Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/87.228.193.254/Archive

15 December 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Athanasios Orphanides has been getting disruptive edits from various IPs since around April which included repeated unexplained removal of the infobox image (more on that here). was initially adding unsourced content and removing the image at the same time. After warnings they added a source but continued to remove the image. The article is now fully protected and these edits are being discussed on the talk page. joined the discussion claiming to be an "independent observer", supporting the 87 IP's position while referring to them in the third person, but this IP has also previously removed the infobox image.

I think all of the IPs who have edited this article over the past few months are the same person, and possibly User who uploaded the unflattering image of Orphanides which I think sparked all this. Common behaviour other than the strange editing of the Orphanides article are blanking warnings/notifications from their talk page, and constructive edits elsewhere to Cypriot football-related articles. (I appreciate that the account and some of the IPs are stale, I've mentioned them mainly for behaviour comparisons.) January  ( talk ) 20:13, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * The IP is denying that they are the same person who has been disrupting the article, I do not believe them. I think this is an attempt to create a false consensus. January  ( talk ) 12:07, 16 December 2011 (UTC)


 * The "independent observer" has blanked this SPI page . The 87 IP has also asked me on my talk page why I have not replied to their latest comment, a comment which came from the "independent observer" . January  ( talk ) 17:52, 22 December 2011 (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

 * Ok...so if were looking for administrative action...well there is nothing to be done except protecting the article if these are socks. All but one or two are block stale, and rangeblocks are out of the question. If your looking to see if were dealing with the same user to evaluate for consensus or some other reason, then stop by my talkpage for a consultation. :P If want a connection to the master (who hasn't edited since august, so it's kinda pointless, would reconcider if he starts editing again) then reopen the SPI. Right now I can't see the point in looking into this. -- DQ  (t)   (e)  20:47, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Noting this response. -- DQ  (t)   (e)  02:52, 23 December 2011 (UTC)