Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Alewis1806/Archive

Report date September 2 2009, 15:12 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * Evidence submitted by TheRetroGuy

All accounts have edited in the last 24 hours and all are focussed on making the same edit - adding unverified (and probably untrue) information to the Natasha Kaplinsky article. 

This information has been added dozens of times over the past 18 months and the article has even been protected a couple of times because of these edits (see article history). Things have been quiet of late, however, so I'm not sure why it's started up again. TheRetroGuy (talk) 14:56, 2 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users

Requested by TheRetroGuy (talk) 14:56, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
 * CheckUser requests

As stated above, this is an ongoing problem. The most recent edits to the article are apparently coming from different internet service providers, but it's difficult to believe that it's not the work of one person. I believe a checkuser of the accounts listed above might establish this. TheRetroGuy (talk) 14:56, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

– behavioral evidence clearly indicates that all these IPs are the same person. Since the IPs are hopping all over the place, blocking them would turn into a game of Whack-A-Mole. An admin may want to consider semi-protection here to curb the vandalism. MuZemike 16:46, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Additional information needed: Please provide a code letter. SPCUClerkbot (talk) 14:59, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments


 * Conclusions
 * Page protected for a month (Bit long, but it has a history of needing long semi-protections). I have blocked the account listed indefinitely, and left the IPs alone per MuZemike's reasoning. NW ( Talk ) 21:07, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by TheRetroGuy
appears to be a sockpuppet account of which was blocked for sock activities involving a significant number of similar edits to the same article, Natasha Kaplinsky, in September (see edit history and edits made by these accounts for a comparison). The edits basically involve adding (usually incorrect) details of the subject's height. Looks like he's back again after a bit of a break. The use of random letters in the username could also be a problem. TheRetroGuy (talk) 22:29, 14 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Also adding for these two edits on 9 November.   TheRetroGuy (talk) 20:15, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Of course, this ip address will be out of date now, but could help to establish location. TheRetroGuy (talk) 20:49, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

CheckUser requests
Requested by TheRetroGuy (talk) 22:29, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

This user has been indefinitely blocked for making these edits and checkuser may be able to locate the source of these edits and stop them. TheRetroGuy (talk) 22:29, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * NW ( Talk ) 21:21, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
I am not sure on this one. Both accounts are editing from the same range, but it is massive (a /10). The addresses do geolocate to roughly the same place, but it's a huge city. I'm going to call this to just barely. J.delanoy gabs adds 00:53, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I personally don't think the behavioral evidence is enough to block without stronger checkuser evidence. Closing as no action taken. NW ( Talk ) 01:42, 20 November 2009 (UTC)