Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/De percy/Archive

Report date February 5 2009, 13:17 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * Evidence submitted by Omarcheeseboro (talk)

De percy's editing history is filled with personal attacks on talk and user pages. Most disturbing is what user did here, in completely changing a user's talk page comments to something vulgar,. Another talk page change - Here are the personal attacks, insults. Most edits are like this, , ,.

Odd in that user sees Wikipedia as a place to use talk pages as forum.

De percy was blocked, and it took no time for very similar comments (personal attack, rude) to be posted on a talk page the user was participating on.. Trying to act like it is a different user but it is pretty obvious it is the same --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 13:17, 5 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.

This is basically admitting that the user in question has and will continue to sock. I can confirm both IPs are from the same range. Foxy Loxy Pounce! 09:48, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments by other users

Deferred to checkuser. The range is 216.78.48.0/21, but it is quite a large range and may cause collateral damage. Peter Symonds ( talk ) 19:18, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
 * Its the same user, logged out, the IPs are dynamic and are part of this range: 216.78.32.0/19. I don't recommend blocking the range as it seems to be very active. However it may be a last resort... We may have to call a checkuser in to double check on my assumptions with this range. The tool I'm using to check the edits on the range is very primitive compared to an actual checkuser's tools. (AFAIK anyway). You can probably block the main account longer for socking logged out. Leaving that up to another admin though. ——  nix eagle email me 00:40, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Please note that the ISP has a larger range, but this smaller range is the only range that this user seems to have access to. (Its a Dialup pool, so obviously dynamic). ——  nix eagle email me 00:42, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * A range block seems to be out of question, I think. Bellsouth (the ISP) are having a lot of costumers on that range, I think. As such this would be a collateral, if I am right. Both of the IPs are dynamic, and are part of a dial pool. -- Kanonkas : Talk  19:28, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

as per above. ——  nix eagle email me 19:24, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

✅ Currently available technical evidence indicates that the following accounts are related:
 * Conclusions

As was discussed above (so there is no release of private information) user ranges all over the 216.78.0.0/16 so a rangeblock is not feasible. -- Avi (talk) 05:16, 22 February 2009 (UTC) All blocked and tagged by. Peter Symonds ( talk ) 12:44, 22 February 2009 (UTC)