Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/179.179.170.86/Archive

12 September 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

I am 100% convinced that this IP user is a sockpuppet for a number of reasons, and I have plenty of evidence. The first thing I will point out is that, when you take a look at each IP's edit history, you will notice that none of these IPs edited at the same time as each other. As a matter of fact, as soon as one IP stops editing, another one of the suspected IPs begins. Another thing you will notice is that each of the IPs edit the exact same articles, most of which pertain to the subject of comic books. Some of these articles include (but are not limited to) Calendar Man, Mad Hatter (comics), Heat Wave (comics), and Toyman. Each of the IPs are shown to not only edit the same articles, but also make remarkably similar edits. For example, the user seemed to have changed his IP many times on the Mad Hatter article while edit warring in several attempts to add unnotable and unsourced material to the article. Another incident occurred on the Calendar Man article, where a user with a similar history added a couple of unsourced and very poorly written sections to the article. Instead of deleting them, I decided to simply add several templates to them. Later on, other IPs (that, again, have very similar edit histories to the IP editor of the Mad Hatter article and the IP that added the sections) attempted to remove the templates without discussion, probably to avoid having the sections deleted or re-written by another user. On Electrocutioner, an IP (with, yet again, a similar contribution history to the others) attempted to add trivial matter to the article in a similar manner to the edits made at the Mad Hatter article, before completely re-writing a section. Apparently knowing that (s)he didn't have the proper citations, the user attempted to cover it up by adding false citations. Here are some other examples of the edits the IPs have been making that are similar to each other:, , , , ,. And this user seems to have used so many sockpuppets that I am unsure if the "sockmaster" is actually the sockmaster or simply just the oldest sockpuppet I could find. Darkknight2149 (talk) 22:26, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

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


 * Note that IP ranges change from time to time, this is likely the case and not a sock.  RMS52  Talk to me  11:21, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Nevertheless, I will do a check on the IP's.  RMS52  Talk to me  16:51, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

 RMS52  Talk to me  16:51, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

I have done a check, the 179 range is located in Brazil but the 191 range seems to be hidden. A checkuser would maybe come for helpful in this case.  RMS52  Talk to me  16:58, 13 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Response: If that is indeed the case, then the user's IP changes quite a lot. If the user is innocent, then putting this situation behind me shouldn't be a problem, but you can see why I would be suspicious. Darkknight2149 (talk) 18:23, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Due to the area the IP's seem to be in that may be likely, but there is a problem. One of the IP's is located in Peru, while the rest in Brazil. I can't expose the 191 range yet, but I'll try. There may be some Meatpuppetery involved.  RMS52  Talk to me  18:40, 13 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Since I filed this report, several other possible sock puppets have surfaced. They are IP users that fit the exact same M.O., edit the same topic/articles, and have disruptive editing patterns (removing necessary templates, adding false citations, ETC) as the reported IP addresses in this investigation. Like the reported IPs, the dates of the IP edits suggests that it is probably the same user who is changing his/her IP address (unless the IP ranges are automatically changing constantly). The IP addresses I found are listed in this sandbox. How should I handle this situation? Do I file another SPI? Darkknight2149 (talk) 03:12, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Since the case is open, I would just add them to the list above and add the additional evidence here. [Notes: I am not a clerk/CU/admin. Comments by RMS52 struck.] —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 21:58, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I have just added the other possible sockpuppets to this SPI. Thanks for the advise. Darkknight2149 (talk) 21:39, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - I don't understand what is expected from CheckUser to do here.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  19:28, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Those IPs probably do belong to the same person, but I'm afraid there is nothing we can do here. He changes them often, and they belong to different ranges. I have to close this case with no action.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  21:45, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

20 September 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Since I initially reported this sock, several more obvious sock puppets have popped up. The user seems to be changing his/her IP address every one to three days, as they continue to make non-constructive edits. Like all of the previously reported, these IPs never edited at the same time as each other. As soon as one IP stopped editing, another one began. They are all making similar edits to the exact same articles which are all based around the exact same topic (comic books). These edits include adding unsourced and/or unnotable material to the "In other media" section of articles, poorly re-writing sections without the proper citations and covering it up with false citations , and removing necessary templates without discussion. Then when I reverted one of the edits of the user, the user attempted to re-add the deleted material while using a different IP that has a similar edit history. Here are further similar edits between the IPs:, ,. Not to sound impatient, but I would advise moving forward with this investigation as fast as possible. This user has proven that only more and more sockpuppets are going to pop up as time goes by, and at an alarmingly fast rate. Darkknight2149 (talk) 21:37, 20 September 2015 (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

 * Those are throw-away IPs, so there is no point to block them. He changes them often, and there is nothing we can do (they do not even belong to the same range). I have to close this with no action.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  21:43, 22 September 2015 (UTC)