Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser: Difference between revisions

Edit links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Bormalagurski (talk | contribs)
2,021 edits
Essjay (talk | contribs)
21,413 edits
Line 57: Line 57:
:Hernando Cortez's editing times also correspond closely with blocks against Lou franklin. [[User:Phr|Phr]] ([[User talk:Phr|talk]]) 19:22, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
:Hernando Cortez's editing times also correspond closely with blocks against Lou franklin. [[User:Phr|Phr]] ([[User talk:Phr|talk]]) 19:22, 28 May 2006 (UTC)


{{Likely}}. Hernando_Cortez is editing from a number of public locations (libraries, copy shops, etc.) in the same city as Lou_franklin; looks like a textbook case of attempting to avoid detection. <span style="font-family: Verdana">[[User:Essjay|<font color="#7b68ee">'''Essjay'''</font>]] <font color="#7b68ee">(<small>[[User talk:Essjay|<font color="#7b68ee">Talk</font>]] • [[User:Essjay/Contact|<font color="#7b68ee">Connect</font>]]</small>)</font></span> 01:59, 29 May 2006 (UTC)



== Declined requests ==
== Declined requests ==

Revision as of 01:59, 29 May 2006


    Read this first

    This is the place to request sockpuppet checks and other investigations requiring access to the Checkuser privilege. Possible alternatives are listed below.

    Requests likely to be accepted

    Code Situation Solution, requirements
    A Blatant attack or vandalism accounts, need IP block Submit new section at #Requests for IP check, below
    B Evading blocks, bans and remedies issued by arbitration committee Submit case subpage, including link to closed arb case
    C Ongoing, serious pattern vandalism with many incidents Submit case subpage, including diffs
    D Vote fraud, closed vote, fraud affects outcome Submit case subpage, including link to closed vote
    E 3RR violation using sockpuppets Submit case subpage, including diffs of violation
    F Evading blocks, bans and remedies issued by community Submit case subpage, including link to evidence of remedy
    G Does not fit above, but you believe check needed Submit case subpage, briefly summarize and justify

    Requests likely to be rejected

    Situation Solution
    Obvious, disruptive sock puppet Block, no checkuser needed
    Disruptive "throwaway" account used only for a few edits Block, no checkuser needed
    Checkuser on yourself to "prove your innocence" Such requests are rarely accepted, please do not ask
    Related to ongoing arbitration case Request checkuser on the arbitration case pages
    Vote fraud, ongoing vote Wait until vote closes before listing, or post at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets
    Vote fraud, closed vote, did not affect outcome List at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents or Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets
    Other disruption of articles List at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents or Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets
    Open proxy, IP address already known List at Wikipedia:WikiProject on open proxies
    You want access to the checkuser tool yourself Contact the Arbitration Committee, but such access is granted rarely


    When submitting a request

    • If submitting a new case subpage, use the inputbox below; if adding to an existing case subpage, see WP:RFCU/P#Repeat requests.
    • Choose the code letter that best fits your request. Provide evidence such as diff links as required or requested. Note that some code letters inherently require specific evidence.
    • When listing suspected accounts or IP addresses, use the {{checkuser}} or {{checkip}} templates. Please do not use this template in a section header.
    • You may add your request to the top of the #Outstanding requests section, by adding {{Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/CASENAMEHERE}}. If you do not, clerks should check for pages in Category:Checkuser requests to be listed and will do this for you.
    • Sign your request.


    After submitting a request

    Privacy violation?

    this header: view • edit

    File a Checkuser Request
    Cases are created on subpages of Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case.
    If you require help or advice, ask at Wikipedia talk:Requests for checkuser.

    If a case subpage already exists, edit the existing page instead, either adding to the currently open section (if the case is not yet archived) or adding a new section to the top (if the case has been archived). When editing an existing case, be sure to list it here or add Category:Checkuser requests to be listed to the subpage.

    If creating a new case subpage, add the name of the main account (or "puppetmaster", not the sockpuppet!) in the box below. Leave out the "User:" prefix. Do not remove the text in the box, add the name to the end only (that is, append the name to the existing text). Then press "Request a checkuser" and you will be taken to a page where you can fill out the request.

    Example: if you want to request a checkuser on User:John Doe, enter the text:
    Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/John Doe

    <inputbox> type=create editintro=Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Inputbox/Header preload=Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Inputbox/Sample default=Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/ buttonlabel=Request a checkuser bgcolor=#F8FCFF width=50 </inputbox>

