Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Subhaan08/Archive

03 February 2012

 * 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 " ~ "''

WP:DUCK accounts. This user started trolling Wikipedia as IPs, ,. This needs to be stopped. Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions.  21:16, 3 February 2012 (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 CU here is excessive, because this one is painfully obvious. Per WP:DUCK I've blocked Subhaan10. The IPs haven't edited in several months, so I'm not taking action against them. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 05:33, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

20 April 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Both made same edit to "Lollipop Param Pam Pam" Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 00:21, 20 April 2012 (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

 * as a WP:DUCK.--Slon02 (talk) 00:24, 20 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Per the 92.30.234.53 block log, both of these are related to Sockpuppet investigations/Subhaan08 and should be merged to that case. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 02:46, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

No edits on that range for a couple of days, now. I'm not going to make any additional blocks at this point, at least unless he comes back again. --MuZemike 21:44, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

03 February 2012

 * 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 know that checkuser is not for IPs. I reported this guy at AIV last week per WP:DE and WP:SP, but for a reason this was declined. Considering his obnoxious "done" summaries (WP:DUCK), and that has abused multiple IPs in the past, there is no reason to checkuser it, just need to be blocked for a while. Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions.  18:19, 2 August 2012 (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

 * - Then no need for a CU request... -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  01:36, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
 * And what's next. If I take it to AIV/AN/ANI, it will be declined or ignored, if I take it here, it will be declined. Considering that this is not the first IP he has used since April, what can I do? Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it!  See terms and conditions.  03:01, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks like the same user, and the IP geolocates to the same city as earlier blocked IPs from this user. The address is probably stale by now, though, and hasn't edited in 11 days. SPI seems like the correct place for these reports; not every SPI needs checkuser and admins do give out blocks at SPI based on behavioural evidence. Sorry for the slow response time, but SPI is quite backlogged at the moment and unfortunately not all requests are looked at right away. I'll mark this for close at this point, but do re-report here if they show up with a fresh IP. Jafeluv (talk) 20:53, 14 August 2012 (UTC)