Misplaced Pages

:Requests for checkuser: 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.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 12:01, 28 February 2006 view sourceJuicy Juicy (talk | contribs)13 edits →See [] for all details.← Previous edit Revision as of 13:31, 28 February 2006 view source Book Mouse (talk | contribs)24 edits ALR is 'LightbringerNext edit →
Line 819: Line 819:
* Both are apparently opposed to Christianity and religion * Both are apparently opposed to Christianity and religion
--] 12:01, 28 February 2006 (UTC) --] 12:01, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
=== ] is ] ===
I think ''ALR'' is ''Lightbringer'', hence trying to say I'm S'n'F sock to cover his tracks. ] 13:31, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 13:31, 28 February 2006

This page has a backlog that requires attention of one or more users with Checkuser permissions.
(please remove this notice when the backlog is cleared up)

Noticeboards
Misplaced Pages's centralized discussion, request, and help venues. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the dashboard. For a related set of forums which do not function as noticeboards see formal review processes.
General
Articles and content
Page handling
User conduct
Other
Category:Misplaced Pages noticeboards


    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 Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets
    Vote fraud, closed vote, did not affect outcome List at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents or Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets
    Other disruption of articles List at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents or Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets
    Open proxy, IP address already known List at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject 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 {{Misplaced Pages: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

    Purge cache

    Privacy violation?

    this header: view • edit

    File a Checkuser Request
    This page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference.
    Either the page is no longer relevant or consensus on its purpose has become unclear. To revive discussion, seek broader input via a forum such as the village pump.
    Cases are created on subpages of Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case.
    If you require help or advice, ask at Misplaced Pages 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:
    Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/John Doe

    <inputbox> type=create editintro=Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Inputbox/Header preload=Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Inputbox/Sample default=Misplaced Pages: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}}


    Enter requests below:

    Possible Batzarro (talk · contribs) socks

    Batzarro (talk · contribs) seems to be involved in a dispute with zanimum (talk · contribs) over which images are allowed on userpages and which are not. Several accounts have surfaced, all following Batzarro's reasoning, WP:POINT-making and choice of words. I believe that all of the following accounts are related to Batzarro:

    I believe the latter two accounts have been created by Batzarro to impersonate and possibly incriminate zanimum. The wording Kooorooo has chosen on User talk:Kooorooo is out of character for zanimum, and is consistent with Batzarro's choice of words. Aecis 11:26, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

    Add zanee (talk · contribs) to the list. -- user:zanimum
    And the 15 25 other socks in Category:Misplaced Pages:Suspected sockpuppets of Batzarro... Aecis 22:08, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

    Running Batzarro's IPs through http://www.apnic.net/apnic-bin/whois.pl , all but one of the IPs in the suspected list are registered to Irshad Deen who actually works within Sri Lanka Telecom Internet. Can anyone double check me, to make sure I'm correct in this lookup? I presume this is only an accomplice, but nevertheless, we should follow through. -- user:zanimum

    Curps tells me I'm correct with ID'ing the ISP, but that actually the contact to complain to. -- user:zanimum

    He's upto 42 sock accounts/IPs now. -- user:zanimum

    I believe he's backed down now. -- user:zanimum

    Guess again Jerkwad,if you track down my IP s mate,you ll find that i ve edited in hotels in Santa Cruz,MElbourne and Colombo.

    I have used many sockpuppets.

    I want Ashida Kim's page to be deleted. Thank you 203.222.148.158(Batzarro Sockpuppet)

    He just posted this comment, in a weird place in the middle of this thread. This IP's indef now, but he says he's "Lloyd John Peterson Lloyd", presumably it's actually just "John Peterson Lloyd". Searched the name, and previous vandalism to Ashida Kim came up, including the IP 222.165.174.109, which I've yet to block. -- user:zanimum

    Baphin (talk · contribs) and JohN (talk · contribs)

    These new users immediately jumped on List of Freemasons and have repeatedly made uncited edits (Baphin added a whole section or Turkish Freemasons whose only verification is in Turkish, and rather than add the cite, he violated WP:NPA and tried to start an argument with me rather than address the legitimate citation problem. Usually, the individuals who do this have an agenda rather than a desire to increase knowledge. So, I would like to have this user sock-checked against KJVTRUTH (talk · contribs) and Lightbringer (talk · contribs) in particular, but he very well could be someone else.

    User JohN, most notably, in an edit comment saying "removed president as redundant" he also added two uncited entries, and his edit comments are indicative of KJVTRUTH (talk · contribs), although I believe that KJVTRUTH is a sock of Lightbringer (talk · contribs). He also decided to start an argument rather than solve the problem, so I would like him sockchecked as well. A quick look at the history for List of Freemasons will show the extent of the issue.

    If they are Lightbringer socks, they need to be indefinitely blocked as per ArbCom ruling. MSJapan 14:54, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

    GodsWarrior (talk · contribs) ConservativeChristian (talk · contribs) 24.5.28.255 (talk · contribs)

    One anon and 2 brand new users appeared and started editing Evolution without discussion, inserting religious POV. User:24.5.28.155 first, then User:ConservativeChristian 3 reverts, and User:GodsWarrior appeared to make a 4th revert. John| 07:42, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

    May be related to the recent Christianity vandal. You may want to add those to your request if you also think so. 68.39.174.238 01:56, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

    Purtilo (talk · contribs) 152.163.100.10 (talk · contribs) Vitam (talk · contribs) 128.8.128.33 (talk · contribs) 205.188.117.7 (talk · contribs) 66.92.151.249 (talk · contribs)

    As usual, whenever John Lott reaches a semi-stable state of temporary aggreement, the puppet patrol returns with their agressive reverting to their "not verifiable" (IOW - false), uncited version (without, as expected, any discussion). Can someone please verify if this is, in fact, a definitive use of sock puppetry or merely meatpuppets. Hipocrite - «Talk» 13:09, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

    Bensaccount (talk · contribs) 84.228.107.148 (talk · contribs)

    Are these one and the same? If so, the anon ip is being used to evade a 48 hour block and both accounts should be blocked for 48 hours (it's a static ip) - if not, it's just a coincidence on Misplaced Pages talk:Neutral point of view, jguk 14:10, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

    67.171.70.101 (talk · contribs) AJ Haskell (talk · contribs)

    Both of these accounts appear to be socks of User:Andrew Lin, who is indefinitely banned (see this Rfc). Andrew has used numerous puppets in the past, and I wouldn't be surprised if there are more out there. Jersyko talk 01:00, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

    Jeffrey Barlach (talk · contribs)

    A new account, Jeffrey Barlach, appeared yesterday for the apparent purpose of making attacks on Essjay (talk · contribs).

