62.49.119.18

62.49.119.18 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

20 December 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Listed the puppeteer as the oldest-used IP for these edits, although 81.155.238.245 has been used to make unrelated edits many years prior.

The telltale sign is a combination of unsourced claims, particularly to Frenchie (rapper), and what led to many of these accounts' blocks, abject avoidance of the issue found at Talk:New York#Proposed action to resolve incorrect incoming links and easily traceable use of the edit summary "(New York (state) redirects New York)".

The user overrides this intentional redirect largely on other hip hop articles, but mostly on items related to Frenchie (rapper) and Grafh. Another common edit summary is "[xyz] is a rapper from [abc]"

Everyone one of these accounts has edited Frenchie or/and AZ (rapper) and every account uses at least one of the above edit summaries.

As 217.13.133.67 is currently blocked 2 weeks and 213.78.80.243 is blocked for one, and a few of the others have been blocked in the past, I think all of these accounts should be blocked the same amount of time -- two weeks. (81.155.238.245 hasn't been used for non-disruptive edits since 2012) JesseRafe (talk) 19:08, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

December

User continues to make the same disruptive edits as 213.78.80.243 within three hours of that IP's expiration of their week-long block JesseRafe (talk) 18:36, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And based on patterns to articles, particularly Frenchie and Grafh, and edit summaries and content of using labels with piping to signify a supposed Associated Act, over embellishment of the AAs, and constant tinkering with where they are from, user can also be found to have used the following IP addresses as well:
Most of these accounts were never warned or even welcomed, let alone reported or blocked. Just furthering the history of this particular user, not ducking a block, but being adamant on making these changes and ignoring warnings. These further instances should be met with severe blocks, not just 31 hours if they are a "first" time offense. JesseRafe (talk) 19:00, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Also: 86.151.50.218 (talk+ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log)) JesseRafe (talk) 20:40, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

January

21 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Same unproductive edits on dozens of IPs on only a few articles, literally redoing the same edits for months. JesseRafe (talk) 19:52, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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


21 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Same unproductive edits on dozens of IPs on only a few articles, literally redoing the same edits for months. JesseRafe (talk) 19:53, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

IP is old, and we can't CU IPs. Closing. GABgab 23:53, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
More