Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/121.72.121.67/Archive

21 December 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

121.72.121.67 (TelstraClear DSL in New Zealand)  blocked for 31 hours  for edit warring,       then 121.74.142.75 (TelstraClear dialup in New Zealand)  appears and continues the edit war. Guy Macon (talk) 22:32, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Seems pretty clear cut to me; user edits using their broadband, gets blocked, then uses dial-up to evade said block. However, given that the user's only interest appears to be the Raspberry Pi article, and that article has now been protected until mid February, there is not much point taking any action against either of the IPs. --(ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 02:04, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

25 February 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Ongoing sockpuppetry and abuse of Raspberry Pi (which just came off a 2-month semi) using TelstraClear DSL and dialup in New Zealand. 121.74.158.215 blocked, now we are playing Whac-A-Mole. Also see: Guy Macon (talk) 04:21, 25 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Followup: Raspberry Pi is now semi-protected for three months, but considering this response, we may want to block the above IP addresses anyway. --Guy Macon (talk) 08:30, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * protection solves the problem for now. Little point blocking in the meantime, as they have likely moved on from these specific addresses, and I'd rather not do a pointless rangeblock for 3 months. If they come back in three months, it might be worth considering blocking these ranges:
 * Assuming they haven't moved on to different ranges in 3 months time (which is likely, so I suggest refiling here and getting someone to calculate the new ranges). In the meantime, though, those blocks would only have collateral damage and wouldn't prevent any abuse that the page protection isn't already preventing. SpitfireTally-ho! 11:47, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Assuming they haven't moved on to different ranges in 3 months time (which is likely, so I suggest refiling here and getting someone to calculate the new ranges). In the meantime, though, those blocks would only have collateral damage and wouldn't prevent any abuse that the page protection isn't already preventing. SpitfireTally-ho! 11:47, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Assuming they haven't moved on to different ranges in 3 months time (which is likely, so I suggest refiling here and getting someone to calculate the new ranges). In the meantime, though, those blocks would only have collateral damage and wouldn't prevent any abuse that the page protection isn't already preventing. SpitfireTally-ho! 11:47, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

09 June 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Adding another IP to the list of IPs all adding the same unsourced claim to Raspberry Pi. No recent activity from this IP, so no action needed -- I just wanted it to be on the list.

Question: if we place a block on the ranges discussed previously, will there be significant collateral effects? Guy Macon (talk) 17:07, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I semi-protected Raspberry Pi as the move that would likely result in the least collateral damage. Closing. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 19:06, 9 June 2013 (UTC)