    Essjay has filed an RFArb involving Jeffrey O. Gustafson (talk · contribs); the case has not yet been accepted. I'd like a sock check on Barlach to see if he's a sock of JOG, a sock of some other recurring nuisance, or (perhaps most likely) some random annoyance trying to stir up trouble. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 13:51, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

    I don't think it's Jeff; I think it's Rainbowwarrior1977. The most recent RW77 sock was Brandonfarb (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), so that will probably be the only one that will have recent IP activity. We have done sockchecks on RW77 before, so if the Arbitration Committee maintains records of past Checkuser results other IP useage will be in there. (If not, I'd specifically like to request maintaining whatever we have available, as I don't see this problem dying anytime soon.) Essjay 18:52, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
    There's no central log. Some of us keep records of some CheckUser results, though sporadically. I keep wishing I'd kept old checks when an old problem shows up again ... - David Gerard 08:52, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

    24.68.242.147 (talk · contribs)

    Ok, from the highly-POV edit summaries, this one I do think is a Lightbringer (talk · contribs) sock. --SarekOfVulcan 15:30, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

    The Belvedere posters

    The "Mrbelvedereposter" accounts have been around for some length of time solely for the purpose of inserting nonsensical text into articels along with a pic of "Mr Belvedere". I request they be CheckUsr'd to see if there are any non-standard sockpuppets of his or if he's using some IP addr along with them. Thanx 68.39.174.238 01:59, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

    I had a look into these. They appear to be one person harassing User:Mike Halterman. There's a pile of other names too. Expect a list to show up in the block log this evening - David Gerard 08:45, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

    Timecop (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    The following accounts seem to follow a similar agenda and/or AfD voting pattern:

    Thanks, --MarkSweep (call me collect) 09:02, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

    We like to call that "voting pattern" The War On Blogs and pretty much anyone on wikipedia seems to have an "agenda". Femmina 15:00, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

    User:MARMOT

    The following acounts have extremley similar writing styles and editting patterns as well as a history of "dealings" concerning User:Cool Cat. I have reason to believe they perhaps may be sockpuppets of the blocked MARMOT.

    many thanks, --Zero 15:27, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

    Brazil4Linux (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Brazil4Linux has come on IRC complaining that he was blocked for using sockpuppets to evade 3RR, but has not engaged in this behaviour. There was no checkuser evidence for this. I'm sorta posting this for him, though he didn't understand what CheckUser is when I tried to explain it.

    --Phroziac . o º 14:10, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

    • Though User:GroundZero might not be a sockpuppet, the account should still be blocked since the username that was chosen is very similiar to administrator Ground Zero. User:Zscout370 14:33, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
    • Which you will note is why I blocked that account. The others were editwarring on articles Brazil4Linux was arguing on. All appeared during B4L block periods to continue edit wars.  ALKIVAR™ 21:13, 28 January 2006 (UTC)


    143.231.249.141 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

    Congressional staffers from this IP have been featured in news reports, talked about on the ANI and summarized here. I think a sock puppet check is essential, considering the seriousness of the vandalism and Misplaced Pages credibility. Thanks, —This user has left wikipedia 16:38 2006-01-29

    Copied over from the noticeboard: It might be useful if someone with SQL access to the database could generate a list of all non-empty contributions histories from 143.231 accounts; there's potentially 65,535 other IPs that might have been engaging in this. Hopefully there weren't many IPs from the range doing this, but this is indeed potentially troublesome. Antandrus (talk) 17:23, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

    Copied over from the noticeboard: I would suggest a similar check be run on 156.33.*; if House staffers are doing something, there's a good chance they've told some of their Senate buddies to try out the same thing. (Perhaps only a 156.33.195.* check would be needed on the Senate side; I'm not that great at deciphering IP allocations.) Also, 143.231.* is used by the House as well, though I'm not sure in what capacity. --Aaron 17:46, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
    Copied over from the noticeboard: A user has just heard this story on TV in Massachusetts. This is a big thing. Mushroom 17:21, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
    143.231.249.141 is the only ip that has edited from 143.231.*, not including deleted edits. As for 156.33.*, see User:Phroziac/156.33.0.0/16 ips that have edited --Phroziac . o º 16:05, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

    Issue reported to the board. Anthere

    The faster we block everyone / revert every single POV edit, the better chances we have of receiving good headlines. —This user has left wikipedia 18:40 2006-01-29

    Checkuser shows about a dozen users coming in on this ip. Most are not political edits. Fred Bauder 18:43, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

    Just for the record, I was wrong, no vandalism from registered all those users, I reviewed all 16 of them:
    • 8 are good faith editors
    • 6 have no edits
    • 2 show interest in politics but still good faith editors
    That's a relief =D —This user has left wikipedia 19:22 2006-01-29

    Possible use of socks in content dispute

    There is currently something of a content dispute/edit war going on at the talk pages of the articles List of sovereign states and Gallery of sovereign state coats of arms (I am involved in it), as documented on the administrators' noticeboard and requests for page protection. The dispute probably started a month ago, when the coat of arms of the disputed regions (Abkhazia and South Ossetia) were first removed. User:Renata3 was the first to (cautiously) bring up the possibility of sockpuppetry. The user seems to have a very dynamic IP: he almost certainly uses the 212.72.135.x and 212.72.156.x ranges, while I'm 90% sure of 24.165.12.148 and 70 to 80% sure of 80.83.131.10. Of the IP's, only 80.83.131.10 has edited on articles other than the disputed pages. 80.83.131.10 is also the only IP whose contribution history predates the content dispute. These IP's have probably had the effect of avoiding 3RR, although it's impossible to say that they have been used for that purpose (I doubt they are). The IP addresses involved are:

    The involved registered accounts are:

    The three accounts have all surfaced in the last few days and have all only made edits to the disputed articles. The "remover" has said that Pirveli is his account, while he has denied being Irakliy81 or Geodave. If these two IP ranges, the two separate IP's and the three accounts belong to the same user, they would have allowed him to dodge 3RR and to appear to represent a wider opinion in the discussion than he actually does. Aecis 22:49, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

    Nowdign (talk · contribs)

    He only made one edit (to my talk page), but its characteristics were consistent with a broken proxy. The underlying IP should probably be blocked. --GraemeL 20:17, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

    Aidepolcycne (talk · contribs)

    Definately the Communism vandal. However according to (Someone whose name I forgot, check that talk page), this accounts style of backslash escaping contribs suggests its a PHP proxy, which probably should be found out (Hence this request) and blocked incase he tries to use it again, or someone else does. 68.39.174.238 00:39, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

    Vandalismbuster (talk · contribs)

    OK, this dude has been extremely active (3 out of 5 total edits) with the section on Mr Belvedere poster on VIP/LTA. I request he be CheckUsr'd to see if he is the same as MBdP. I would also cite that the person behind these sockpuppetries likes to edit that section of that page, witness Mrbelvedereposter11 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)'s sole contrib. 68.39.174.238 00:46, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

    User:Wikipaedia_is_Dictat0rship (talk · contribs)

    This account blanked the featured articel with some "Communist manifestoe" about "right wing influence", highly suspiscious of the Communism vandal; however he kept referring to the "United MilkMan Front". I request this user be CheckUsr'd to see if MilkMan = The Communism vandal, so they can be merged and understood as such. 68.39.174.238 02:15, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

    MMSimon (talk · contribs), MMSGuy (talk · contribs)

    This user left this message on admin noticeboards .