    Indicators and templates   (v  · e)
    These indicators are used by Checkusers, SPI clerks and other patrolling users, to allow easier at-a-glance reading of their notes, actions and comments.
    Case decisions:
     IP blocked  {{IPblock}}  Tagged  {{Stagged}}
     Blocked but awaiting tags  {{Sblock}}  Not possible  {{Impossible}}
     Blocked and tagged  {{Blockedandtagged}}  Blocked without tags  {{Blockedwithouttags}}
     No tags  {{No tags}}  Blocked and tagged. Closing.  {{Blockedtaggedclosing}}
    Information:
     Additional information needed  {{MoreInfo}}  Deferred  {{Deferred}}
    information Note:  {{TakeNote}}  In progress  {{Inprogress}}
    Clerk actions:
     Clerk assistance requested:  {{Clerk Request}}  Clerk note:  {{Clerk-Note}}
     Delisted  {{Delisted}}  Relisted  {{Relisted}}
     Clerk declined  {{Decline}}  Clerk endorsed  {{Endorse}}
    Self-endorsed by clerk for checkuser attention  {{Selfendorse}} CheckUser requested  {{CURequest}}
    Specific to CheckUser:
     Confirmed  {{Confirmed}} Red X Unrelated  {{Unrelated}}
     Confirmed with respect to the named user(s). no No comment with respect to IP address(es).  {{Confirmed-nc}}
     Technically indistinguishable  {{Technically indistinguishable}}
     Likely  {{Likely}}  Unlikely  {{Unlikely}}
     Possible  {{Possible}}  Inconclusive  {{Inconclusive}}
    no Declined  {{Declined}} no Unnecessary  {{Unnecessary}}
     Stale (too old)  {{StaleIP}} no No comment  {{Nocomment}}
    crystal ball CheckUser is not a crystal ball  {{Crystalball}} fish CheckUser is not for fishing  {{Fishing}}
     CheckUser is not magic pixie dust  {{Pixiedust}} magic eight ball The CheckUser Magic 8-Ball says:  {{8ball}}
     Endorsed by a checkuser  {{Cu-endorsed}}  Check declined by a checkuser  {{Cudecline}}
     Possilikely (a mix between possible and likely)  {{possilikely}}


    Note: Individuals making requests must check back regularly. The role of checkusers is to report findings; it is the responsibility of the individual making the request to see that appropriate action is taken.


    Outstanding Requests

    Bormalagurski

    We thought that a previous warning/finding would stop this user, but seems like not. His actions are highly suspicious, as the following example proved. See contributions of this user in the article Kosovo Liberation Army, they are almost crossing the 3RR rule, and "suddenly" when I (wrongly actually, missing one more revert)report him in the 3RR page, someone else Krytan does that what he wanted, and to confuse an admin further Estavisti also edited a bit. I realized that I wrongly reported him for the 3RR, which gave him a reason to edit with the other accounts, which I was very suspicious for a long time being his sockpuppets. Seeing the speed of edits, and the very short time between the edits. Just check when suspected sockpuppets User:Krytan and User:Estavisti "started" editing. Exactly when he was crossing the 3RR boundary. It is impossible that the 3 usernames can be different, when they edited within a very short time-span. Please take some action, this user has been disruptive in almost all his Wikipedia "career", has been blocked 4 times previously, but is not becoming more understanding. It would be good to find out if these are his meatpuppets or sockpuppets, and action to be taken accordingly. On the contrary. I thank you in advance. ilir_pz 00:09, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    I would also like to request a checkuser, just to prove Ilir wrong. He is so obsessed with his claims of an "organized propaganda program" aimed at "pushing Serbian POV" that he does not see the clear facts. I, Bormalagurski, am in Vancouver, Krytan is in Toronto and estavisti is in London. A simple IP locator can prove this. Also, estavisti has over 1,700 edits [1], mostly on articles I've never touched (I believe thats more edits than I've made [2]), Krytan also edits stuff I don't care much about (mostly South Serbia, I believe [3]). But when it comes to Ilir's vandalism, which is extremely noticable, I think it's understandable that some of us intervene. Good luck in proving that we are the same person, I really look forward to the results of this checkuser. Also, I'm not surprised that Ilir's main evidence is my wiki-history (which has not been perfect), even though I have changed my ways long ago, but it's hard for others to accept that. On the other hand, Ilir has been organizing vandalism with his Albanian friends, convicted vandals like Hipi Zhdripi and his sockpuppets, who have been blocked for "POV pushing and disruption". There has also been a sharp rise in throwaway accounts, writing in similar fashion as Hipi and Ilir. -- serbiana - talk 00:47, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Iloveminun

    Full reasoning behind argument - User:HighwayCello/Minun

    I have suspected that there may be a connection between "Po132", "Minun132" and "Iloveminun", primarily because of their similar names. What later aroused my suspicion further was the discussion between the three users, the somewhat suspicious breaks between editting and user contributions and their joint interest in Pokémon, all three of them joining the Pokémon WikiProject... for full reasoning, see here. Highway Rainbow Sneakers 21:00, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Lou franklin

    Hernando's editing pattern closely mirrors that of Lou, consisting mostly of edits to Societal attitudes towards homosexuality and Talk:Societal attitudes towards homosexuality, which take a similar POV position to Lou. He also opposed KimvdLinde's RfA, following one of Lou's other habits - opposing the RfAs of people involved in the article and/or his Arbcom case.

    On the face of it, Hernando is a merely a meatpuppet of Lou. He has a very different speaking style, the account was created just under two months before he started to edit war in earnest, and on the face of it his edits mirror Lou's because Lou asked him to take up his position on the talk page. However, there is a crack in that image - Hernando's first four edits after his first to his userpage were minor copyediting edits, making no mistakes, despite the fact that his talk page edits imply that he has a poor grasp of English. He hasn't made any since he took up the edit war on SATH. As for the creation date, although the Arbcom case was not closed at the time it was fairly clear which way it was going. And the easiest way to 'disguise your handwriting' is to reduce it to the level of a child.

