Misplaced Pages

:Requests for checkuser/Case/Dereks1x: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser | Case Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 15:20, 13 July 2007 editVK35 (talk | contribs)2,251 edits →[]← Previous edit Revision as of 15:28, 13 July 2007 edit undoVK35 (talk | contribs)2,251 edits politicsNext edit →
Line 17: Line 17:
:::::jpgordon warned against edit warring here. These are semi-public computers with multiple users. ] 15:00, 13 July 2007 (UTC) :::::jpgordon warned against edit warring here. These are semi-public computers with multiple users. ] 15:00, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
::::::If this conversation is to continue, it should probably go to the community noticeboard, not here. In any event, I suspect that might be the optimal solution, and I don't expect to comment further on this issue regardless of whether other users decide to take it forward or not. '''· <font color="#70A070">]</font>''' ''<font color="#007BA7" size="1">]</font>'' 15:06, 13 July 2007 (UTC) ::::::If this conversation is to continue, it should probably go to the community noticeboard, not here. In any event, I suspect that might be the optimal solution, and I don't expect to comment further on this issue regardless of whether other users decide to take it forward or not. '''· <font color="#70A070">]</font>''' ''<font color="#007BA7" size="1">]</font>'' 15:06, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
:::::::And edit warrior Tvoz of the Tvoz/Jersyko/Bobblehead group is expected to continue edit warring to show "concensus" here because they are somehow mad about a sanitized view of Barack Obama and want to destroy anyone that they don't like and anyone that even is remotely linked. Who is this Obama, anyway, just some politician in the news. ] 15:12, 13 July 2007 (UTC) :::::::And edit warrior Tvoz of the Tvoz/Jersyko/Bobblehead group is expected to continue edit warring to show "concensus" here because they are somehow mad about a sanitized view of Barack Obama and want to destroy anyone that they don't like and anyone that even is remotely linked. Who is this Obama, anyway, just some politician in the news..The next U.S. President is a forgone conclusion...President Hillary Rodham Clinton. ] 15:12, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
::::::::Before this escalates more, the Jersyko/Tvoz group should explain why they are had a WP:SSP report of them deleted as well as a WP:RFCU (I saw that!) and why they meat or sock puppet each other. See how productive this edit warring is? Not productive at all. See how my productive edits have ground to a halt? And where does Bobblehead fit in? I will be restrained and not comment for now. ] 15:16, 13 July 2007 (UTC) ::::::::Before this escalates more, the Jersyko/Tvoz group should explain why they are had a WP:SSP report of them deleted as well as a WP:RFCU (I saw that!) and why they meat or sock puppet each other. See how productive this edit warring is? Not productive at all. See how my productive edits have ground to a halt? And where does Bobblehead fit in? I will be restrained and not comment for now. ] 15:16, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
:::::::::::At first when jpgordon reverted the long explanations and warned against edit warring, I thought "but I need to say 'this' ". After a moment, I thought that it was ok. Jpgordon, do you want to do it again, revert the stuff after you edit and put in the edit summary that there is to be no edit warring? ] 15:20, 13 July 2007 (UTC) :::::::::::At first when jpgordon reverted the long explanations and warned against edit warring, I thought "but I need to say 'this' ". After a moment, I thought that it was ok. Jpgordon, do you want to do it again, revert the stuff after you edit and put in the edit summary that there is to be no edit warring? ] 15:20, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:28, 13 July 2007

Dereks1x (8th or so)

Code letter: F (block log)