    You've had your fun with me, now I'm going to have my fun with you. I have placed 30 nihlartikles throughout wikipedia, and your job is to find them. Be careful, over half of them have graphics and look very unassuming.

    Assuming he's serious not blowing smoke, perhaps checking this user's IP and comparing to users with the same/similiar IPs creating articles might be helpful. Calton | Talk 05:00, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

    What, you think I'm dumb enough to post them all from the same IP? Sorry, I put a lot of work into this challenge, and you're not going to clean out 30 hoax articles that easy. Checkuser is too easy. Work a bit harder, assclown. - MilkMan
    What, you think I'm dumb enough to post them all from the same IP? Since you don't seem very bright, yes, I do. Next question? --Calton | Talk 05:28, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

    WinterMan (talk · contribs), Guizarres (talk · contribs)

    Both display the backslash bug, which almost always mean they came from a misconfigured open PHP web proxy, which should be blocked before it causes damage. Both accounts are already indefinitely blocked. cesarb 01:10, 6 February 2006 (UTC)


    Fg2 (talk · contribs) and Freshgavin (talk · contribs)

    I think these are two accounts used by the same person based on various things on their respective talk pages (answering questions on each other's talk pages, for instance) and the way they interact on various pages (not to mention the somewhat obvious username link: Freshgavin and Fg2 (perhaps "Freshgaving2"?)). "Both" of them are voting on a proposed MOS change for Japanese articles, which seems unfair if they are both the same person. Thanks for your time. --nihon 08:51, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

    Dschor (talk · contribs)

    See WP:AN#Template:User pedo. --MarkSweep (call me collect) 00:44, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

    Update: Now an involved party in an ongoing arbitration case: . --MarkSweep (call me collect) 01:02, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

    Results, edits on his own account Fred Bauder 04:04, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

    Kingjeff (talk · contribs)

    Kingjeff nominated an article for the WP:FAID football article improvement drive a couple of weeks ago and got upset when it was taken off the list, according to the AID rules, after nobody else voted for it. He put it back on and it immediately attracted a vote from Hargreavesfan (talk · contribs), a user whose only previous contribution had been to vote on another poll the same way that Kingjeff had, five minutes after Kingjeff had cast his vote. As I write, more than half of Hargreavesfan's contributions have been votes.

    Since then, several new people have shown up on the FAID, and it's heading towards the point where it will become a farce. A suspiciously high number of these appear to be Bayern Munich supporters from the USA and Canada, which fits with Interiot's tool's suggestion that Kingjeff is based in the Americas, assuming a normal work/school day. So far we have:

    Please could you check these out to give us an idea of which, if any are sockpuppets? Thanks, CTOAGN (talk) 10:12, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

    User:Hargreavesfan is a definite sockpuppet of User:Kingjeff. Kingjeff is in Canada, and User:Kaiser23 is on the same ISP, but they appear to have never used the same IP, and thus this is insufficient to prove sockpuppetry.
    It appears that User:Afrosheen, User:TwilaStar, User:SpandX, User:Caponer, User:Skurrkrow, User:Jhohenzollern and others are all the same user.
    User:Jack o lantern is unlikely to be either, since the IP is outside the US. —Matthew Brown (T:C) 04:38, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
    Will the sockpuppets be blocked? Conscious 13:26, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

    Thanks for doing this, but please could you list all of the sockpuppets linked to Jhollernzollern? We'll need to know who they are so we can discount votes from any of them. CTOAGN (talk) 15:07, 11 February 2006 (UTC)


    User:Juicedpalmeiro, suspected sock of User:Almeidaisgod

    Almeidaisgod (talk · contribs) has been known to make personal attacks, edit war and use sockpuppets to bolster his POV pushing by evading WP:3RR. Previously identified sockpuppets: Flavius Aetius (talk · contribs) and Brian Brockmeyer (talk · contribs) (previous checkuser: ). This evening I noticed that User:Brian Brockmeyer had removed the sockpuppet tags generated by this earlier checkuser , which I restored -- and that another user, User:Juicedpalmeiro had reverted me and added a barnstar . (Brian Brockmeyer then charmingly called me a cunt on my talk page for restoring the tags.)

    Beyond this behavior, the two accounts seem to edit similar articles, particularly University of Miami Brockmeyer edit scrubbing criticism and Juicedpalmeiro edit, also concerning criticism; University of Notre Dame (BB edit JP edit and Miami Hurricanes Football BB edit JP edit. · Katefan0/poll 03:34, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

    Update: New potential sock, CaneMan (talk · contribs), showed up to edit Miami Hurricanes Football (first edit, where he calls people "idiots"), as well as University of Miami in much the same manner as the other accounts (here again about the criticm section ). Additionally, despite the fact that I've never spoken to this person and we edit no articles in common (so far), he took it upon himself to leave a message at User talk:Rangerdude suggesting that I'm an abusive administrator , but only after I blocked User:Brian Brockmeyer. · Katefan0/poll 12:04, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
    Also: UMclassof06 (talk · contribs), which, along with some of the above accounts, is being used to influence a consensus-measuring vote on the University of Miami page, see · Katefan0/poll 22:00, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
    Same pattern: Onward_ND (talk · contribs) · Katefan0/poll 14:38, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

    User:Humanun Genus and User:Lightbringer

    User:Humanun Genus is a suspected sock of User:Lightbringer MSJapan 04:35, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

    OMG Lets rape Shanel (talk · contribs) and NC VANDAL LOVES SHANEL!!! (talk · contribs)

    The user is making threats to an admin, and I have strong reasons to believe that he's using irc lurking on the channels Shanel is on (because the usernames correlate to waht it's being discussed on the #wikipedia-en-vandalism channel at the moment) and I need more information in order to consider possible courses of action. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 22:14, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

    Looks like the same vandal as the previous huge dump of usernames from Fred Bauder. I'll compile a list of suspect usernames. —Matthew Brown (T:C) 00:27, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

    User:Lir socks on Talk:Misplaced Pages

    Can someone find out what IP-adresses/range this desperate guy is using for all his socks posting on Talk:Misplaced Pages, and then do the right thing with them. Thanks. Shanes 02:34, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

    • I second this. In addition, a checkuser on some of the users recently blocked for being Lir whose sole contributions consisted of adding Lir's page to the Misplaced Pages article would be in order. I have reason to believe that they are not Lir, and may be another user attempting to get Lir's site added to the spam blacklist. These include User:ITV, User:T1000, User:Tricooon, and possibly some others. --Blu Aardvark | 21:49, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

    CerealBoy (talk · contribs)

    Judging by this edit, CerealBoy (talk · contribs) is vandalising through an open proxy. Presumably someone with Checkuser should query for the IP address and permanently block it. Jkelly 22:10, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

