Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/2600:387:5:805:0:0:0:A4/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

These edits are from the same IP range: 2600:387:5::/48.

2600:387:5:805:0:0:0:58 and 2600:387:5:805::a4 have been warned multiple times for removing content without explanation. 2600:387:5:805:0:0:0:58 made an identical unconstructive edit to one that 2600:387:5:805::a4 made before the latter was blocked.

The other IPs above also have also been used for unconstructive editing in recent months, and perhaps are socks of the above two. Examples:


 * 2600:387:5:805::59
 * 2600:387:5:805::61
 * 2600:387:5:805::62
 * 2600:387:5:805::63
 * 2600:387:5:805::64
 * 2600:387:5:805::a1

I don't have time to go through the whole 2600:387:5::/48 range, so that's all I've got for now. Still, a range-block might be worth considering. Zazpot (talk) 11:01, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

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

I understand about the other IPs, but surely 2600:387:5:805:0:0:0:58, which made an identical edit to 2600:387:5:805::a4 as noted above, must be considered a sock being used for WP:BLOCKEVASION. If not, please could you clarify why not? Thanks, Zazpot (talk) 13:37, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not calling it sockpuppetry or block evasion because this is a very busy mobile wireless range in New York City, and all the person has to do is to walk down the street a bit to have a new IP address assigned to them. It's possible that they're forcing the network to assign them a new address, but it may not be intentional at all. If ::58 was editing recently, I would have blocked the address, but the last edit was half a day ago, so the user almost certainly has a different address by now, making a block of this address pointless. —DoRD (talk)​ 13:55, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Symbol declined.svg Not sock puppetry: This user is editing from a dynamic IP range and likely has little or no control over what IP address they are using, and may not even be aware that their IP address is changing. Unfortunately, a block of even the /64 that these IPs are all in would cause significant collateral damage, so short single IP blocks will probably have to suffice. I know that it's frustrating, but as the disruption occurs, please report them to AIV for blocking. —DoRD (talk)​ 13:16, 6 February 2019 (UTC)