    At least two editors other than myself have openly speculated as to whether Hernando is a sock, and I think this should be cleared up. Sam Blanning(talk) 19:09, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Hernando Cortez's editing times also correspond closely with blocks against Lou franklin. Phr (talk) 19:22, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

     Likely. Hernando_Cortez is editing from a number of public locations (libraries, copy shops, etc.) in the same city as Lou_franklin; looks like a textbook case of attempting to avoid detection. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 01:59, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined requests

    AppleJuicefromConcentrate

    Account AppleJuicefromConcentrate was created on 25th May; he created implausible/hoax articles on a shop named "Claught of a bird". Four hours later, after the article was speedily deleted several times, a new account was created (Motorox) doing the same. For persistent re-creation of the article and incivility, AppleJuicefromConcentrate received several short-time blocks; Motorox was blocked indefinitely. I unblocked AppleJuicefromConcentrate on 27th May after he promised not to engage in disruptive behavior. (The time in his block log is about two hours off because I initially forgot to remove the automatic blocks.) After being unblocked, AppleJuicefromConcentrate created his user page; then the three other accounts were created within minutes from each other and with an identical user page (two of them also with a very similar name; the third one with the name of the article he created). AppleJuicefromConcentrate maintains that these accounts are not his sockpuppets, so I would like you to confirm or disprove it. Thank you. - Mike Rosoft 16:02, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Unless they're used to evade a block or to create false consensus on polls/discussions like AfD or RfA, they're Alternate Accounts and allowed... See if he's using these to do any of the Prohibited Use items on WP:SOCK, but a Checkuser seems fairly superfluous as these appear to be pretty obviously the same person. -Mask 21:07, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined See the header: Checkuser is for cases where there are policy violations. I see none here. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 00:48, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    FruitsAndVegetables133

    FruitsAndVegetables133 is trying to get Embrun, Ontario promoted to feature article status, and appears to have created the last four accounts for vote-stacking (section 9), due to the fact that they have only 6 total edits between them combined. Editor88 03:48, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    • Declined. This is blatant, and those votes wouldn't count regardless. Mackensen (talk) 04:14, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    86.5.7.168

    I ask for a checkuser to be run so as to establish whether Israelbeach has again been evading his block through use of sockpuppets. I'd like to point out that Israelbeach has been known to edit from multiple IPs, including: + I ask for a checkuser to be run so as to establish whether 86.5.7.168 has again been evading his block through use of sockpuppets. This person has been updating pages on Wikipedia with factually incorrect and liabellous content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prince123 (talk • contribs)

    The problem with this site is anyone can delete any content that they feel to be factually inaccurate, without providing any basis for this, reasoning or counter argument. I provided references and links and yet Prince123 deemed it to factually inaccurate! Admittedly I could not find any links pertaining to the conviction of Daniel Attenborough so I could understand why that section was removed, however why remove the whole section on the local history? It wasn't unsubstantiated, much of the information from the village (which is over 500 years old) is written in BOOKS! Yes there was a source of reference before the Internet, before hyperlinks! What else could I do other than provide the names of the books? Get one of the authors to place it on a website so that I may link to it? Are you a historian Prince123? Are you familiar with the local history of Attenborough? Then how are you able to decide what should be on the page and what should not, how are you certain what is fact and what is not?

    I should also add that in your opinion Prince123, famous locals should also not be listed in local history, which is clearly ridiculous, by that logic there would no mention of Elvis on the Graceland page!

    Just for record I am not evading my block, I have never been blocked and I am not some kind of sockpuppet.

    86.5.7.168 23:22, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined I don't know what this is, but it's not a checkuser request. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 04:09, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Moby Dick (again)

    Since a checkuser for Davenbelle is not possible (as davenbelle last edited on early december) and as per the evidence at WP:ANB/I#Sock_investigation I'd like to request a CheckUser to establish weather or not Moby Dick is editing from a +8 UTC country or better if from bali (assuming this does not violate privacy issues). Thanks. Cat out 07:53, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Checkuser is not for fishing. See above: You must lay out clearly the evidence for sockpuppetry. You must explain how your request fits the policy above. Checkuser is not used to confirm "gut feelings" or curiosity; it is only used for cases where there is strong evidence of a connection and a serious matter of policy violation. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Essjay (talk • contribs) .