    208.54.15.129 (talk · contribs), MikaM (talk · contribs), 69.107.21.3 (talk · contribs), Freethinker99 (talk · contribs), and Kecik (talk · contribs)

    I suspect that these may be sockpuppets of Giovanni33 (talk · contribs)/BelindaGong (talk · contribs), who were checked before and found to be the same. I believe Giovanni33 is using these accounts to violate the 3rr on Christianity, and to evade his block for 3rr violations. Related evidence that Freethinker99 is Giovanni33 is this change on Giovanni33's usertalk page: Tom Harrison 15:10, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

    The same user group is showed up a block on Adolph Hitler and started to aggressively pursue a particular POV. All of these accounts are about 1 month old (roughly equivalent to User:Giovanni33) and have less than 100 edits. Given the amount of trolling, it might be best to protect both Adolph Hitler and Christianity to give some time to cool off. Jbetak 20:57, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
    User:Giovanni33 has emailed me several times, claiming each time that he is the husband of User:BelindaGong and even stated that he would fax copy of ID's to me as proof. Regardless, these other "editors" are another matter...Giovanni33, BelindaGong and Freethinker99 are all currently under a 48 hour block and this will expire in about 24 hours.--MONGO 05:17, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

    MikaM acknowledged here that the IP address 69.107.7.138 was his/hers. 69.106.243.31 is probably the same person, as it's a very similar address and the edit is one which MikaM wanted, according to discussion on the talk page. MikaM, who is fully aware of 3RR, reverted twice recently (to Giovanni33's preferred version), and then 69.107.21.3 reverted three more times. I asked MikaM on the Christianity talk page to state whether or not he/she was behind those last three reverts, but he/she refused to answer, saying that an earlier sockcheck had shown that he/she was not a sockpuppet. That check, of course, was to see if MikaM was editing from the same IP as another registered user: it did not prove that future edits would always be made logged on.

    This shows a strong connection between the three IP addresses.

    Additionally, Kecik reverted three times (to Giovanni33's preferred version), and then there was a revert from an IP address. I asked Kecik both on the Christianity talk page, and on his/her own talk page, to state whether or not that edit came from him/her, but so far, there has been no response.

    Giovanni33 has been shown by a sockcheck to be BelindaGong. Having been exposed, he now claims that she is his wife. That may, or may not, be true. If it is true, they set up an elaborate pretence about not knowing each other, even to the messages they sent to each other on their talk pages. Her very first edit was to revert to Giovanni's version. She and he, even when we did not know their connection, reverted well above three times per day, despite numerous warnings. We were reluctant to report newcomers. After they were finally blocked, they were more careful, but still did six a day between them. They also took two votes on talk pages. The contributions of BelindaGong, MikaM, and Kecik show that their purpose on Misplaced Pages is to agree with Giovanni and to revert to his version. Freethinker99 pretended to be a genuine newcomer while GiovanniBelinda was blocked, reverted to his/their version, and then answered a question which had been addressed to Giovanni on Giovanni's talk page, while logged on as Freethinker99. He then logged on as Giovanni33, and changed the signature. He/they then tried to claim that they knew each other and that Giovanni just happened to be at Freethinker's house, and Freethinker had allowed him to use the computer, but had forgotten to log off as Freethinker.

    All in all, there is a very disturbing pattern of new users with no prior history at Misplaced Pages arriving and coming to all the pages he edits, agreeing with him on the talk page, reverting to his version, claiming consensus where none exists, and following him to other articles and voting for whatever he votes for. AnnH 13:16, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

    All in all a very disturbing pattern by older users such as yourself, who are attacking any new user who happens to agree with Giovanni. I'd appreciate if you would stop making the accusations against me and the other new users. I consider it a personal attack and in violation of Wiki culture. You seem to follow me around and instigate this by snide remarks, and insinuations. It's harmful and distracts everyone attention away from the editing work we come here for. Instead it only creates a frezy of personal accusations, and attacks. Many users are convinced that this is primarily motivated by POV disputes (not just new users who feel this way), steming from the Christianity article. We have already lost good new and old users as a result, who left protest over the witch-hunts against anyone who agrees with User:Giovanni33 POV. Its time for this to stop. Btw, your descriptions of the events regarding Giovanni, Belinda, and Freethinker are biased and not completely accurate. MikaM 02:42, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

    Dussst (talk · contribs)

    I have reason to believe that Dussst may be the indefinitely blocked user Bourbons3 (talk · contribs). Bourbon3 was blocked for copyright violations on 15 January 2006, and his response was "**You've just lost a valuable editor to the Userbox project, JACKASS - UK «ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3» ". Dusst first edited on 16 January 2006, and his second edit was to add himself to the Userbox project. Also note the format of his current signature: • | Đܧ§§Ť | • . I don't want him to think I'm targeting him because I oppose his opinions on userboxes, but I came across this today. Maybe there's some sort of logical explanation for the coincidences? -- nae'blis (talk) 16:25, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

    Thetruthisknown (talk · contribs)

    Anotherblogger (talk · contribs) was banned earlier today for threatening to DDOS attack wikipedia if he wasn't allowed to make a particular edit to Perverted-Justice.com. Throughout the day, he had been making this edit repeatedly, despite being reverted by a number of users, since consensus was against this edit. Shortly after he was banned, Thetruthisknown (talk · contribs) continued to make the edits, leading me to suspect that Thetruthisknown (talk · contribs) is a sockpuppet of a banned user, and should also be banned. Fieari 22:24, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

    220.245.180.133 (talk · contribs), et al

    User:220.245.180.133, User:220.245.180.134, User:220.245.180.130, User:58.162.252.236, User:58.162.255.242 and User:58.162.251.204 have conducted a low intensity but disruptive edit war at Jonathan Sarfati and is suspected of being a sock of Sarfati or Agapetos_angel (talk · contribs), Dennis Fuller (talk · contribs) or of being staff of Answers in Genesis , Sarfati's employer. FeloniousMonk 00:59, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

    220.245.180.133 is a major regional South East Queensland proxy for an Australian ISP (tpg.com.au). TPG are high on the second tier of ISPS, and have many thousands of customers in the region served by this proxy (and the similarly numbered twins). Including me - Alex Law 08:53, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

    Locke Cole (talk · contribs)

    In regards to the on-going edit war on PhpBB, it seems that Locke Cole is tag-team reverting to remove some external links along with some IP users. Locke Cole's user page says he's from Washington, and the ISP for a couple of the anon IPs is also. Please check to see if there is a connection between Locke Cole and any of :

    Thanks. -- Netoholic @ 09:13, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

    Young_Zaphod (talk · contribs), Eggster (talk · contribs), 68.162.148.34 (talk · contribs), 151.201.48.208 (talk · contribs), Eht_Lived (talk · contribs)

    I feel silly requesting it when it's pretty obvious, but please check Young_Zaphod with the following users. He appears to be the same person as Eggster, and Eggster was using sock puppets, which was proven by you earlier this week, and he was temporarily banned as well. My 3RR report resulted in someone suggesting for me to do a CheckUser even though it's very obvious, so thus my request here. He seems to be using these to avoid 3RR and cheat in votes lately:

    He also on the talk page at Talk:Verbungula accused me of being Savidan, please compare him or her with myself. Savidan (talk · contribs) Atari2600tim (talk · contribs)

    He's been harassing me and making false reports against me, and I'm not sure what to do about it. He doesn't have any credibility, and my contribs page disproves anything he says, but I'm still confused as to how to handle it. Sorry for making you have to check these (he seem to be in a college computer lab, meaning I'll probably have to bug you again when he sits in a different chair next week). Thanks in advance! Any suggestions would be welcome as well. --Atari2600tim (talk • contribs) 13:32, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

    Other possible Young Zaphod (talk · contribs) sockpuppets: 66.101.59.248 (talk · contribs), 67.165.85.111 (talk · contribs), Draktus (talk · contribs), SargonIII (talk · contribs), and Eht_Lived (talk · contribs)

    Multiple votes in multiple AfDs: Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Verbungula and Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/NiMUD Karnesky 00:30, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

    NiMUD VfD is still ongoing, please go ahead and check Young Zaphod with those others. --Atari2600tim (talk • contribs) 13:54, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
    I realize there is a backlog but this request is 6 days old and the user in question is continuing this behavior on AfD's and has expanded use of socks to other pages (MUD,MUSH,TELNET, pssibly more). Thank you for your attention. Jlambert 01:44, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

    Results

    Some results: Young Zaphod also contributes as his IP addresses:

    as well as:

    Impossible to tie Draktus and SargonIII to these; that part's inconclusive. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 22:24, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

    Master and Commander (talk · contribs), Wiki4Life (talk · contribs), 128.12.20.66 (talk · contribs)

    Master and Commander is accused of being a sockpuppet of Wiki4Life, and of being one of the persistent ip vandals at Matthew Vassar. The ip above has been used by Master and Commander to vote on an afd, and the M&C logged in and fixed the signature to apply to himself (which doesn't seem sockpuppet-ish behavior to me). I'd just like to be able to confirm or deny. The active accusation is that M&C and W4L have both voted on a couple AFDs as socks of each other. Thanks! --Syrthiss 15:48, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

    Top Drawer (talk · contribs), Repartee (talk · contribs), Bottom Drawer (talk · contribs)

    I don't think checkuser is needed, as it's fairly obvious that Top Drawer is a sockpuppet of Repartee by looking at their contributions. Nothing but vandalism and nonsense. -Kmf164 (talk | contribs) 17:10, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

    A CheckUser should still be done to weed out other sock puppets. --Nlu (talk) 19:45, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
    Good idea. This user has been quite persistent and there certainly might be other sockpuppets. -Kmf164 (talk | contribs) 22:12, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

    I've compiled a list of potential sock puppets for this user. See Repartee (talk · contribs) for details. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yankees76 (talk • contribs)

    User:Bottom Drawer, another suspected sockpuppet of Repartee, has shown up today with the same vandalism behavior. -Kmf164 (talk | contribs) 19:40, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

    Larvatus (talk · contribs) and Henryuzi (talk · contribs)

    Both agreeing on highly contentious content in WebEx (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) related to Min Zhu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Larvatus (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is currently subject of an arbcom case, Henryuzi (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has only had one previous period of activity on WP, and has no edits outside of this topic. I believe Larvatus is a gun fan, which is why the username made me suspicious, that and the addition of potentially defamatory content to WebEx. Just zis  Guy, you know? / 17:28, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

    No proof - IPs are different providers. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 07:06, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

    Pti (talk · contribs) and Edward NZ (talk · contribs)

    Both are revert warring on PhpBB (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) and seem to have the eerily similar habit of blanking their talk pages whenever someone leaves them a message there. If they're identified to be the same editor, they would have violated WP:3RR repeatedly. —Locke Cole • t • c 23:20, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

    Unlikely. The two users are on different continents, judging by their IP addresses. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 07:00, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

    KDRGibby (talk · contribs) and 129.15.107.72 (talk · contribs) (and other 129.15.107 addresses)

    Some pretty obvious sockpuppetry at Che Guevara. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 00:00, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

    If it's KDRGibby, he's being very sneaky - there's absolutely nothing to tie them together in the CheckUser records. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C)

    ScottMiller (talk · contribs) and Anotherblogger (talk · contribs)

    After Anotherblogger was indef banned, and the article he liked to mess with was Semi-Protected, ScottMiller showed up trying to push a website heavily related to the website Anotherblogger was working on. ScottMiller's confrontational, antagonistic tone on the talk page is reminiscent of Anotherblogger. Could they be one in the same? Fieari 00:43, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

    While the CheckUser evidence isn't conclusive, it's somewhat persuasive. They both edit from the same /24 address range in the same ISP's dynamically-assigned IP range. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 06:44, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

    MikaM (talk · contribs), Kecik (talk · contribs) and others

    User:Giovanni33, a blocked revert warrior at Adolf Hitler, has already been shown to be the owner of sockpuppet User:BelindaGong. The evidence is building rapidly that User:Giovanni33 is now using sockpuppets User:Kecik and User:MikaM to continue this disruptive revert war. I think some sort of a sockpuppet check would be more than helpful. Thanks. Wyss 00:45, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

    MikaM (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and Kecik (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) are not the same user. Fred Bauder 01:44, 17 February 2006 (UTC). Neither are the same user as Giovanni33 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) who may have had a sockpuppet BelindaGong (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Fred Bauder 02:08, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
    Thank you Fred. While I hate to disapoint them, I'd appreciate if these POV warriors would stop making the accusations against me and other new users. I consider it a personal attack and in violation of Wiki culture. Many users are convinced that this is primarily motivated by POV disputes, including old users. We have already lost new and old users as a result, leaving in protest over the witch-hunts against anyone who agrees with User:Giovanni33 POV staring in the Christianity pages and flowing over into others. Its time for this to stop. You know who you are, so I need not name, names. Thanks. MikaM 02:28, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

    DueDiehcal (talk · contribs) and others

    These users are constantly involved in Edit Wars, and frequently support each other. Please check if any of them are sockpuppets of each other. If they are, they may have used the sockpuppet(s) to avoid 3RR yesterday. DueDiehcal (talk · contribs) is particularly suspect, because after coming into existence, DueDiehcal immediately started to engage in Edit Wars and even defaced an opposing user's page.--Endroit 02:14, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

    Three civil rights editors

    These three users popped up in the last few months - two added extensive timelime data to civil rights movement pages (of which at least one line, concerning Bobby Bland, was completely bogus) and the third completely rewrote Montgomery Improvement Association. The reason these three are suspicious is that Benjamin Gatti (talk · contribs) has just been put on probation by ArbCom (about 40% my doing), violated that and is blocked for a week, and knows I largely compiled Timeline of the American Civil Rights Movement. After posting the timeline info (not to the Timeline article) user Mitchumch e-mailed me -- I responded on his Talk page, as I only send my e-mail address to admins. My question is, are the three sock-puppets of user benjamin Gatti, and if so did editing with userid Mitchumch constitute evading a properly-placed block? Simesa 06:31, 18 February 2006 (UTC)


