Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Jvolkblum (3rd)

;Suspected sockpuppeteer

{{user5|1=Jvolkblum}}

;Suspected sockpuppets

{{user5|1=15ParkRow}}

{{user5|1=Smurfette143}}

{{user5|1=69.86.92.251}}

;Report submission by

BlueAzure (talk) 00:07, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

;Evidence

The two accounts were previously identified as Jvolkblum sock's during the previous sockpupperty case. {{User|15ParkRow}} was not blocked because the checkuser run at that time was inconclusive due to exclusive use of open proxies. {{User|Smurfette143}} was not blocked because no edits had been made by that account. A subsequent checkuser has confirmed both accounts as socks.

{{User|69.86.92.251}} is the ip address that Jvolkblum is using to edit logged out. At 18:53 on April 19, 69.86.92.251 made this [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=New_Rochelle_High_School&diff=prev&oldid=206737803 edit] with the edit summary "Undid user vandalism/ deletion of notable alumni + citations >> ( information is ACCURATE and citations are credible". Eight minutes later 15ParkRow made this [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=New_Rochelle%2C_New_York&diff=prev&oldid=206739055 edit] with the edit summary "Undid user vandalism/ deletion of notable residents + citations >> ( information is ACCURATE and citations are credible". The address's whois and traceroute match {{User|24.215.173.132 }} which was previously Jvolkblum IP address, indicating that Jvolkblum was able to get a new ip address from their isp. The new IP address like the old one appears to be static.

;Comments

BlueAzure has described the situation accurately. After the most recent checkuser results were returned, these users were inactive for a while. In the last few days, thought, 15ParkRow started editing actively. Most of his/her contributions appeared to be responsible, causing me to temporarily assume in good faith that s/he was turning over a new leaf. However, I have been dismayed to see that familiar old behavior has resumed on the 15ParkRow account, such as uploading Image:NRLelandCastle.JPG and claiming it was a personally made photo (it was a blatant copyvio of a photo from the New York Times) and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=City_School_District_of_New_Rochelle&diff=206571815&oldid=205774630 this edit] on City School District of New Rochelle, in which a reference to a school district brochure was identified as being a Wall St. Journal article. --Orlady (talk) 01:55, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

The evidence looks very persuasive to me. The connections between the accounts are logical and strong. I considered writing a conclusion and blocking the accounts but I'm somewhat unfamiliar with the process and didn't want to muck it up doing it. Pigman☿ 04:21, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

;Conclusions

I'm convinced...both accounts indefinitely blocked as it appears the master account has no desire to turn over a new leaf. _GB^T/C 12:04, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

----