Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/70.108.110.22

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Synergy (talk | contribs) at 20:24, 31 March 2009 (→‎Report date March 26 2009, 15:14 (UTC): null edit). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

User:70.108.110.22

70.108.110.22 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Report date March 26 2009, 15:14 (UTC)
Suspected sockpuppets

also see

and another

Evidence submitted by MuZemike

Engaging in sockpuppetry to avoid violating the three-revert rule on Omarosa Manigault-Stallworth:

User has already broken 3RR on Tim Hasselbeck by using other socks:

All three IPs also Geolocate in the D.C. area. I am also adding 70.108.70.62 (talk · contribs) and 70.241.28.61 (talk · contribs) for similar previous edit-warring up to, but not over, 3RR a couple of days ago, and that they both also Geolocate to D.C. MuZemike 15:14, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is also noted that the user was already been warned twice now about breaking 3RR [1] and [2]; both warnings have been blatantly ignored. MuZemike 15:17, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Muzemike: Tell redpen to not revert either. 70.108.79.147 (talk) 01:28, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.

Im not a sockpuppet. My ISP changes the IP not me. 70.108.79.147 (talk) 15:16, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not 3rr intentionally. I add sourced content & it is reverted. I readd it. Then u all all tell me to stop. TELL REDPEN! I take the time to add content but all s/he does is revert. redpen is following me STALKING ME Elisabeth Hasselbeck Tim Hasselbeck Omarosa Carson Daly and initiating edit warring. I hvae readded my edits bc the content I add is good & sourced. I have asked for help but you all ignore me. Instead you focus on telling me to not 3rr. Look @ the CONTENT of my edits. Tell redpen to stop reverting and actually contribute in making the articles better. 70.108.102.252 (talk) 16:36, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
The IP's comments on the various talk pages indicate to me that there was no intentional use of multiple IPs to try to hide identity/avoid appearance of 3RR violations. .-- The Red Pen of Doom 02:46, 27 March 2009 (UTC) With yet another IP added, I am no longer at the same level of AGF that I was when I made my previous statement -- The Red Pen of Doom 12:37, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
70.241.28.61 appears to be unrelated: it's a different ISP and the geolocation tool I use suggests it's in Houston, Texas (unlike the others which are in Washington, DC). Also the edits from that IP don't look like the same user. —Snigbrook 15:56, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK. After looking at the WHOIS, that seems to be the case. Removed. MuZemike 16:23, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
CheckUser requests

{{RFCU}} is deprecated. Please change the case status parameter in {{SPI case status}} to "CURequest" instead.

Checkuser request – code letter: B  + F (Ongoing serious pattern vandalism and another reason)
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below. Mayalld (talk) 18:32, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk endorsed Per this edit, it is clear that this editor is not a newbie who hasn't yet grasped our rules. Editors that manage to grasp the syntax of parser functions, and use them to play silly tricks, whilst being unable to grasp policy are thin on the ground. Endorsed for CU to find out if this editor is an experienced user logged out. Mayalld (talk) 18:32, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
  •  Clerk note: Whether your ISP changes your IP address or not, you are not entitled to revert more than 3 times in a 24 hour period. Mayalld (talk) 15:26, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mayalld: Tell redpen to not revert either. 70.108.79.147 (talk) 01:28, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If we could possibly avoid "yebbut he reverted too", life would be simpler. Edit warring is not permitted, and in particular reverting more than 3 times in 24 hours will lead to a block. Even if somebody else is doing the same thing it does not excuse you doing it. Mayalld (talk) 07:28, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not 3rr intentionally. I add sourced content & it is reverted. I readd it. Then u all all tell me to stop. TELL REDPEN! I take the time to add content but all s/he does is revert. redpen is following me STALKING ME Elisabeth Hasselbeck Tim Hasselbeck Omarosa Carson Daly and initiating edit warring. I hvae readded my edits bc the content I add is good & sourced. I have asked for help but you all ignore me. Instead you focus on telling me to not 3rr. Look @ the CONTENT of my edits. Tell redpen to stop reverting and actually contribute in making the articles better. 70.108.102.252 (talk) 16:34, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Clerk note: clearly this isn't getting through to you. "I am not 3rr intentionally" - 3RR means no more than 3 reverts in 24 hours, end of story. It doesn't mean "no more than 3 reverts unless you have a good reason". 3RR is deliberately framed so as to NOT look at the content. Repeated reversion is bad for collaborative editing, and it is better for the long term good of the project that an article be left in a poorer state for a short time than have an edit war. If another editor has breached the 3RR, report him, do not imagine that either "my edits were good" or "he did it too" excuse edit warring. Mayalld (talk) 16:41, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think u need 2 step back bc your comment is rude & unnecc. I do understand. 3 reverts in 24 isnt allowed. What I am saying is that redpen too is reverting 3x in 24 hrs on 4 diff pages. Where are the sanctions for redpen? 70.108.102.252 (talk) 17:06, 27 March 2009 (UTC) You said nada 2 me about a trust block. I dont even know which page you 're talking about since redpen is STALKING ME on 4 diff articles: Omarosa Girlfriends Elisabeth Hasselbeck Tim Hasselbeck. 70.108.102.252 (talk) 17:09, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was option number 2 on your talk page, and I am talking about the talk page of any article you have a conflict on.
As to your comments about redpen, I can only repeat that regardless of his behaviour, you have breached WP:3RR, and that is NOT allowed. If redpen is breaching WP:3RR, please supply diffs, and he too will be subject to sanctions. Mayalld (talk) 17:12, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another IP range is making the same disruptive edits as the 70.108.*.* range. 173.79.58.33 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) was caught removing whois templates for his 70.108.*.* IP's and was blocked for disruption. Traces back to the same Pool as the 70.108.*.* IP's in the Washington DC area. Momusufan (talk) 15:24, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think this IP is more likely a meatpuppet than a sockpuppet. "I was asked to remove" "I was told you were crazy" etc. -- The Red Pen of Doom 15:30, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I put up a sockpuppet notice on the 173 IP talk page anyway to get his attention. Momusufan (talk) 15:36, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
They certainly do think alike - "I think I should be able to do this and I am not going to listen to anybody who tells me otherwise, even if EVERYBODY is telling me otherwise." -- The Red Pen of Doom 15:40, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

With that conclusion coming to light, I labeled the IP talk pages and userpages as socks to that indefblocked user with {{IPsockCheckuser|Lilkunta}} . Momusufan (talk) 18:59, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We just got an admission from the IP on the indef blocked user DIFF. Momusufan (talk) 19:20, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions
  •  Clerk note: clearly the same user, and clear 3RR breaches. However with the IP address moving like that, a block would have a lot of collateral damage to be effective. I have invited the user to accept a 24 hour "on trust" block. Mayalld (talk) 17:01, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    •  IP blocked as 70.108.102.252, immediately returned as 70.108.118.234, also  IP blocked. User seems determined to edit around blocks to add poorly sourced BLP. Mayalld (talk) 11:17, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Confirmed to be indef blocked user Lilkunta (talk · contribs). if you want to block, the range is obviously 70.108.0.0/16 but it is busy. I don't think CU can be of much help here. -- lucasbfr talk 18:40, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This case has been marked as closed. It will shortly be archived automatically.

{{SPIclose}} is deprecated. Please change the parameter in the {{SPI case status}} to "close" instead.--Blocked the /16 for a week. PeterSymonds (talk) 20:22, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/70.108.110.22&oldid=280933105"