Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/101.191.105.254/Archive

10 March 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

All of them edited the same page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/So_Random! between now and November 2014 with a similar style also the IPs all start with 101.191.--- Most also edited https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_So_Random!_episodes All are also editing stuff like C minor F Sharp ect  Bobherry Userspace   Talk to me!   Stuff I have done  20:31, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

A CheckUser is moot. We can plainly see that these are all part of the same IP range. Harej (talk) 20:35, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

The IPs are dynamic. Consider reporting one of the IPs to WP:AIV requesting for a range block instead of filing a case here. --ToonLucas22 (talk) 22:07, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I'm afraid that a rangeblock (of 101.191.0.0/17) would cause too much collateral damage, i.e. innocent users would be prevented from editing. Both articles are under pending changes protection, but you might consider taking them to WP:RFPP for semi-protection. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 22:58, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Nothing more here to do. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  12:08, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

20 March 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

Look at their contribution logs. Also, look at logs of this article and that article. George Ho (talk) 19:11, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

These IPs appear to be dynamic. Please check. --ToonLucas22 (talk</i>) 19:49, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Checkuser comments: Yes, the IPs are in a dynamic range, despite what the "geolocate" feature on the IP's page says. Not sure what more you are looking for here.  Risker (talk) 01:30, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Also, as I said in the previous case, a rangeblock will not be feasible, so protection of the affected article(s) is going to be the best option. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:05, 31 March 2015 (UTC)