Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tailsman67/Archive

29 November 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Same IP-range, has posted on the same user talk page (here)as an IP repeatedly blocked for behaviour and talk page abuse (74.163.17.131 Block Log), with the same manner of speech and lack of signature. I believe there is little doubt the user is using an "alternate" IP to evade a block. --Salvidrim! T·C 15:37, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

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

Comment:No I'm not,my old Ip got left behind my computer does that sometimes,you can't blame me for it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.163.15.130 (talk) 15:49, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * One thing I can and will do, however, is noting that you are blocked until 5-December (including talk pages), and are currently editing, which is not allowed. Please note the user has admitted above to ban evading. --Salvidrim!  T·C 15:49, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Comment:I have nothing to do with my Ip changing my dad does. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.163.15.130 (talk) 15:53, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * And yet, you are aware of the block. Even if the IP change is not "intentional", you were not allowed to edit until 5-December and you had to respect that, which you failed to do.  --Salvidrim!  T·C 15:57, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry I was late I was talking to jimbo whales,I doesn't matter,new Ip means you can't blame them for their old Ip. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.163.15.130 (talk) 16:00, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * ... I believe the above comment speaks for itself. --Salvidrim!  T·C 16:02, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
74.163.0.0/19 has been blocked for 1 week. –MuZemike 16:02, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

06 December 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Edits to the same pages as the sockmaster and his previous puppets, ranging from similar to outright identical. Also speaks in much the same manner as the others. Claims to be a different user who is only a friend of the sockmaster; either way, aiding a blocked user is still considered an offense, and his first edit was made while the last puppet IP was still blocked. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 22:36, 6 December 2011 (UTC) Cyberlink420 (talk) 22:36, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * User admitted here to editing on behalf of the blocked user. In addition to the exact same writing style and complete refusal to sign his posts, he has posted "gibberish" on Jimbo's page, just like the previous IP had.   Salvidrim!   22:41, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Neither IP listed here (nor the one in the archive) is currently blocked, so there's no evasion. There isn't any abuse of multiple accounts here either - they haven't been editing concurrently. If they're being disruptive and vandalizing then you can take that to AIV, but I don't see a particularly compelling reason to block the IP for socking. (Just as a side note, we don't use support/oppose in SPI cases.) —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 01:00, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, the first edits by 98.71.49.191 happened at a time 74.163.17.131 was blocked for vandalism, 74.163.15.130 for evading the ban, and the 74.163.0.0/19 range blocked as a result of this SPI case. Thus there was ban evasion through use of IP-socks.   Salvidrim!   01:09, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Maybe, but it should've been reported then. Right now, one IP is being used; the others are more or less stale. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 01:13, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * There is evidence (and even an admission from the IP) that he has used this IP to evade a ban, even if the ban is currently lifted, surely ban evasion is punishable? To note, with the warnings and current behaviour he is very likely to end up blocked quickly anyhow, however I would like it to be recognized that he has used an IP to evade a ban for the second time, for future reference.  Salvidrim!   01:36, 7 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Kww blocked the sock IP. The master hasn't been used for at least a week, so I'm closing for now. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 03:54, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

11 January 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

This is Tailsman67, a formally banned user. Same old. Practically an admission. Same range. Salvidrim!   &#9993;  19:19, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I also recommend somehow merging the previous SPI reports found here Sockpuppet investigations/74.163.17.131. This particular user never formally had a Wikipedia account. See this page for all relevant discussions, including the formal ban.  Salvidrim!    &#9993;  19:20, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The user also confirmed his identity here.  Salvidrim!    &#9993;  19:26, 11 January 2013 (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

 * has blocked the IP for a period of one week. Tiptoety  talk 20:07, 12 January 2013 (UTC)