    Zero0000 (talk · contribs) editwar on Amin al-Husayni

    • Zero0000 (talk · contribs) has maxed out on his 3 reverts per day , , . Within minutes an Anon editor from Norway made his first Misplaced Pages edit. He knows how to revert and use the same edit summary style used by Zero0000 (talk · contribs). This user usually edit from Australia but have been editing from places in Europe (such as Belgium) recently.
    • cybbe (talk · contribs) edits from Norway and is known to help Zero with the exact revert war on this subject (see this diff:

    Update: It is 100% a sockpupet of cybbe (talk · contribs)

    User:Zeq|Zeq]] 14:03, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

    Irpen (talk · contribs)

    In a sort of "bet" between User:Irpen and User:Alexander007, I was sent out by Irpen self () to make a request to demonstrate Alexander that he uses no sockuppets. Could someone be gentle with these two users? Neigel von Teighen 23:14, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

    Robert Stanek editors

    There's a small edit war going on on Robert Stanek to keep (sourced) material that three editors object to off the main page; they're also enthusiastically attacking anyone who disagrees with them or reverts vandalism, which I guess is par for the course. All the Stanek-related articles were originally written by about half a dozen editors, and this is three of them. For various reasons they look remarkably sockish - Stanek is widely believed to use sockpuppets to promote his books; they edit en masse at the same time, swapping in and out for sets of edits; it's almost impossible to tell them apart.

    Currently, if they are the same, they've massively violated 3RR on Robert Stanek, possibly ditto on Talk:Robert Stanek last night (not entirely sure on that one), and voted on an AFD twice.

    Would it be possible to checkuser the following?

    For the sake of transparency, not that they'll pay any attention, it'd be nice if you could also confirm for the record that Zora (talk · contribs) and myself aren't the same person! Thanks... Shimgray | talk | 02:33, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

    Possible Sockpuppet

    An edit war broke out recently on the Wayne Gretzky article. One anon. IP 66.254.232.219 continuously rv'ing long standing wording and avoiding warnings from RasputinAXP and even a 24 hr block from GUY. During his attack he was "backed-up" in his arguements by Onward ND. 66.254.232.219 returned from his block and began his revert war again(breaking 3RR in the process) Again, his statements were backed up by Onward ND And again the IP user was blocked by GUY. It has been observed that during 66.254.232.219's blocked periods... Onward ND(normally a very frequent contributor) was dormant as well.

    Could a Check User be done on:

    It is quite likely that are the same person. Thank You Mr Pyles 23:27, 19 February 2006 (UTC)


    BigBear

    BigBear (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) posted an uncivil warning on User Talk:Plover with a comment stating that it is from User:Jason Gastrich. If this is a sock it is significant in the light of the ongoing Arbcom case, if it isn't then somebody is deliberately impersonating Gastrich. It is possible that this account may, if it is not Gastrich, be related to the many Gastrichnnn impersonators above - if so it probably establishes them an attempt to smear rather than meatpuppets. Gastrich certainly has enough enemies, although I think those who are active on Misplaced Pages (e.g. User:WarriorScribe) are not stupid enough to try this. Guy 16:09, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

    This is an important RFCU because Gastrich is now claiming that he hasn't edited Misplaced Pages in weeks and all of these latest socks are really netstalkers impersonating him and trying to get him in trouble. And I'm actually somewhat open to this idea. --Cyde Weys 16:20, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
    It might also be worth checking whether these accounts are consistent with a single person:
    It's not impossible that some of them might be "Uncle Davey" - Usenetpostsdotcom (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - since he has exhibited behaviour external to Misplaced Pages which indicates that he may be sufficiently naive to attempt this. It's also not impossible that they are in fact Gastrich, since he is undoubtedly technically competent, but Fred's reply to my query re "not found" above suggests they are not on a common ISP so that could be way out.
    Apologies, I know this is a lot of work, but I think it's important to be fair; there is no doubt that astrich has used socks, but that is different in degree from running a massive sock farm. Guy 16:46, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

    Vrray9000@yahoo (talk · contribs)

    Vrray9000@yahoo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and Randallrobinstine (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) both have very similar vandalism patterns. Randallrobinstine was indefinitely blocked on December 29, 2005. Both users have a history of changing images on various webpages. For instance both users have edited Image:That '70s Show logo.png to say "That K-Jo '70s Show" or something to this effect. Both users have also vandalized identical pages (notably That '70s Show and Adult Swim) and all vandalism relating to television and video games in some form.

    This is kind of moot now as Vrray9000@yahoo has been blocked. If there is time however, I'd still like to know as I am curious if my suspicions are true. --11:18, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
    It's too long ago to associate with User:Randallrobinstine. However, the same IP continues to vandalise without being logged in : 69.76.206.218 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

    Whether you're here because you like browsing userpages or because you want to leave me a message, come say hi!

    This is a very unusual CheckUser request. It's been raised at WP:AN#Is there a counsellor in the house? that this user claims to be a 13-year-old who wants to commit suicide by a painless manner. Obviously, this might be a hoax. Obviously, there might be no way to trace him/her. But I'd like to request a CheckUser to see if, in fact, any information can be yielded that might allow someone here (if legal) to track down this person's location and have his/her parents or authorities contacted. Obviously, there are legal issues which may need to be addressed, but I think a CheckUser needs to be the first step. --Nlu (talk) 08:00, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

    I know from previous experience with suicide threats on Misplaced Pages that if an IP can be uncovered, the legal staff can and will do everything to track the person down, including contacting the ISP. Essjay 08:16, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
    CheckUser does not reveal any association with other users. I have the IP if the right people need it, but will not post it here. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 09:22, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
    Bowlhover appears to be located outside the US, which may complicate matters slightly. ➥the Epopt 15:41, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

    GiantGonzella (talk · contribs) PinkDoofus (talk · contribs) and Panjom (talk · contribs)

    User:Panjom stated that "An sprotect! Times like these make me glad I have hundreds of old accounts". Clearly has created numerous accounts to bypass procedure and be disruptive: is there a way of noting the IP addresses that have been used by this account and used by other accounts? Ta bu shi da yu 12:23, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

    GiantGonzella (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and PinkDoofus (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) are the same individual. Other socks include:
    All from 70.48.248.226 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), which is a Sympatico address and very likely the DickyRobert vandal. Given their topical interests (Daniel Brandt, Criticism of Misplaced Pages, Misplaced Pages) I would tend to suspect that we're dealing with someone here responding to the "call for revolution" recently posted on Misplaced Pages Review.
    Panjom (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is a one-off via a Korean IP that has no other edits (and in fact the entire /24 it's in has no other edits), which suggests a botnet or other proxy being used. Kelly Martin (talk) 14:12, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

