Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/79.179.10.243/Archive

21 September 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Not exactly sure if it qualifies as sockpuppetry, so if I'm wrong in initiating an SPI - pls advise me about the right direction. The case is the following: IP 79.179.10.243 has been banned for edit warring in article RT (TV network) (there was also a named editor involved in edit warring, who narrowly escaped sanctions, and the whole page was protected for a week). Block has been issued at 04:09 on Sep 20th (see User talk:79.179.10.243). Later on, three IPs listed above have started appearing and editing talk page of the same article, with exactly the same agenda (WP:DUCK is IMHO very clear here; they also seem to belong to the same ISP, though with a rather different IPs); significant disruption like "Don't be a smart ass RN1970. wikipedia has become the ultimate propaganda tool." is abundant in such comments. My understanding is that it constitutes using a sockpuppet IP to bypass block, and therefore should be dealt with (though I have no idea how it should be dealt with, I hope somebody could suggest a way). Ipsign (talk) 14:28, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Per Meta Privacy Policies, Checkusers will not connect IPs that are socking, however, a clerk or patrolling admin will probably block the IPs in this case per WP: DUCK. It seems pretty clear based on their edits that it is all the same person (probably block evasion of Drmies's block). Electric Catfish2 00:29, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Additionally, the WHOIS reports all confirm that the ISP is Bezeq International, the connection is broadband, and they are all static IPs. Electric Catfish2 00:30, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
— Berean Hunter   (talk)  13:10, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Page protection is the best way to cope with this situation as well as playing whac-a-mole when they appear. Because this is aging and they haven't edited in several days, I don't think blocking would do any good at the present. Closing.