Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sloopcaptain/Archive

25 September 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Unique pattern of MOS vandalism and edit summary "punctuative correction". Sock of IP blocked by  the other day. Same person that spawned edit filter 678 created by. Edit filter discussion and further historical evidence at this discussion. Account creation occurred same day IP 68.98.155.153 was blocked (the one that spurred the edit filter request). Abuse has been going on for years (since 2012). This is the first known account however. Suspect more to follow after this one is blocked, so thought it best to start SPI and to ask the edit filter be broadened to catch edits by accounts. CU request given history of socking/IP hopping.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 04:39, 25 September 2015 (UTC)  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 04:39, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
 * User has also posted about the MOS and given their name and location at the ref desk. Geolocation of IPs corroborates named location.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 04:45, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

I meant to ask for a sleeper check. I understand why IPs cannot be linked.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 14:52, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
 * We don't run sleepers check unless there is some special reason to suspect existence of sleeper accounts.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  19:27, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Does this need to go to ANI for behavioral issues instead? Seems like a sock problem to me and very long term abuse.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 17:29, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Pushing on two weeks here... can someone close this? Warn or block the socker? Something? Been holding off on reverting them until this is closed.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 20:20, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Over 3 weeks now. If nothing can be done, please just close it with no action. Just want to get it finalized one way or the other.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 22:38, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * On an SPI-unrelated-note, has anyone tried contacting this person given that they've provided their real name? Sam Walton (talk) 09:34, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Non checkuser observation: Since the account holder has given his location as Fairfax, Virginia and all the IPs geolocate to the same location, I would say that the overiding reason for not publicly linking IP addresses to account names no longer applies in this case. DieSwartzPunkt (talk) 13:57, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - CheckUser is not permitted to compare named accounts with anonymous IPs. Declining and moving to the "open" status.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  08:38, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
 * As Sloopcaptain is now very obviously evading the one year block on their IP I've blocked them indefinitely. If they successfully appeal the block then the IP should be unblocked as well.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots  18:08, 23 October 2015 (UTC)