Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Tonyphile

[edit] Tonyphile

• Tonyphile (talk • contribs • block user • block log • checkuser)
• Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Users (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log)
• Determination (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log)
• JlMB0 WALES (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log)
• Coproero (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log)
• Beer God (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log)
• Christ Almighty (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log)
• BlankFlank (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log)
• FunkDunker (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log)

Confirmed Blocking the IPs to stop the flow as well. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 04:33, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

More of the same from Horace Manley (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log). Kotepho 05:03, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

I believe he's also

• ¢um (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log)
• ¢umbucket (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log)
• ¢luster (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log)
• £over (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log)

A real charmer, it seems. -GTBacchus^(talk) 05:07, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

He is:

• Horace Manley (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log)
• Tyrell Incy (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log)
• Beauford Spingolo (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log)

Will check on the above. Essjay (Talk • Connect ) 05:09, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

It appears that the individual IP blocks are not quite effective, since new accounts are still pouring in. I suspect that those IPs might be dynamic, and that we might have to block a whole range of IP addresses to completely suppress this vandal. 05:18, 8 June 2006 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.117.4.132 (talk • contribs) .

Indeed, he is the accounts listed above by GTBacchus. 69.117.4.132 is right, individual blocks are not working here; I've checked the /16, and there don't appear to be any legit contributors in it, but a lot of this kind of vandalism. I've blocked it for 24 hours; feel free to unblock if legit collateral damage shows up (make sure it's an established user, not a new account, and let me know about it so I can look for any tie-ins), or to reblock if it continues past the 24 hours. The range is 70.218.0.0/16. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 05:34, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Wow, isn't /16 something like 65,356 IPs? Wait a minute... 70.218.x.x.... I've seen that range... no, it was 70.213.x.x, here. WHOIS identifies those as the same. It was a very similar pattern, and someone identified (correctly?) that person as User:Dschor, if memory serves. -GTBacchus^(talk) 05:41, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it's about 65,000 addresses. And yes, 70.218 and 70.213 both belong to the same company, Cellco Partnership DBA Verizon Wireless. Dschor has been in 70.218, but also in unrelated IPs. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 06:14, 8 June 2006 (UTC)