    Clearly the evidence for sockpuppetry is avalible at ANB/I. The evidence pretty much convinced Administrator MONGO.
    I have reviewed the evidence posted and have discussed this matter with one other editor and I see a preponderance of evidence that indicates that not only has Moby Dick wikistalked User:Cool Cat, but User:MegamanZero as well, and that Moby Dick is a sockpuppet of Davenbelle.--MONGO 09:13, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
    Other admins such as Bishonen and Tony Sidaway believe it is more than likely... I do not want to copy paste entier ani discussion so as not to clutter here unless you request otherwise. The section titled "Moby Dick" on ANB/I has plenty of evidence.
    Since a checkuser to compare Davenbelle and Moby Dick is not possible I have to rely on circumstencial evidence and establishing Time Zone is one of them.
    --Cat out 23:47, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Seconded. I realize it's not entirely clear from Cool Cat's request, but if Moby Dick is Davenbelle, it is a matter of serious policy violation. Please see the remedy passed in Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Coolcat,_Davenbelle_and_Stereotek, or, simpler, this summary and warning of Moby Dick by User:Tony Sidaway. Even if it sounds like fishing, I think this is a case where it would be appropriate to look for any sockpuppets or sock-siblings of Moby Dick himself, if that's technically possible. Bishonen | talk 00:52, 25 May 2006 (UTC).[reply]
    I get that it's violation of an AC decision if it's Davanbelle, but really, what do you expect? The best I can provide is "He's editing from an IP that is registered somewhere in one of these 20 countries, inhabited by 100 million people. Yes, Davanbelle could be in there somewhere." We can't do identification based on perceved location; if we did that, everybody on the site would be the sockpuppet of a thousand other people.
    At this point, the best I can offer is for you to take the issue back to the Arbitration Committee; the vast majority of the checkusers on this project are AC members, and they can do the check and come to thier own conclusions. I'm just not comfortable putting people's IPs out there unless it is 100% clear that the privacy policy allows it, and I'm not going to be responsible for saying "He's somewhere within 1000 miles of the suspect" and have that turned into a conviction. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 02:06, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    True and you are right. But triangulating the suspect in a 1000 mile area would be usefull circumstancial evidence for this case. I can only gather circumstancial evidence as we cant checkuser davenbelle for reasons that has been discussed to death. You can just tell us country or timezone rather than an the IP list for now. The ip list will require some sort of aproval as per privacy policy... --Cat out 10:28, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    User: Azate

    Although I do not like doing this, I thought I should file a separate request for the users above. I would like to ask the CheckUser please check if these users has any common IP's.

    Thanks. Resid Gulerdem 19:14, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined Stop trolling. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 21:31, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Darknightonight

    I suspect that there is a lot of sockpuppetry going on around the vote on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Camp Massad (2nd nomination). Some IPs with suspiciously close ranges have been editing and making very similar comments. I am not sure who the master puppeteer is and who the puppets are, but their voting patterns are so similar that I cannot see anything but a sockpuppet or vote fraud. Páll (Die pienk olifant) 19:20, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined. Those IPs are dynamic Shaw Communications addresses; they're assigned to hundreds of contributors. Without knowing who to check against, there is no way of picking one editor out as the puppeteer. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 21:35, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Jesus On Wheels

    States he's not Willy on Wheels, but it's a little risky to allow this account to be on Wikipedia. Jesus on Wheels has been blocked again for username, but I'm a little skeptical about allowing a block to be issued on someone who isn't Willy on Wheels. CheckUser to see if any other accounts "On Wheels" were made so a proper block or unblock can be made. DGX 19:03, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    fish CheckUser is not for fishing Essjay (Talk • Connect) 05:35, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Science3456

    Football closed an MfD that Science3456 has been using many sockpuppets to close improperly. Football has various unrelated edits, but I believe they were only made to make him look more like an established user (and be able to edit a semi-protected page, too). rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 02:48, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined. Those being checked must have recent contributions. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 01:53, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    142.22.186.13

    Hi. The user with this IP has only contributed vandalism. [[4]] I'm guessing this deserves a blocking. Thanks for your time. Frankman 05:13, 20 May 2006

    Declined.. You seem to have confused requests for checkuser investigation with Administrator Intervention Against Vandalism. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 01:45, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Completed requests

    Greier

    Greier, who has some weird obsession of adding {{historomania}} to the Vlachs article, is currently blocked for 3RR because of that. Today, Vlachul, with only 2 edits, comes out of nowhere and adds the tepmlate back, the exact same behavior as Greier. Looks like a clear case of block evasion to me. —Khoikhoi 18:01, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Also note here and here he comes to the page and reverts back to Greier's version. Or here where he edits G's userpage. —Khoikhoi 18:04, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Also perhaps the banned User:Bonaparte might be involved. He too has an interest in pushing the Romanian POV above all others and follows Greier from page to page. —Khoikhoi 18:10, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    For proof of the above statement, check the anon (open proxy) IPs which reverted to Greiers version at Vlachs of Serbia - they were sockpuppets of Bonaparte (he was permabanned for using open proxies). --Telex 18:41, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

     Likely. Will have to check with Jayjg about a connection to Bonaparte. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 01:04, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Lightbringer (yet again)

    Modus operandi fits Lightbringer (choice of username, wording of editsummary, reverting to a non-masonic editor, article edited) as per his report on WP:LTA. Recent socks to check include Naturalism IS satanism, Newmason and RBMacmillan. WegianWarrior 08:41, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

     Confirmed. And cookies for using the new templates! Essjay (Talk • Connect) 07:14, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Prin