HappyFarmer popped up at AN/I to complain about admin abuse in the blocking of Feddhicks (talk · contribs) as a Dereks1x sock (see AN/I thread). This was his 10th edit or so; the content of his edits show him to be an old Misplaced Pages hand, and his focus on "admin abuse" in connection with the blocking of a Dereks1x sock are suspicious. If this is confirmed and any sleeper accounts are identified, I'd be happy to block them. Thanks. MastCell 23:42, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I added Feddhicks, who I indef blocked as the most recent obvious Dereks1x sock today, and VK35 to the list. I have confirmed in the past via e-mail with a checkuser that VK35 is editing from the same IP range as Dereks1x. Hopefully, checking VK35, HappyFarmerofAsparagus, Feddhicks, and Dereks1x against one another will clear up who is a sock and who isn't, given that two in the list are known to be Dereks1x (one recent sock plus the original account). · jersyko talk 00:12, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
  • I can confirm that all these edit from the same IP range. It's a /12 network, however, which means that there are 1,048,576 IP addresses there. So the fact that there is no overlap in usage between, say, Feddhicks and HappyFarmer, says nothing either positive or negative about their relationship with each other. Ones eyebrows are raised, though, when there is an overlap; with over a million different IPs, why have Feddhicks and VK35 edited, within minutes of each other, on the same IP? Could be coincidence, could be nefarious behavior, could be nothing at all. That's why the most I can say in situations like this is  Possible; behavioral evidence and editing content has to carry far more weight here than analytical results. --jpgordon 17:32, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Just so I am understanding correctly -- VK35 contributed from the exact, identical IP address as Feddhicks within literally minutes of one another? Italiavivi 22:50, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, one time 16 minutes, another time 40 minutes, in a 2-day period on the same IP. And, just another data point -- VK35 has been in on about 80 different IPs in that range, and there are no other editors on any of those IPs at any time within Checkuser's range. Just Feddhicks. I suspect VK35 has an explanation for this, considering his unblocking history. --jpgordon 05:08, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Jimbo's explanation for the unblock was that part of the reason for Dereks1x's community ban was that he falsely claimed to be a medical doctor and used that claim in a content dispute and that VK35 had provided evidence to Jimbo's satisfaction that he actually was a medical doctor. That, along with VK35's clean edit history at the time, convinced Jimbo to assume good faith and say that VK35 and Dereks1x using the same IP range was coincidental. --Bobblehead 06:52, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
jpgordon warned against edit warring here. These are semi-public computers with multiple users. VK35 15:00, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
If this conversation is to continue, it should probably go to the community noticeboard, not here. In any event, I suspect that this might be the optimal solution, and I don't expect to comment further on this issue regardless of whether other users decide to take it forward or not. · jersyko talk 15:06, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
And edit warrior Tvoz of the Tvoz/Jersyko/Bobblehead group is expected to continue edit warring to show "concensus" here because they are somehow mad about a sanitized view of Barack Obama and want to destroy anyone that they don't like and anyone that even is remotely linked. Who is this Obama, anyway, just some politician in the news..The next U.S. President is a forgone conclusion...President Hillary Rodham Clinton. VK35 15:12, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Before this escalates more, the Jersyko/Tvoz group should explain why they are had a WP:SSP report of them deleted as well as a WP:RFCU (I saw that!) and why they meat or sock puppet each other. See how productive this edit warring is? Not productive at all. See how my productive edits have ground to a halt? And where does Bobblehead fit in? I will be restrained and not comment for now. VK35 15:16, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
At first when jpgordon reverted the long explanations and warned against edit warring, I thought "but I need to say 'this' ". After a moment, I thought that it was ok. Jpgordon, do you want to do it again, revert the stuff after you edit and put in the edit summary that there is to be no edit warring? VK35 15:20, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
If you are creating a new request about this user, please add it to the top of the page, above this notice. Don't forget to add
{{Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Dereks1x}}
to the checkuser page here. Previous requests (shown below), and this box, will be automatically hidden on Requests for checkuser (but will still appear here).
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a Request for checkuser. Please do not modify it.

Dereks1x (7th)

request links: main • edit • links • history • watch • talk
Filed: 02:48, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Code letter: F; diff = ]

I think that Spevw and Dereks1x are socks. Dereks1x is community banned and edit warred in the John Edwards article. He also edited on Calvert Deforest about him working for Parke Davis ].

Spevw also edited about John Edwards making a joke about mental illness. Spevw also made a comment about Parke Davis here ]. Given that both edited about John Edwards and both made a mention of the Parke Davis company (although in different articles), I am very suspicious. John Edwards is a good man not worthy of criticism.

I am usually easy going but Dereks1x is a bad person. Dereks1x is known to be tricky so I think Spevw's edits about Colby College (in Maine) is just a diversion and that Spevw is really nowhere near Maine. The checkuser will prove it and prove the 2 to be socks. Thank you. RevAEdwards 02:48, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

 Clerk note: moved from Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Spevw -- lucasbfr 17:58, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 Clerk note: I assumed you meant Dereks1x, not Derekx1s. -- lucasbfr 18:00, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Red X Unrelated. Voice-of-All 02:27, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Dereks1x (6th)

request links: main • edit • links • history • watch • talk
Filed: 06:18, 18 May 2007 (UTC)


  • F

soapboxing screed by banned user removed · jersyko talk 12:36, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

 Clerk note: moved from Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Bobblehead -- lucasbfr 07:55, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

 Confirmed that Nostasi and Nostasi2 are Dereks1x. Dmcdevit·t 08:08, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Dereks1x (5th)

request links: main • edit • links • history • watch • talk
Filed: 14:06, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Edits from this username began a few hours after Ryulong blocked a few other obvious Dereks1x socks that were attacking him (e.g.). Like other Dereks1x socks, this editor is heavily involved in discussion at Talk:Barack Obama (almost to the point of being able to call it a SPA). Like Doc United States and other Dereks1x socks, however, this editor edited articles in a seemingly random area of "expertise" ((just one other article in this case, Oxygen Enhancement Ratio). I say "random" because for each sock, Dereks1x appears to choose a new area of "expertise" on which that sock will focus (Doc was medicine, TL500 was airplanes, this editor appears to be nuclear science). · jersyko talk 14:06, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

I amended this request to add User:Hempbilly, who is a new user who just started editing the Obama article and talk page in the style of Dereks1x (and who has far too intimate a knowledge of wiki-markup to be a brand new user, as this was the user's first edit). · jersyko talk 16:21, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

  •  Inconclusive. And even more amusingly, before I even looked at this, Hempbilly left a message on my talk page asserting he is nobody's sockpuppet. I didn't find any connection between Hempbilly and the others; but he does seem to be in lockstep with User:TDC. On the other hand, Nuclearj isn't IP-related to Dereks1x either, unless User:Sethtothej and/or User:BlueAg09 are, and I couldn't relate them directly. --jpgordon 03:19, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Dereks1x (4th)

request links: main • edit • links • history • watch • talk
Filed: 21:22, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Lawman8 appeared on the Barack Obama page shortly after the pages semi-protection ended and started making similar edits to another Dereks1x sock KMCtoday (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) in regards to Barack Obama's support among police officers following his endorsement by the Illinois Fraternal Order of Police. Lawman8's talk page edits are similar to Dereks1x and socks have often made comparisons between removal of their "compromise edits" and the actions of communists.

