Template talk:User shared IP address private

Family members[edit]

Moved from Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions § Family members (2)

– -- Trevj (talk) 14:34, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Archive21: Family members

The result of the previous conversation is that Trevj created a user box {{User shared IP address private}} and listed it at Wikipedia:Userboxes/Wikipedia/Related accounts. I think that this is a mistake. The whole point of the deceleration of "This user shares an IP address with: Username." is to reduce the chance of an sockmaster being able to hide behind the family argument. See for example user:Xn4,Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Xn4 and User talk:Umar Zulfikar Khan#Account blocked indefinitely.

This new template is open to abuse so I suggest that it is removed from Wikipedia:Userboxes/Wikipedia/Related accounts any objections and if so why? -- PBS (talk) 08:58, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for alerting us to previous cases. I was unaware of these and apologise if the existence of {{User shared IP address private}} could cause problems. I have no objection to its removal from Wikipedia:Userboxes/Wikipedia/Related accounts, in which case a note at Template talk:User shared IP address private would be informative for future users. If it's taken to WP:MFD, I'd be interested to learn the collective view of the wider community. Thanks. -- Trevj (talk) 09:12, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. If the userbox cannot exist, the user is still allowed to state the same thing (this account shares an IP with other editors) on their userpage, right? I think it's understandable if an editor doesn't want to identify their editor family members on his userpage; I would certainly prefer it that way if it were me. ʝunglejill 12:59, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Without naming the accounts, the message is of no use. The whole point of the message is to protect users who share an IP address, and stop problems with accusations of sockpuppets and checkuer investigations. -- PBS (talk) 18:59, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Frog890/Archive (2–5 September 2012) and see this revision 11 September 2012 of User talk:Frog890. It is an example of a sockmaster in this case closing the stable door after the horse had bolted, but with an assumption of good faith, its use before 2 of September would have complicated the sockpuppet investigation.

Another example is here: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jay Starz/Archive (23–29 August 2012). While the template {{User shared IP address private}} has not been used, and there was no sockpuppet, pre-emptively adding {{User shared IP address}} to the two accounts mentioned in the investigation would have brought transparency to the issue which {{User shared IP address private}} would not. -- PBS (talk) 14:10, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]