    He interchangeably edits comments of his puppets like this. This editor is a regular abuser of Wikipedia. He uploads literally hundreds of images with fake copyright tags. See all his discovered puppets here. I tried to tag some of his images but he reverts them immediately like this. Looking at his usernames, it seems he is islamophobic.Anwar 19:29, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined. Users must have recent contributions in order for checkuser to produce results. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 10:06, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Prin's account is already blocked. But he has returned with a new set of puppets. And ofcourse his uploads were recent. See his uploads till 22 May 2006 via Prince 06 account and uploads till 21 May 2006 via Ghajini Anwar 10:12, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Perhaps you've failed to grasp how checkuser works. In order to confirm that two users are the same person, there has to be information about each person in the system. Running a check produces that information, which can then be checked. If there is no information, nothing is produced, and nothing can be checked. The only way to see if another account is related to the Prin account is to check it against information from the Prin account. There isn't any. Period. It doesn't exist. I can't check things that don't exist; it simply isn't there for me to check. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 10:26, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm mainly curious because the issue popped up a couple times while I was browsing other things, but would it be possible to chain along from more recent Prin socks? The User:Prince 06 account started contributing a few hours after the User:Jath16 account was blocked as a sock - perhaps there is there information to match Prince 06 to Jath16? It may just be some sort of fan club or other group all making similar edits, but these do seem to keep popping up like hydras! - David Oberst 10:53, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    OK I got these IP addresses previously used by Prin from April archive and May archive:
    • 81.157.165.7
    • 81.129.220.151
    • 81.129.181.71
    • 81.157.160.29
    • 81.158.120.158
    • 81.158.127.232
    • 81.129.220.29
    • 81.129.220.200
    • 81.157.164.165
    • 81.158.120.183
    • 84.9.43.12
    • 86.134.187.119
    • 86.143.115.221
    • 86.143.32.89
    • 86.144.182.94
    • 86.134.32.14
    • 86.134.32.89
    • 86.138.135.64
    • 86.138.135.103
    • 86.140.164.100
    • 86.144.252.103

    Is it possible to check the new puppets with reference to Prince_06? He is uploading the same pics (>50) with similar fake copyright tags and signs interchangeably comments of his puppets. That's nowhere near coincidence. Anwar 10:58, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    I just remembered one more thing.
    At 19.29, 22 May 2006, one puppet wrote this abuse at Ghajini's talk page
    At 19.33, 22 May 2006, Ghajini reported this abuse at my talk page
    I suspect both were one and the same. Can you match them? Anwar 11:14, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

     Confirmed. Same person. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 21:58, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    What action will be taken on the puppets? Anwar 22:02, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    List it on ANI, and they should be blocked. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 22:29, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


    Axiomm

    User:Axiomm recently nominated himself for adminship and I believe he has used the following accounts to vote support for himself (see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Axiomm):

    1. Both Axiomm and Gruntilda have a gap in their edits between early-mid March and late May.
    2. Both Axiomm and Gruntilda tried to propose Austin St. John for deletion. [5] [6]
    3. Both Axiomm and I like to watch BasebaIl reverted edits by User:PS2pcGAMER [7] [8]
    4. Both Axiomm and I like to watch BasebaIl voted "keep" on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New Jersey Dragons. Apparently, I like to watch BasebaIl was using various AOL IPs to vote keep. The only other users who voted keep were all sockpuppets of User:EddieSegoura, an indefinitely blocked user (see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Exicornt Vandalism/EddieSegoura). EddieSegoura created sockpuppets such as User:DavidOr tiz, suggesting that EddieSegoura and I like to watch BasebaIl are the same person, because both usernames are about baseball, reinforced by the fact that EddieSegoura also seems to like baseball [9]. Thus, Axiomm may possibly be related to EddieSegoura and his sockpuppets.

    --SCHZMO ✍ 21:02, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

     Inconclusive However, the baseball account is most likely a sock of EddieSegoura (he's gone back to using AOL, after I caught the static IPs last night) and Gruntilda is also AOL. I'm inclined to belive Gruntilda is EddieSegoura, not Axiomm. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 22:53, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    North Carolina Vandal

    This kid has acquired a new IP range (63.19.128.0/17 evidently no longer blocks him). Some of the throwaway accounts he has created in the last 24 hours include:

    They're vandalising all the typical targets, in the typical manner.

    Range blocks are the only effective way to stop this pest. A report of a new IP range would be helpful. Thanks, Antandrus (talk) 15:24, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    information Note: New ISP, it seems. 65.137.142.0/24 would be a start; 65.137.0.0/16 would be okay for some short blocks. The main IP in the 142.0/24 is 65.137.142.160; it can be blocked post haste. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 22:06, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    User:ChromiumCurium

    This user has made at least three edits through a backslashing proxy. Please determine the IP address used for these edits and block it indefinitely. Timestamps (UTC):

    I imagine once the IP is blocked it would be okay to unblock the user account (I blocked him because he probably knows he's being naughty, and to keep him from messing up any articles between now and then). — May. 25, '06 [19:32] <freak|talk>

    Bar-Ilan vandals

    This is complicated, so please bear with me. There might be up to three different vandals involved, so I'll describe them by their different MOs:

    Bar-Ilan "block me" vandal

    MO: Blanking pages and asking to be blocked, or for Bar-Ilan University to be blocked. This is classic for 132.70.50.117 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), but has also been done by User:dittoboy who was impersonating another user at the time. I'd like to request a checkuser for User:dittoboy to establish if he is also from Bar-Ilan university.

     Inconclusive. Dittoboy cannot be checked, because his contributions are too old. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 11:12, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Bar-Ilan impersonator

    It has been established that six accounts impersonating user:AlexKarpman all issued from Bar-Ilan (See: Wikipedia:Requests for CheckUser#Impersonator). It has separately been established on the Hebrew wikipedia that about two-dozen accounts impersonating Alex Karpman and other users of the Hebrew Wikipedia all issued from the same IP, also a Bar-Ilan IP (See: w:he:ויקיפדיה:בודק/בקשות לבדיקה#בקשה_לזיהוי_מתחזה). I request a checkuser for the Alex Karpman impersonator(s) in order to establish whether this is the same individual as the "Block me" vandal.