--Bobblehead 21:24, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

 Confirmed --jpgordon 00:00, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Dereks1x (3rd)

request links: main • edit • links • history • watch • talk
Filed: 23:54, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Code letter: F

A recent RFCU confirmed that Dereks1x was using a sock with likely false medical credentials to bolster a policy argument (see also Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets/Dereks1x). A thread at the at the community sanction noticeboard is likely to lead to a community ban of Dereks1x and any socks. Atlas87 (talk · contribs) began posting at that thread, and Atlas87's focus on "due process" violations by the community toward Dereks1x made me strongly suspect that Atlas87 is a Dereks1x sock, especially given that Dereks1x made had a similar, unique concern before his block. This comment on Doc United States' talk page (soon after I started the below RFCU) and this cryptic comment at RfA (soon after I commented in the same RfA) served to confirm my suspicions. I blocked Atlas87 given the severity of Dereks1x's offenses (i.e. use of false credentials) and requested review of my block at CN, and an early comment suggested another RFCU. · j e r s y k o talk · 01:23, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

 Confirmed --jpgordon 05:55, 3 April 2007 (UTC)


Dereks1x (2nd)

request links: main • edit • links • history • watch • talk
Filed: 23:54, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Code letter: F

As a result of Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets/Dereks1x, Dereks1x was blocked for 48 hours by Durova for WP:POINT violations, and his socks were all blocked indefinitely after they continued editing after Dereks1x was under his block. Today, User:Doc United States made an edit at Talk:John Edwards that makes me suspect Doc might also be a sock of Dereks1x. Here are the relevant diffs that makes me think this RFCU is needed:

  1. Dereks1x placed "expert" tag in the John Edwards article to encourage an expert to conduct original research on Ms. Edwards' cancer (see talk, basically the crux of the dispute) at 12:19 on March 26
  2. New User account created, User:Doc United States at 14:30, March 26
  3. After a few days of editing medical articles, Doc United States adds a comment in support of Dereks1x's position at Talk:John Edwards today.

Doc United States has edited some medical articles, but Dereks1x is known to be editing from a library and would certainly have access to medical books. Anyway, given the timing of Doc's account creation and the content of his comment at Talk:John Edwards today, I think it's quite possible that Dereks1x is not only evading his block again, but also trying to pass off false credentials with his sock in an attempt to bolster his arguments. · j e r s y k o talk · 23:54, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually, here are a few more diffs that provide further evidence that Doc is a sock of Dereks1x (i.e., the odd focus on the Edwards situation): · j e r s y k o talk · 00:02, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
 Clerk note: Merged from Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Dereks1x 2. mrholybrain's talk 00:46, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
 Confirmed. --jpgordon 05:07, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
 Clerk note: Actually, I believe the fact that Dereks1x and Doc United States are the same person has been confirmed. mrholybrain's talk 10:52, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
 Clerk note: removing diploma picture and statement, since checkuser is not here to verify one person's resumé but the possibility of 2 accounts to used by the same person. -- lucasbfr 21:32, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Dereks1x

request links: main • edit • links • history • watch • talk
Filed: 03:06, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Code letter: G

See also Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets/Dereks1x. I am making this request because I suspect that Dereks1x is using sockpuppets to attempt to gain advantages in content disputes through article text editing and (more often) on talk pages. Aside from TL500, the suspected socks had few edits outside their agreement with Dereksx1 in content disputes (though I understand that at least one of the socks has increased his/her editing as of today, see Bobblehead diff below). The alleged socks have advanced positions remarkably similar to Dereks1x's on relevant talk pages while most other editors that have participated in the relevant discussions have reached opposite conclusions. I'm more confident about the first two of the socks than the last of the three.

Relevant diffs on socks possibly being used to gain an advantage in content disputes:

Additionally, see diffs provided by Bobblehead and others from Tvoz at the SSP.· j e r s y k o talk · 03:06, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Request should be denied because of failure to "use other methods first" (see top of RFCU page), not being a "difficult case" and "checkuser is not for fishing". See SSP page for explaination that Derek has been civil, not disruptive, and has contributed much valuble and rare material on a variety of non-political subjects. Other accused users have engaged in almost no political discussion and all 4 users write about exclusively different things. Complainer is attempting to harrass in order to stamp out any civil discussion and invade privacy of users.Dereks1x 06:00, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

 Clerk note: This is the checkuser's judgement call, not yours or mine. PTO 14:20, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Rejected --jpgordon 18:32, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the Request for checkuser. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent requests related to this user should be made above, in a new section.