Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Am6212/Archive

Report date February 4 2009, 20:12 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * Evidence submitted by The TriZ (talk)

As shown by the log, the two first ip-numbers are confirmed socks of, the blocks has just expired and his back edit-warring again. The three others show identical behaviour, with the two last begining with 130.17.92.xxx is obviously socks to. I also now saw this in Am6212's talkpage. The TriZ (talk) 20:12, 4 February 2009 (UTC) It would also be appreciated if someone could mass-revert all of his edits, if possible. The TriZ (talk) 23:42, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

I perhaps inserted the wrong name as topic, Am6212 is the "master-puppet", with these confirmed puppets. He hasn't made any edits with his main-acoount, but with several of his puppets (not shown in the confirmed puppets is the 130.17.92.xx ip numbers, but if you check his block log you'll see he got blocked for a similar ip number that started with the same numbers, 130.17.92.17). I can provide you with diffs where he uses his socks for edit warring if that's what your asking for?

With ip number ,, &

With ip number, , ,.

Ip number edits the same articles and the ip number starts with 24., removes Syriac from articles just as the other socks. ,,.

For ip number, basically edits from the same ip number as Am6212's other sock, which got blocked some time ago as shown by the block log of Am6212. First edit was this, an article created by me about a Syriac singer.

Ip number is again the same kind of ip number that Am6212 was blocked for earlier (which was ). Have made among others these disruptive edits,, ,.

I'm also adding to the suspected list, since he edits in the same way in articles such as Assyrian/Chaldean/Syriac people & Assyrian flag, e.g..

The TriZ (talk) 01:58, 5 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't understand, isn't this an obvious case? The guy has around 10 socks, which his using to make his destructive edits. I don't have the patience, the time or the power to keep reverting all of his socks edits. He has already been blocked for these socks, and now he is using them again, it's an obvious case and based on the other similar ip-numbers and the edits with them, it's a solid case, it's all the same user! The guy and his socks have done enough, he needs a permanent vacation! The TriZ (talk) 22:02, 5 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Seriously, he is probably using some kind of ip program, that's not diffícult. However, he has already been blocked because of these socks. Now PLEASE, for whatever reason, just BLOCK HIS SOCKS! He has been vandalizing for months now, i'm giving up...The TriZ (talk) 22:10, 16 February 2009 (UTC)


 * For crying out loud, he has already been blocked for these socks! So evidently he is probably just using some kind of ip program. And the edits are all basically identical. The TriZ (talk) 22:33, 17 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Also the accuracy of the WHOIS tool may not be 100 percent. I checked my own ip, sure I get the correct country, not the correct city though. So I mean, check yourself, I tested my neighbours ip number and it seems we are living in two different cities which aren't the actual city we live in. So obviously the accuracy of the tool isn't 100 percent accurate. Check it yourself, and that explains why you might think they are no where near eachother. The TriZ (talk) 12:21, 18 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.

Agree with Tiptoety (I believe you mis-spelt "no where near"). 24.248.39.186 and 72.201.99.34 are both Cox Communications IPs based in Arizona (different towns, but possible connection), but then 24.201.90.108 is in Montreal, Quebec and 130.17.92.35/130.17.92.110 are at the California State University, Stanislaus. Possibly meatpuppetry or zombie computers, but no definite connection. Foxy Loxy Pounce! 10:28, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments by other users

Can you (The TriZ) please provide diffs of the edit warring please, as it appears has not edited in quite some time. Tiptoety talk 00:28, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
 * While the majority of the edits correlate, the WHOIS says that they are on where near on another. Tiptoety  talk 06:49, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

fixed category link Mayalld (talk) 14:45, 9 February 2009 (UTC) Mayalld (talk) 22:26, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Conclusions
 * the various IP addresses quoted are geolocated in places many miles from each other, and it simply isn't feasible to accept that they are all the same user. SPI exists to deal with cases where socking IS going on, but it can't deal with disparate disruptive editors who aren't actually socks. It is also evidence based, and no matter how much these editors are causing issues, shouting that we should block them all as socks is not going to run, because the evidence says that they aren't. Without prejudice to re-opening without a scattergun approach to potential socks, I'm closing this case. Mayalld (talk) 22:26, 17 February 2009 (UTC)