     Confirmed. The AlexKarpman imposter is 132.70.50.117. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 11:12, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Creative vandal from Bar-Ilan

    This is a well known vandal on the Hebrew Wikipedia, who operates by setting up new accounts named for his next planned act of petty vandalism. Similar acts of vandalism have occurred here on the English Wikipedia, and investigators on the Hebrew Wikipedia believe that the same individual may be responsible. I would like to request checkusers for the following accounts in order to establish whether they are A. from Bar-Ilan University, B. the same as the "block me" guy and/or Bar-Ilan impersonator:

    For the record, I entered this after being approached on WP:he by users requesting my assistance on WP:en tracking a known WP:he vandal. For more background details, see user:woggly/Bar-Ilan_vandal

     Inconclusive. The edits are all too old to be checked. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 11:12, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Zappa.jake

    Apparent sockpuppetry in Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Zappa.jake; it would be helpful to know if it was Zappa.jake doing it. --Rory096 05:01, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Red X Unrelated. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 05:26, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Fnhddzs and Dilip rajeev

    These two user names share the same edting style and pattern which is provocative. They also often reinforce each other in revert wars. Thanks. --Samuel Luo 03:46, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Red X Unrelated. Completely different sides of the world. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 04:31, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Lightbringer (again)

    Suspect this is out old 'friend' User:Lightbringer again - MO and POV fits to a tee as described on Long term abuse/Lightbringer. Recently identified (and banned) socks include (among others) user:Newmason. WegianWarrior 19:09, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

     Confirmed. Also RBMacmillan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Essjay (Talk • Connect) 21:27, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Rgulerdem

     Confirmed. They're all the same person. Commentary noted, and moved to /Rgulerdem. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 21:45, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Edwardkindred

    This is a non-puppet request. User Edwardkindred was identified as one of Jazzper's sockpuppets earlier this week. I received an email from Edwardkindred today. He claimed that "i got to the same school as him and are friendly i do not do the vadalism that he has done or creat useless articles about his dubbism." It is true that there is no evidence of vandalism from this account. If Edwardkindred and Jazzper share only IP 218.185.69.177 (i.e. the IP of Sydney Church of England Grammar School) then Edwardkindred's claims are reasonably sound and he should be unblocked. On the other hand, if Edwardkindred edits from IPs 60.227.17*.*, then this is just another tired old ploy by Jazzper. Can someone check please? Snottygobble 11:54, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    information Note: He is using the same school IP, but a home IP that doesn't show signs of sockpuppetry. YOu can unblock him and detag, but I'll be keeping my eye on the IPs for any kind of sockpuppetry. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 21:18, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks again. Snottygobble 23:41, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Impersonator

    I'd ask to check the IP of the impersonator who opened six useres with names similar to my own using unicode chars (cyrillic letters). He "reverted" several pages I edited writing "reverting my own edit (and no one will say it isn't mine)" int the edit summary.

    He copied my user page and talk page, and made the original ones redirects to his pages.

    On the Hebrew wikipedia he opened 23 accounts impersonating me and a sysop, w:he:משתמש:Harel. a complaint from the Hebrew wikipedia is has been sent to the university of which the impersonator operated. I'm asking to check the IP of the following usernames to compare it to the ones from the Hebrew Wikipedia.

    His activity is monitored at w:he:משתמש:AlexKarpman/מתחזים, and the IP check on the Hebrew wikipedia could be found at w:he:ויקיפדיה:בודק/בקשות לבדיקה#בקשה לזיהוי מתחזה.

    The usernames are:

    (Yes, those are six different usernames, using all kind of variations of latin and cyrillic letters, and captial i's instaed of L) conio.h • talk 12:20, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    IP Check on the Hebrew wikipedia showed that it is possibly the notorius Bar-Ilan University Vandalist. During the past five months he opened at least 76 accounts on all the hebrew wiki projects (most of them on wikipedia), with which he vandalised hunders of articles. (deailed information here: w:he:ויקיפדיה:התמודדות עם טרולים/המשחית היצירתי). The IP check here will help establish him being an insane-inter-lingual-wiki-vandalist. A complaint has been made to the university, but this will help. conio.h • talk 13:21, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

     Confirmed Is coming from the Bar-Ilan university network; unfortunately, there is a legitimate contributor coming from the same area that would be caught up in an IP block. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 21:42, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Ahwaz

    Interestingly:

    1. The anon user has the exact same tone, argument, style of writing and editing habits of User:Ahwaz.
    2. User:Ahwaz desperately tries erasing all records of himself on user talk pages, even though he has been around for quite some time.
    3. Whether or not these Anon users are Ahwaz, the Anon users above are certainly one person. This is easily observable by noting the Talk:Anti-Arabism page where all the IP addresses are debating me as one person.Zereshk 20:32, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

     Confirmed. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 21:33, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


    Roitr

    See Wikipedia:Long term abuse/Roitr abakharev 21:17, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

     Confirmed 88.153.50.37 has been used by DreemT, a recognized sock. 88.154.29.134 has no activity at the moment. TomskyVitalik is connected to DreemT, ForesterGamp, and ChineTown, all previous socks. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 10:18, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Jazzper

