CRAustralia

CRAustralia (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Report date March 3 2010, 03:43 (UTC)
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by Bilby

Passes the duck test - User:CRAustralia logged in and removed the indef block notification from the user's talk. Six minutes later User:CRAustralia1 was created, and then proceeded to make the same edits ([1][2]) that CRAustralia was making prior to the indef ([3][4]).

Comments by accused parties

See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users

How can we be sure that CRAustralia is CRAustralia1? THe similar edits are just circumstantial. --Merbabu (talk) 07:04, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

information Administrator note No, to actually pass the "duck test" you have to fly the sock over Bronco Stadium three times without landing on the blue artificial turf (which they naturally think is water) and then fitting said sock over the top of the Oregon Duck's head without breaking. –MuZemike 03:56, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically.
Report date March 17 2010, 14:36 (UTC)
Suspected sockpuppets


Evidence submitted by JamesBWatson

CRAustralia and CRAustralia1 were blocked on 3 March 2010 following the previous CRAustralia sockpuppet investigation. 71.135.117.216's only edits have been to repeat the unacceptable edits made by CRAustralia and CRAustralia1. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:36, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties

See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

IP hardblocked 3 days. –MuZemike 16:29, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically.
Report date March 22 2010, 09:48 (UTC)
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by JamesBWatson

Following previous investigation 71.135.117.216 was blocked for 3 days. Now 71.135.107.117 has started editing, and, like 71.135.117.216, the only edits are restoring unacceptable edits previously made by CRAustralia and CRAustralia1. Is there now a case for a range block, and for a longer time? JamesBWatson (talk) 09:48, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Comments by accused parties

See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 Clerk note: range appears to be 71.135.96.0/19 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial)) (8192 addresses) SpitfireTally-ho! 13:31, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the IP is CRAustralia, but the IP hasn't edited in a week, and neither has any other IP within that /19 range. I'm not going to block that range for there is too much unrelated editing going on. –MuZemike 20:26, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This case has been marked as closed. It will be archived after its final review by a Clerk or Checkuser.
More