Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/69.110.8.85/Archive

Evidence submitted by Jiujitsuguy
<IP account 69.110.8.85 is utilizing a number of IP accounts to makes contentious edits. Shortly after he was revertedhere, IP account 99.132.106.62 made the same contentious edithere and here. Prior to that, 99.132.106.62 had not made any edits. All of the above-referenced IP accounts are SPAs exclusively editing on Israel-Arab issues. Geo-locater indicates that all of the above-referenced IP users are from California (3 from the San Francisco area). Perhaps most telling is this Diff and this diff where IP 67.180.26.60 admits to editing anonymously under different IP's to advance his agenda and use Wikipedia as a battleground. I am sure he is using other anonymous IPs as well but it's difficult to track them all. Requesting permanent block of disruptive fluctuating IP user--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 15:04, 7 June 2010 (UTC)>

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users
He avoided 3rr on Gaza War because of the multiple IP's, a clear example of sockpuppetry. The IP is also quite familiar with wiki-syntax, thus most likely the return of a banned/blocked user. We have a sockpuppetry problem, a edit-warring problem, and a wp:duck, but I guess we can let this roll around in a bureaucratic snafu if that makes it feel better.-- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 19:03, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Just to add a point. He clearly expressed an intent to edit "anonymously" evidenced by and . I also agree that he is very familiar with Wiki syntax making it a near certainty that he is probably a banned user now editing as a fluctuating IP.--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 19:11, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Can you give diffs to the edits that constituted a violation of 3rr, please, Brewcrewer? As I said, I only scanned over this, and my comment was more aimed at eliminating any misunderstanding that having a changing IP address is in itself a violation of WP:SOCK. Although I accept that this could possibly be a blocked/banned user, it is fairly tricky to prove that: per the privacy and checkuser policies, linking accounts to IPs via the checkuser tool is to be avoided. And there seems to be a lack of evidence showing that the IPs are being operated by a blocked/banned user (being familiar with wiki syntax doesn't really justify a block, and the comment at only indicates that the user is editing anonymously, not they they also edit with an account). Kindest regards, SpitfireTally-ho! 19:14, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Diffs at that page take years to load because the page is so full of bytes, but I'll do it anyway. Lest editors complain about my raise:


 * 1) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gaza_War&action=historysubmit&diff=366377733&oldid=366376967
 * 2) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gaza_War&action=historysubmit&diff=366381561&oldid=366378743
 * 3) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gaza_War&diff=prev&oldid=366382247
 * 4) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gaza_War&action=historysubmit&diff=366389298&oldid=366382563
 * 5) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gaza_War&action=historysubmit&diff=366496647&oldid=366485083
 * 6) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gaza_War&action=historysubmit&diff=366498641&oldid=366497473
 * A perusal of the links clearly demonstrate edit-warring over the last two days.-- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 20:03, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't mind, I have my preferences changed so that it doesn't show page content below diffs. Those edits do seem to show violation of 3rr and EW. However, it should be noted that range blocking these IPs is probably not going to be possible. I'll leave it up to an admin or another clerk to decide how best to proceed at this point. It would seem to me that resolving the matter with the user directly or via some other venue (WP:AN/EW?) may be favourable to playing whack-a-mole with SPI, although others may disagree and as I said I'll leave it to someone else to decide. I'm afraid I'm too busy in real life (shock horror ) at the moment to take any real look into how to continue here (didn't even mean to comment in the first place :-/). SpitfireTally-ho! 20:34, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Please see related case on ANI--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 20:41, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
the IPs are probably all the same person. However, they're dynamic addresses, and the user can't really help it if their IP changes regularly. They don't seem to be evading a block, nor trying to avoid scrutiny. Scanning over this there doesn't appear to be any violation of WP:SOCK. SpitfireTally-ho! 17:00, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

ANI discussion. The only possible thing here would be semi, but I'll let the ANI thread play out. Tim Song (talk) 06:27, 8 June 2010 (UTC)