    It is known that Jazzper has been running a sock farm, but the full list of sock accounts remains unknown. Jazzper has gloated that the current list is "just the tip of the iceberg". I think this is not just an idle boast; there are a number of accounts that I suspect of being Jazzper. On the other hand I may have been too liberal in tagging some of these accounts as socks. I would appreciate it if I could get a check to remove any doubts. Snottygobble 03:52, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    information Note: Rather than list them all here again, I'm working through them all and replacing the tags with {{sockpuppetcheckuser}} if they can be confirmed. Doesn't mean that ones that aren't confirmed aren't sockpuppets, just that they can't be connected with checkuser. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 08:30, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Did run across several previously untagged socks, and two that couldn't be checked. Have blocked and tagged all. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 09:14, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks Essjay; much appreciated. Snottygobble 23:12, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    70.49.111.121

    Moved to Wikipedia:Abuse reports/70.49.111.121/Checkuser. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 06:12, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    I don't mean to be a total eejit, but is that an "accept" or "decline"?` Snoutwood (talk) 15:17, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    The Middle East Conflict Man

    Immediately after the blocking of the former, Carroteater began continuing where TMECM left off, with the same pattern of edits: a minute-by-minute persistent campaign against socialism, and specifically, adding images of Ghadaffi, Hussein, Mugabe et al to the Socialism article. At the moment, they are both banned, but I'd like to know if there's any other information that can help shed light on them. TMECM claims the anon is Carroteater, and the anon has been up to the same sort of stuff. Times seem to dovetail with TMECM (exception: make of 1[10] what you will); the anon is an older editor, but note that TMECM's userpage went up damn fast for a newbie! --Nema Fakei 17:00, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Clarification: Carroteater is blocked indefinitely as an obvious sock of TMECM, TMECM is blocked for 48 hours, 24 for 3RR from Katefan plus a further 24 I added for attempting to evade his block. With respect to Nema, I'm not sure if it's worth wasting time on this. So far the only person to protest my judgement that the sockpuppetry is "obvious" (in the explicit sense used by point 2 of the policy at the top of this page) is TMECM himself. --Sam Blanning(talk) 17:25, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Fooltocry seems to be taking off when Carroteater117 was banned. The same pattern with inserting odd images into the Socialism] article.[11][12] // Liftarn 08:24, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Also blocked indefinitely as obvious. Seriously, the contributions are identical - maybe two different editors could collude to add inflammatory pictures (though meatpuppetry of that sort is just as much subverting policy as sockpuppetry), but adding the same text? [13] [14] Please. --Sam Blanning(talk) 09:50, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Hm. More updates: [15] The anon here chose the name Michael40, but posted to User Talk:The Middle East Conflict Man as Joel (imitation of or subconscious influence by Joelito?). This [16] diff suggests that 130.216.191.184, who posted a supporting message on TMECM's talk page is also 60.234.157.64, and is therefore also "the vandal known as carroteater117", as 130.216.191.184 himself puts it. --Nema Fakei 11:25, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    TMECM is no newbie, he have been editing on no:. He was banned there, migrated to nn:, banned there aswell and then showing up here. ZorroIII 15:48, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah, good point.--Nema Fakei 16:52, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    information Note: Sam is right about them being obvious; however, due to the number of socks, I'll check and block the IP if possible. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 06:52, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    He has a few good arguments on his talk page [17]. Please take a look at them, mr. Essjay. And please check which country each of the IP addresses are in. --80.239.107.30 10:45, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Mr 80.239.107.30, it appears you find his arguments so convincing that you feel free to remove the sockpuppeteer warning from his userpage. Bear in mind that this is considered vandalism - even if you are TMECM. --Nema Fakei 11:25, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Two new to chek up, Nerdyned22 and 3.1415. Both have the same edit style 3.1415 added a Pol Pot immage to the Sociamism article[18] and Nerdyned22 also added simmilar pictures[19][20] One of them may be a copycat as their edits appear to be close in time. // Liftarn

    MetaStar

    User:DrBat and User:MetaStar were edit warring over Rachel Summers and related articles, when I blocked them both for 3RRV on the Summers article. Shortly after this, User:MarvelousGirl showed up and started editing in a way similar to MetaStars. DrBat thinks that the user may be a sockpuppet of MetaStar while I am skeptical of this claim. I am however, listing it here because 1) DrBat requested me to do so because DrBat is still blocked and 2) I think Marvelous is plausibly MetaStar and would like to have the matter cleared up/have her name cleared if she isn't. JoshuaZ 00:49, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

     Confirmed. MetaStar and MarvelousGirl are the same user, without question. User:Coronis also appears to be this user. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 06:04, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Er, [21] Corionis claims otherwise, and Marvelous had previously acknowledged being Corionis' cousin. How firm is the evidence? JoshuaZ 23:38, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    TheMadTim

    Possible abusive sockpuppets or impersonator. Of perma banned sockpuppeteer user:TheMadTim. --Karatekid7 00:39, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Admin User:GraemeL confirmed that the last of these was an open proxy. All of the other IP addresses appear in Spam blacklists but without knowing which port the proxy server is running on, it would be impossible for me to confirm that they are proxies. Strange pattern when a new user comes on knowledgeable of my edit history and very aware of wikipedia policy. --Karatekid7 01:20, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Not that the edits are definitely not from the areas, but I think there is something very dodgy here. --Karatekid7 02:46, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Red X Unrelated TheMadTim has created a number of sockpuppets, but the above do not appear to be directly connected to him. He was responsible for the following socks, however:

    As for the proxies, check with the open proxy project. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 05:30, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Ok thanks, I tried that the open proxy project with no success, do they do a complete port scan?

