User talk:ToBeFree
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III. |
IP Evading Block
Hi,
I reported the IP 67.87.197.43 and it got blocked, but other IPs, *2601:381:4203:C70:6D24:9237:BBBC:B981
*2600:387:5:807:0:0:0:3A
*2601:381:4203:C70:65C2:B293:733F:22EC have all been making extremely similar edits and in small chunks just like 67.87.197.43, and on the same pages. In addition, in October 2019 got the same “editing not constructive” warning that 67.87.197.43 got over and over again. I’m not sure how a Sockpuppet Investigation is supposed to work, could you help me out? I’m trying to revert his/her edits.
Thanks! Smith0124 (talk) 00:07, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Smith0124, thank you very much for the report!
- This was a bit tricky, but the edits at Mosholu Parkway really gave it away: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] – in addition, the reported IP address has a very strong and obvious editing overlap with the blocked IP address, editing the same articles (!) and making the same changes. I have blocked the IP range to prevent further block evasion, and I have reverted the changes made in violation of the block.
- Regarding sockpuppet investigations, Twinkle offers a nice sockpuppet reporting tool. When you're on the contributions page of the blocked user, click TW->ARV->Select report type: Sockpuppeteer. Provide evidence like we both have collected here, ideally with diff links that make the situation very clear. Afterwards, do feel free to notify the blocking administrator about the created investigation. This way, both the blocking administrator and other experienced sockpuppet investigators can have a look. Note: Do not click "Request CheckUser evidence". If CheckUser evidence is really necessary, an experienced user or checkuser will mark the report as such; in almost all cases, you do not need to do so manually.
- Now that the user has already been blocked, don't worry: You do not need to create a sockpuppet investigation now. Just keep the handy tool in mind for the future.
- Best regards,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:01, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
Thank you so much!! You’re the best. I appreciate everything. I assume this type of thing is annoying to deal with. I will keep the knowledge for the future. Smith0124 (talk) 01:03, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
- You're welcome, Smith0124, and thank you very much for the kind feedback. I actually happen to enjoy this sometimes. Such as now. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:05, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
IP Evading Block (again)
Hi ToBeFree,
I'm so sorry to bother you again, but it seems the same anonymous user is sockpuppeting again. IP 166.109.255.177 is making similar edits on the same pages (such as Interstate 87 (New York)), has gotten the same unconstructive edit warnings in the past, you get the idea. I think the original account needs to get a stricter punishment to encourage them to stop. I leave it to you, you have good judgement.
Thanks! Smith0124 (talk) 01:35, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Smith0124,
- That's a tricky case, but [6] and [7], combined with the timing and the article overlap, are sufficient evidence.
- A three-month block is already at the upper end of reasonable actions against an IP-hopping editor who behaves in this way. If they continue to make the same edits after three months, I'll set a new three-month block. Also, with each catched block evasion, the timer is effectively reset by the new block. The only way to get out of the situation without making an unblock appeal is to stay away from Wikipedia for three months and to start discussing controversial changes on talk pages.
- Please continue to report and undo such block evasion; I'm still confident they'll eventually lose their interest in making changes that do not persist.
- I'm now creating a sockpuppet investigation before blocking the IP address.
- Best regards,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 03:28, 27 February 2020 (UTC)