Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jacob Hnri 6/Archive

01 January 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every six hours.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

check for sleepers -- Addi hockey  10 e-mail 19:28, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - I blocked the account, but a check for sleepers would be good. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 19:36, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * This is my first CU, so don't take this as closed or confirmed - another CU should double check! As far as I can see, and  are both ✅ (and blocked) and there are no sleepers that I can see. I'm not so sure about the link to . Chase me ladies, I&#39;m the Cavalry (talk) 19:56, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I can confirm, after discussion with MuZemike, that these two fellows are indeed confirmed socks of . Chase me ladies, I&#39;m the Cavalry (talk) 01:28, 2 January 2011 (UTC)


 * 22:08, 24 December 2010 MuZemike (talk | contribs) blocked Jacob Hnri 6 (talk | contribs) (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of indefinite ‎ (Abusing multiple accounts: And vandalism. User responsible behind User:You've been hit by a truck and similar vandalism-only accounts and IPs) -- DQ (t)  Merry Chrismasand a Happy New Year!   20:07, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

03 January 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every six hours.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

see contribs requesting CU to check for sleepers -- Addi hockey  10 e-mail 22:25, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
99.35.24.0/22 blocked 1 month; just anon only. –MuZemike 22:30, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Account creation restricted per . –MuZemike 22:36, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

08 January 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every six hours.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

Sleeper Check -- Addi hockey  10 e-mail 16:30, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I'll take this one straight away - apologies to the clerks for my haste! One sleeper found, blocked, and tagged. Chase me ladies, I&#39;m the Cavalry (talk) 16:38, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Closing then. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 17:03, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

08 January 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every six hours.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

Sleeper check -- Addi hockey  10 e-mail 17:40, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * A check was done less than two hours ago. I think we can hold off for now. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 17:58, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I have added another account -- Addi hockey  10 e-mail 18:04, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Added a few quackers to see if they hold any evidence worth checking -- Addi hockey  10 e-mail 18:19, 8 January 2011 (UTC)


 * - Urgh, all of those accounts were registered after the last run. Okay, endorsing now to check for sleepers and to see if we can get some form of rangeblock. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 21:29, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

No other sleepers. The underlying range has already been blocked. –MuZemike 21:36, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

I found a couple of new accounts and would appreciate a check on the following for a possible rangeblock. These were created before MuZemike did a check but didn't come up for some reason.
 * Elockid  ( Talk ) 21:56, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Elockid  ( Talk ) 21:56, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Elockid  ( Talk ) 21:56, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Elockid  ( Talk ) 21:56, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Elockid  ( Talk ) 21:56, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Elockid  ( Talk ) 21:56, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

That's because I forgot to block with account creation blocked when I blocked that range a while ago. –MuZemike 22:07, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Here's a couple more



-- Addi hockey  10 e-mail 15:04, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

09 January 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

Sleeper Check -- Addi hockey  10 e-mail 15:10, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
I have also blocked 99.110.96.0/22. Elockid  ( Talk ) 16:10, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Blocked latest: Empty Trend 20-31. Shell  babelfish 15:26, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
 * - I just blocked Empty Trend 32-37. Is there no IP blocking we can do here? —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 16:04, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
 * No sleepers. TN X Man  14:54, 10 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Closing then. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 15:09, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

16 January 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

I blocked 99.69.196.0/22. 99.69.198.131 was previously autoblocked before I implemented a rangeblock, so an account was using this IP. Need a CU to check for sleepers and see like all the other ranges they were using, if a hardblock is possible. <b style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:14px; color:#4682B4;">Elockid</b>  ( Talk ) 04:07, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Perhaps a check on User:Empty Trend 42 will reveal another IP? Listing in the suspected sockpuppets for a sleeper check. -- Addi hockey  10  e-mail 04:12, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - It's been a few days since we last ran a CU on this case, and I have a feeling there are sleepers —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 04:43, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * No sleepers. Tiptoety  talk 06:58, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

29 January 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

sleeper check -- Addi hockey  10  e-mail 19:04, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Upon further consideration this actually might not be him.... could a CU confirm the useragent? Addi  hockey  10  e-mail 19:06, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - I've blocked the IP for vandalism, but I suppose it can't hurt to take a look for sleepers. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 19:10, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Just a Quick FYI, the CU will not talk about the IP`s useragent. -- DQ  (t)   (e)  23:27, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * No apparent sleepers. -- Avi (talk) 06:31, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * With MuZemike already confirming the "Bot". That will close this case. -- DQ  (t)   (e)  11:11, 1 February 2011 (UTC)