    68.63.52.246 and User:Auburnfan4

    I recently had vandalism to my user page which is unlike the previous vandalism (as I know who was doing it previously, and this isn't them) . This was immediately following a dispute with User:Gators222 and User:Auburnfan4, in which some of the slurs thrown at me were very similar to the vandalism which subsequently occurred. Auburn University is in Alabama. It goes to reason that Auburnfan4 is as well. Further, the IP that vandalized my page last night is a Comcast user, in Alabama. I think it should be relatively easy to determine whether Aurburnfan4 is on the same subnet, or even the same IP. Will checkuser be able to verify this either way? ... aa:talk 21:57, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

    Actually, I'd like to extend that to Gators222, on account of him also living in Alabama, and having a very similar user page and mannerism. ... aa:talk 00:29, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
    It looks like there's a good change that it's User:Gators222; he used the same IP address about 3 days prior to the vandalism. Gators222 uses the same IP address as User:Auburnfan4, as does User:I ignore you. Also see , in which Auburnfan4 admits to being Gators222 (probably by mistake, being logged in as a different user than he thought). It also appears that User:Gators222isgayfucker is actually Gators222, pretending to be being impersonated. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 02:45, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
    I was just going to ask about this "I ignore you" user. Given this user is being abusive, and that my page is being vandalized by this user, and that they're using socks to accomplish same, what is the course of action? I'd of course like it stopped, but I'm generally against things like blocks, as I think it just exacerbates the problem. ... aa:talk 04:05, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
    Oh, and I forgot to thank you. ... aa:talk 04:10, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

    128.138.41.190, 207.93.211.50, Wikidugaren, Enkhbatt

    Wikidugaren and the two anonymous IPs have coordinated in two revert wars so far at Inner Mongolia. . In the more recent episode, the first IP jumped in to carry on after Wikidugaren did 4 reverts in a day and was given a final warning; recent messages left at Talk:Inner Mongolia suggest that they are the same. Later on, a new account (User:Enkhbatt) was created and carried on reverting. The sudden appearance of Enkhbatt and its immediate entrance into the revert war suggests that it might be a sockpuppet. -- ran (talk) 17:16, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

    User:Wikidugaren is also 128.138.41.190. It seems likely they are 207.93.211.50 as well. I can't tie Enkhbatt to anyone, however. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 03:10, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

    Thanks! -- ran (talk) 13:55, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

    User:Haham hanuka and User:85.250.244.160

    Please check if Haham hanuka tried to evade 3RR on Yigal Amir by logging out for a 4th revert using i.p. User:85.250.244.160. This is the reference to the the 3RR noticeboard of this case. gidonb 18:23, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

    While you are there, on the same revert war HH has suggested that User:Yellow up is a sock of Gidonb. I express no opinion. William M. Connolley 18:42, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
    I request that this allegation will be checked. gidonb 19:02, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

    More information on the user can be found on Talk:Yigal Amir. Much is framed and the rest above the frames, so it is hard to miss. gidonb 22:54, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

    User:Haham hanuka is User:85.250.244.160. No evidence that User:Yellow up is a sock of anyone. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 02:59, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

    User:Kuban kazak and User:Kazak

    Subject of alleged abuse: RfA for Alex Bakharev where both voted "Support". Kuban kazak's vote:, Kazak' vote: .

    Reasons for my suspicions:

    • these two users demonstrate the same and rare ethnic pride: being "Kazaks" (Russian Cossacks). This might not be very common among Wikipedians. Not many people in Russia (who identify themselves Cossacks). And such people usually do not speak English well and/or use Internet (not to mention projects like WP). Furthermore, even two "Cossacks" in English WP could choose different nicks following their personal differences. It's important to note that Kuban kazak is very straightforward in expressing his views on talk pages: he could choose the evident nick for a sockpuppet just to make the point.
    • both share common interests and opinions, edit the same articles and talk pages etc. Similarity is in details and not limited to Cossack or Russian nationalism issues.
    • when voting, User:Kuban kazak changed his usual signature to "Kuban Cossack" and voted few days before User:Kazak. It could be done to disguise the evident similarity of two usernames for users not familiar with Russian terminology.
    • the voting in question is very much tensed; the nominee lost the previous RfA month ago; User:Kuban kazak is his active supporter; all three share the same views.
    • recently User:Kuban kazak has been twice blocked for 3RR violation (a breach usually related to sockpuppetry).

    I'm not in possession of time and Wiki skills to provide deeper investigation (like edits timing, IPs etc.). I asked some people for help with this haven't got it. Ukrained 22:50, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

    I was going to just add that this person has numerously tried to use the most rudest ways to descredit my image. Actually when he suggested we be sockpuppets I offered myself to report this as soon as possible. Finally there are several million people with Cossack heritage living in Russia and about one million of Cossacks in regular Cossack service. Not that uncommon IMO. To all said above when users check my IP they will find it is either of London or Oxford based. That is because our Stanitsa (Cossack settlement) uses a British satelite uplink for communication (telephone and internet). So by all means check, and also if possible do pay attention to his behaivour. , . Translations I can provide where appropriate. --Kuban Cossack 23:25, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
    This is absurd. Nice friendly attitude you have there, Ukrained. By all means, check IPs - I live in the USA, Kuban Cossack lives in Russia. None of the "points" you came up with have any valid basis - why would Kuban Cossack create a sockpuppet with a nearly identical name? Lastly, how can you say that I 'share the same views' with him? What basis do you have whatsoever for these accusations? Do you just have nothing better to do? Kazak 23:46, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
    Here is another piece of evidence, 24 hours ago I was blocked for 3RR violation. Today Kazak made numerous edits to pages I never visit or edit. Have a look at our contributions and find that there are none of similarity. Finally Kazak is less active on WP then me, yet nevertheless he has registered long before I have. Finally Ukrained your numerous attempts to edit my comment if anything shows your true colours, if anything I would recommend that you clean up some of your comments made in my adress, or cancel this silly procedure which will 100% prove you wrong. --Kuban Cossack 00:28, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
    The two users do not appear to be related. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 02:48, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

    User:-Inanna- and User:Altau

    I'm just curious if Altau is a sockpuppet of Inanna, as she has denyed this, but Altau talks the same, and magically apears whenever Inanna gets blocked. Altau hasn't logged in since the 8th. --Khoikhoi 01:59, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

    Confirmed. Inanna and Altau appear from the same IPs repeatedly - again and again, across a wide range of IPs. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 08:05, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
    So shouldn't Altau be blocked? --Khoikhoi 08:25, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
    Done. A warning left on -Inanna-'s talk page about the use of sockpuppets for block evasion. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 01:48, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

    User:AvengerRSPW, User:StephenSignorelli, User:PyterTaravitch, & User:Lord Of Darkness

