Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Aradic-es/Archive

Report date September 29 2009, 19:30 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * Evidence submitted by Toroko

User Aradic-es was blocked last time 03:39, 22 August 2009 for 2 weeks, so this ban lasted until 5 September 2009. Despite it, he probably made block evasions with IP numbers 78.2.168.71 on 1 September 2009, 195.29.221.170 on 25 August and 78.2.189.68 on 24 August. Other users also noticed this block evasion and Aradic-es deleted it from his talk page to hide the evidence. Aradic-es pushed the same Croatian POV on 23 September what 195.29.221.170 pushed earlier. IP number 78.2.168.71 made almost the same incorrect edit what Aradic-es made later. Here is another example (both edits are incorrect and the same).

Otherwise, 195.29.221.170 made this edit 27 times yet, and Aradic-es continued this edit warring. Toroko (talk) 21:18, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users

Requested by Toroko (talk) 19:30, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * CheckUser requests


 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
 * . NW ( Talk ) 22:11, 29 September 2009 (UTC)


 * 78.2 IPs are him, the other one isn't. Brandon (talk) 17:53, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

No action taken. With 195.29.221.170, I'm with CheckUser here that the technical evidence along with the given behavioral evidence (i.e. the different articles being edited) shows no sock puppetry going on. With the two 78's, they are confirmed, but Aradic-es has already did the block with regards the edit warring. Blocking Aradic-es would only serve to be punitive in nature and hence against our blocking policy. The two IPs haven't edited since then. MuZemike 02:58, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Conclusions

Evidence submitted by PRODUCER
Articles are frequented by banned user Aradic-es and editing is in the same manner. Note a rangeblock may be in order to prevent further block evasion. ◅ P R O D U C E R  ( TALK ) 22:29, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

CheckUser requests
Requested by ◅ P R O D U C E R  ( TALK ) 22:29, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 * - I temporarily softblocked the range. I will also the checkuser request to see if a longer term block is possible. NW ( Talk ) 22:32, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * There are a number of active anonymous editors and a few accounts. Short blocks should be fine, hardblocks if IPBE is handed out first (I advise against it at this point). Brandon (talk) 02:49, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Conclusions

 * Thanks Brandon. Will mark as closed. NW ( Talk ) 05:31, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by PRODUCER
Aradic is using the Quahadi account on WikiMedia (obviously Aradics other account, note the links to Aradics other accounts) to continue his activity here in conjunction with IPs. ◅ P R O D U C E R  ( TALK ) 18:03, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

CheckUser requests
Requested by ◅ P R O D U C E R  ( TALK ) 18:03, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 * and - Quahadi is not a registered username on the English Wikipedia. As he has declared the use of the account on Commons, it is not a violation of the sock policy. The Aradic-en account is too stale for a checkuser to be run, but I have softblocked it as it is obviously Aradic-es' sockpuppet. I have also blocked this particular IP, which interestingly has moved away from the previous range. Could you please list any other IPs that you have seen editing in another SPI case? Thanks. NW ( Talk ) 16:07, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by PRODUCER
Edits only articles that Aradic edited and pushes the same POV. ◅ P R O D U C E R  ( TALK ) 12:44, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Conclusions
IP blocked 12 hours. MuZemike 08:11, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by PRODUCER
Edits only articles that Aradic edited, pushes the same POV and has same grammatical errors. ◅ P R O D U C E R  ( TALK ) 17:53, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Conclusions

 * Blocked appropriately. NW ( Talk ) 20:55, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by PRODUCER
Edits only articles that Aradic edited, pushes the same POV and has same grammatical errors. ◅ P R O D U C E R  ( TALK ) 08:10, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Conclusions
Posušje semi-protected for 1 week. Hopefully, this deters the socking. MuZemike 20:03, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by PRODUCER
Edits only articles that Aradic edited and pushes the same POV. (see previous SPI's) ◅ P R O D U C E R  ( TALK ) 07:30, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Conclusions
78.1.112.0/20 blocked 1 week. –MuZemike 22:24, 28 December 2009 (UTC)