    These two confirmed sockpuppets of theMadTim (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) I think would better show the pattern of vandalism in the socks that I have shown. --Karatekid7 09:42, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    are some more. Karatekid7 23:29, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    some more likely socks of this disruptive user. Karatekid7 20:58, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Thewolfstar and its meatpuppet User:Lamb of god

    Another suspected sock of Thewolfstar (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), permabanned by the community for extreme disruptiveness: new user Dot_Bitch (talk · contribs). Check please? Note, please check also if Dot Bitch is related to Lamb_of_god (talk · contribs), permanently blocked as meatpuppet of Thewolfstar. Dot Bitch has similar interests and same stylistic tics as previous identities (such as beginning messages with "Hey" not followed by any punctuation — fairly distinctive). Dot Bitch's very few edits include a sympathetic one on User talk:Lamb of god and one to User:CorbinSimpson, an encourager of Thewolfstar. Bishonen | talk 11:59, 21 May 2006 (UTC).[reply]

    information Note: I'll check, in order to maintain current records, but that username is a clear {{usernameblock}}, regardless of the results. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 12:23, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

     Possible. Dot Bitch is editing from an IP registered to a hosting company; good traffic *rarely* comes from hosting companies. This is a common trick of sockpuppeteers to avoid detection. I can't confirm it outright, but it is certainly possible. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 12:40, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Also, note that Macai (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) appears to be the same user as Thewolfstar. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 12:42, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the check. Macai claims to be her 18-year-old son, living with her, sharing a LAN network. I have spoken with him, and assume good faith. I believe he is who he says he is, for several reasons. Anyway, there's no abuse coming from the Macai account. Bishonen | talk 13:07, 21 May 2006 (UTC).[reply]
    That's entirely likely. The two are definately coming from the same machine/personal network; the pattern is too distinct for it to be a dynamic IP or other similar situation. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 13:15, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    In good faith, I feel that I should note that Dot Bitch does not use the <big> tags that Thewolfstar and Lamb of god were fond of. Also, the user was unaware (to my knowledge) of how to sign comments and appeared to get my name from the Esperanza member list. I could be wrong, but I figure I might as well keep good faith in mind. - Corbin Be excellent 16:11, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    As I said, it's possible, but can't be confirmed. However, if the individual has grown savvy enough to make attempts at avoiding detection, it is not a very far stretch to desguising stylistic features and feigning ignorance. At about the 500th sockpuppet investigation, you begin to realize the great lengths people will go to in order to make just one more edit. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 16:20, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Thewolfstar has confirmed that Dot Bitch is her sock, see User talk:Dot Bitch. Both are now indefinitely blocked. Bishonen | talk 01:41, 22 May 2006 (UTC).[reply]

    Definitely Lightbringer

    Newmason has two posts to Talk:Freemasonry, one of which reiterates "Freemasonry is Satanism" here, and the other asking for examples of how FreemasonryWatch is wrong here. I would also request that Newmason's IP be checked against the other (inconclusive) RFCU I requested recently. MSJapan 05:30, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Confirmed definately Lightbringer, and not related to the other. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 09:24, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Science3456's latest puppets

    Okay, didn't know that the recency rule was that restrictive. In that case, I'd like to compare two users that I consider to be recent sockpuppets of Science3456:

    Again, they were both involved in improperly closing the same MFD that many Science3456 puppets have been closing or disrupting. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 03:08, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: There isn't a recency "rule," it's a technical limitation; IP addresses are only stored for a certain period of time. This is indicated in the instructions to the page, #4: "Data is kept for a limited time so we cannot compare against accounts that have not edited recently." Additionally, please place requests in this section, rather than at the end of the completed queue. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 03:27, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Inconclusive. If there are other recent sockpuppets, I can check against them. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 03:38, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Whas / Camridge

    I've merged this into a single request. I generally wouldn't perform requests like this, as it borders on "fishing", but will in this case due to the Arbitration matter. I'll have a report on this shortly. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 11:52, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    I am mentor on the Neuro-linguistic programming article. We've had many problems sockpuppets and meatpuppets. Whas and Doc pato have come in on the "pro" side recently. They have not done really any other editing. Doc pato has come on in the last few days. Could someone do a checkuser to see if these 2 are the same people? I have a similar request below. It'd be much appreciated. --Woohookitty(meow) 10:23, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Unrelated. Two completely different hemispheres. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 13:00, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    I am mentor on the Neuro-linguistic programming article. We've had many problems sockpuppets and meatpuppets. Camridge and HeadleyDown are on the "anti" side. There has been evidence presented in the past that shows that they never crossed paths, i.e. they are never posting at the same time. --Woohookitty(meow) 10:23, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Possible The two are coming from the same university, but a number of other legitimate contributors are as well. The edit pattern will have to be the deciding factor. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 13:00, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser&oldid=55666696"