Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HAl/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets

 * This one needs no action, an administrator already blocked it

Evidence submitted by Lester
The original editor,, was indefinitely blocked for disruption to articles related to Microsoft and its products. The last 2 IPs are still active, editing Microsoft related articles. The first two IPs come from the same company (involved with Microsoft). Thanks, -- Lester  01:18, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
 * This IP is currently blocked for being a sock of user:HAl. This IP edited same articles as HAl, and edited HAl's personal talk page.
 * This IP appeared after the previous one was blocked. In the HTC HD2 and Windows Mobile articles, this IP restored the deleted content of the blocked IP address above. Wrote edit descriptions supporting HAl. Edited HAl's talk page
 * This IP edited the same long list of articles that HAl edited, in the same manner as HAl. In the Moonlight (runtime) article, this IP restored content of the first (now blocked) IP 86.83.239.142. This IP address is from the same location as all the others.
 * Since listing this Sockpuppet Investigation a day or so ago, the IP 86.93.243.233 has made 4 more edits, restoring content of the previously blocked IP. It's easiest to view the IP's contributions history, rather than me provide diffs. He mentions HAl on just about every edit summary. He was blocked for disruptive behaviour and exhausted community patience, but he continues the same behaviour using a company IP address.-- Lester  04:36, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users
I was just on my way to reporting 86.93.243.233, when I see that Lester has beaten me to it. I originally reported 86.83.239.142 to Hersfold. 86.93.243.233's edit history show him resetting all the previous sock's POV work soon after I tried to put some of it right. --Nigelj (talk) 16:12, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
I have blocked 86.93.243.233, who seems like a clear sockpuppet from recent behavior. — Steven G. Johnson (talk) 22:42, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

62.58.36.58 blocked 2 weeks. –MuZemike 19:32, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by MuZemike
Something fishy is going on here, and I'm not sure what to make of it.
 * On 18:02, 5 August 2010, I blocked 86.83.239.142 for block evasion on the part of HAl.
 * On 21:36, 5 August 2010, I semi-protected Moonlight (runtime) after back-and-forth edit warring by 70.226.165.186 and 130.57.22.201. Complaints on my talk page emerge, saying that I should block 130.57.22.201 instead.
 * On 17:19, 6 August 2010, I full-protected Mono (software) after back-and-forth edit warring by NovellGuy and Willimm, both of which all-of-a-sudden popped up after my semi-protection of Moonlight (NovellGuy was created 15:06, 6 August 2010, and Willimm was created on 15:28, 6 August 2010).

Unless proxies are involved judging from the WHOIS information, and it doesn't look like the IPs are the same people as the one IP is from Wayland, Massachusetts and the other from Madison, Wisconsin (two geographically different locations in the U.S.; 86.83.239.142 is from the Netherlands). However, I find it too coincidental about these two registered accounts popping up out of nowhere, unless they both decided to create an account.

In any case, something fishy is going on here, and it is possible that indefinitely blocked user HAl may be involved, hence my bringing this to SPI with a CheckUser request to sort this out. –MuZemike 17:36, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 * - This is something funky. Odd that two people in a half our of registering want to edit war. Even if this isn't HAI, this needs to be dealt with before we get further issues. -- &#47; DeltaQuad &#124; Notify Me  &#92; 00:24, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * . After a quick look, I see nothing more than 2 people disagreeing with each other. One [ registered an account] after the event. I don't think there's a link with HAl. -- Luk  talk 12:20, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't see much need to pursue this further from a sockpuppetry point of view; it is now mainly a content issue. Closing as no action taken. Peter Symonds ( talk ) 17:36, 27 August 2010 (UTC)