Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Luvyduvy56/Archive

21 April 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

See WP:ANI: these IPs were probably used by the above IP to evade blocks. As per Bobrayner at the ANI thread:

''This appears to be the same person as, who got a 2 week block for disruptive editing in early February, then Acroterion gave a month-long block in late February. In early March they started editing with, which was blocked for disruptive editing by Gilliam. They got around the block by moving to. So, there's a block evasion/sockpuppetry problem too. I haven't dug very deeply; there might or might not be an older account behind this. bobrayner (talk) 19:44, 18 April 2015 (UTC)''
 * Now, we have a confession. I would recommend longer blocks, and/or a rangeblock, for this editor. Jydog is blameless. bobrayner (talk) 00:41, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Also see an admission of block evasion here. Esquivalience t 20:20, 21 April 2015 (UTC)


 * See the block log of 70.128.117.172. Right after 70.128.117.172 was blocked by for one week (for WP:NOTHERE), 70.128.120.202 started editing one day later, in contravention of the block.

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

I am not guilty of sockpuppetry.

Yes, it was me that made every one of those edits, you list, on every one of those IP addresses.

I have a computer, whose IP address changes quite frequently. (I know, that, elsewhere on WP, it says that IP addresses are often reassigned.) My IP addresses are reassigned very often - I don't even know what IP my computer will be editing from.

That's not sockpuppetry. I am not responsible for the changes in the IP addresses.

Yeah, I know, I did make that comment on Bobrayner's talk page, which you claim was a confession. That was actually a funny-funny-ha-ha joke. I didn't evade the blocks intentionally.

There is no reason at all to block any of those IP addresses again. After the block on my current IP was lifted, I have not made disruptive edits. It would not be in line with WP's blocking policy to block me again. it would do you no good anyway, since my IP would probably change in a few days anyway.70.128.120.202 (talk) 22:17, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Even if your IP changed, if you made the edits that made a previous IP blocked, it's still block evasion. Esquivalience t 23:54, 21 April 2015 (UTC)


 * This is especially underlined because the confession linked above makes it clear that this IP hopping and block evasion is quite deliberate. DieSwartzPunkt (talk) 15:07, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
 * All this POV editor wants to do is to continue forum-shopping his false complaint that Catholics are being discriminated against (this in the basis of the head of a Catholic organization being asked to follow COI rules concerning the subject matter which is at the core of the organization's purpose - something the head of the organization agreed to, but the IP editor doesn't like). As soon as an IP gets blocked for misbehavior, he hops to another (how convenient that his frequent IP changes happen just when his previous IP is blocked -- interesting, because IP changes can be forced by the user). We would never put up with this kind of behavior from an editor using accounts, especially when they brag about being faster to change accounts (IPs) than admins are to catch up with them.   There's no earthly (or heavenly) reason why this IP should have an advantage over an account simply because it's somewhat more difficult to track their edits and hold them accountable for them.To sum all this up, you've got a POV-pushing block-evading editor who admits that all these IPs are his.  That doesn't need a CU, it needs a duck block for all the IPs here, followed by a range block, if possible. BMK (talk) 01:09, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I've rangeblocked 70.128.112.0/20 for a month. Mike V • Talk 14:13, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

04 December 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

Self explanatory. I'm guessing this IP# has a history of creating socks...unless it's another editor trying to get them in trouble. Reporting anyway. —This lousy T-shirt— (talk) 21:43, 4 December 2015 (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

 * - This is stinking. I blocked him, but maybe CheckUser should check whether this editor is a sock of somebody else.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  22:52, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Interesting. This is ✅ from, who logged in on December 1 to also create .-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 00:04, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Wow! I blocked them all and moved this page to the new title. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  22:35, 5 December 2015 (UTC)