Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Xook1kai Choa6aur/Archive

Report date September 14 2009, 10:15 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * Evidence submitted by Muntuwandi

This is related to Sockpuppet investigations/24.15.125.234/Archive. Recently the user was blocked for 24 hours. Since the block the user has not edited using his account, even though the block has expired. Instead using the ip 76.16.183.158. When I asked why, his/her response was "So what" diff. Interestingly the ip continues to post onto the "puppet master's" main page. . Meanwhile the user has continued with the same editing pattern that got him/her a block for edit warring Wapondaponda (talk) 10:15, 14 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users

Requested by Wapondaponda (talk) 10:15, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * CheckUser requests

Edit warring with IP after block, to evade record of blocks

Behavioral evidence clearly indicates that the IP is Xook1kai Choa6aur. I also think that if Xook1kai Choa6aur is blocked, then the autoblock would likely pick up that IP as well. MuZemike 16:31, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

This wouldn't even be construed as sock puppetry, provided Xook1kai Choa6aur doesn't edit again. There's no overlap between the recent IP edits and this registered account. MuZemike 16:34, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
 * The main problem that I see is that this user has several blocks under different IPs. In general a user's prior blocks and warnings are considered by administrators in future incidents. As this user is hopping between different IPs, any incident appears to be a first offense. Xook1kai last block was for 24 hours, which is the typical duration for a first offense. However Xook1kai had accumulated at least 3 prior blocks before with different IPs. These were not considered because Xook1ai was a new account and it was his first block. Because Xook1kai's edits, by the consensus of the community are disruptive, it is necessary to keep a record of his incidents in one place. Wapondaponda (talk) 16:55, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * How I looked at it, the person is going from IP to registered account and now back to IP. Now, a rangeblock on 76.16.176.0/21 might be possible to prevent abuse from that range currently, and that 24.15.125.234 only happened once. Chances are, this will plug up the abuse; if he comes back outside the range, we can always extend it. That's how I see it. MuZemike 17:02, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

76.16.176.0/21 blocked 1 week. MuZemike 23:14, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Conclusions