    I'm very curious as to whether or not these socks (obviously all the same person given their edit histories) are accessing from European IP's, and as such related to User:TruthCrusader (and his previous identity, User:ChadBryant). User:TruthCrusader has filed a RFA against me, but has been known to impersonate other users and start edit wars with sockpuppets. - Chadbryant 04:12, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

    They are all accessing through an open proxy in Germany which I have blocked. Since it's an open proxy it's hard to prove association with anyone else. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 07:03, 23 February 2006 (UTC)


    SuperDeng (talk · contribs) and Woohookitty (talk · contribs) and DMorpheus (talk · contribs) and Ksenon (talk · contribs) and Constanz (talk · contribs) and Victory Day (talk · contribs)

    I need someone to check the ips of all these people because Constanz (talk · contribs) and DMorpheus (talk · contribs) and Ksenon (talk · contribs) andConstanz (talk · contribs) have accussed me of creating Victory Day (talk · contribs) as a sock pupet which I havent. I believe that either Victory Day (talk · contribs) acctually is a person who agrees with me or that Victory Day (talk · contribs) was created by one of these Constanz (talk · contribs) and DMorpheus (talk · contribs) and Ksenon (talk · contribs) and Woohookitty (talk · contribs) people to disscredit me. So if someone would please check the ips of all of us and tell us what country of origin all the ips are from It would really help.

    (Deng 19:05, 23 February 2006 (UTC))

    The problem here is that Deng has no EVIDENCE that any of us created this account. We have evidence but not enough to request a checkuser here, which is why we haven't. But he has zilch. None. And I'm not even involved in the debate at Eastern Front (World War II) nor have I said that he used socks. In fact, I said I don't think he did. I said there was evidence he might have, but again it's so little that I didn't bring a request. He's basically looking for what amounts to a block CheckUser with no evidence. I told him that this was the place to request a CheckUser check but not in this manner. --Woohookitty 19:39, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
    I would like to see this evidence but more importantly I would like someone to show the ip of Victory Day and me to prove that we are not the same person and most likely not even from the same country. After that has been done I would like someone to check the others ip who would gain from diss crediting me and see if they are from the same country ass Victory Day and if so from the same city as well.

    (Deng 00:51, 24 February 2006 (UTC))

    SuperDeng (talk · contribs) and Victory Day (talk · contribs) and Victory Army (talk · contribs)

    I suspect that SuperDeng (talk · contribs) may have used the sockpuppet of Victory Army (talk · contribs) and Victory Day (talk · contribs) in a single entry on the Eastern Front page. User Victory Day made only a single entry on the discussion page; I asked on that page if the account was a sock puppet. Since then the account has not been used as far as I can tell. I do not wish to get into any sort of personal conflict with this user. But I note that the misspellings and grammar of both users appear similar, and the sole entry by Victory Day was to praise Superdeng. No other entry has been made. The Superdeng account has denied being a sock puppet, but we have not heard anything from the other accounts. User Superdeng is engaged in a two-month-long effort to edit the Eastern Front page against the consensus of other active editors. I request that the administrators take whatever action is appropriate in this case. Thanks. DMorpheus 20:34, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

    And you are also engaged in this conflict and why you would make a seperate request when I have just requested that everyone involved get checked is very intressting.

    (Deng 11:10, 24 February 2006 (UTC))

    Nothing is provable in any of these. I would suggest taking this to further steps of dispute resolution. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 02:31, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

    Amazon10x (talk · contribs)

    A user suspected, at my RFA a while back, that there were sockpuppets voting. I need a CheckUser to confirm the suspicions of the user. There were two "alleged sockpuppets" that voted at the said RFA and one of them was a confirmed sockpuppet. Amazon10x is the other one. It is suspected that Amazon10x is a sockpuppet of Mcfly85, a known vandal account. Can someone check to see if Amazon10x has made any other accounts? Moe ε 23:30, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

    There is no evidence of User:Amazon10x using other accounts. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 01:40, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

    ColonelS (talk · contribs)

    On his first day he headed straight for the Chip Berlet article and started bringing up all the same old disputes, so I'm wondering if this is Nobs or Cognition or somebody else who has been dealt with by ArbCom. Gamaliel 05:47, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

    I'm not sure what the hell Nobs or Cognition is, but this Gamaliel guy has been harassing me ever since I registered and made a valid change to the article about Chip Berlet, who is a fringe left political pundit that Gamaliel likes. Almost immediately a bunch of liberal editors started deleting everything I had added and attacking me with insults. This was not because of anything wrong or untrue about what I added - it was all sourced and quoted and true. They just didn't like that it showed some truths about Chip Berlet that they don't want revealed, such as the fact that he has no law degree as his old article implied and the fact that he wrote an embarassing and controversial rant calling George H.W. Bush and Ross Perot "fascists" with ties to Mussolini! All I did was quote that rant and quoted a conservative response to it - all with sources. And that set them off. So the next day Chip Berlet himself shows up and starts trying to delete anything negative about himself from his own article (I thought people got in trouble for doing that on wikipedia!) The stuff I added wasn't there when I added it there either -- unless these lib types removed it all before too! Chip Berlet's editor name and some of the other libs posted all sorts of vicious rude insults against me and completely blanked the sourced quote of Berlet himself that I had added, but when I made a single complaint that this looked like censorship Gamaliel - who is himself an openly identified liberal democrat and probably a Berlet supporter because of it - sends me a rude message threatening to ban me! Now he's posting all sorts of similar messages to me and when I checked his history to see if he was doing it elsewhere my suspicion was confirmed - here he is now trying to initiate some sort of investigation into me. With all due respect, this Gamaliel guy is out of control and he acts like he's trying to drive me away from wikipedia for no other reason than I "wronged" one of his liberal sacred cows! If this is what wikipedia is all about -- political censorship and leftists threatening to block anyone who isn't leftist for the most minor reasons on the very first day (when they give a blind eye to liberals who are far more incivil) -- I'm not sure I want to be involved in it anyway. And now this guy is trying to set up some sort of secret tribunal against me by calling for a secret investigation without even having the decency to tell me about it! It's pure BS and this Gamaliel guy has got to go. -- Col. S
    While CheckUser does not go back nearly far enough to verify anything, this IP keeps creating new users which instantly dive in to the same topic area (right-wing politics) but different articles. I strongly suspect they're actually the same person. Identification as to a banned user is going to take more. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 00:40, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

    Analysis of the edits of ColonelS (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) shows a slightly different emphasis in his edits from that of Nobs01 who was also concerned with Chip Berlet and the National Lawyer's Guild. Cognition generally edits in other areas and has also tended to focus on other issues. So Nobs01 is a possibility, but it is likely ColonelS is just another right wing editor. ColonelS's internet provider does not offer service where Nobs01 has logged in from in the past. Fred Bauder 01:35, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

    85.96.215.120 (talk · contribs) and Metb82 (talk · contribs)

    Could you please check 85.96.215.120 (talk · contribs) and Metb82 (talk · contribs) because they are removing content from articles consensus on the Galatasaray article and it seems like a user is switching to his IP in order to avoid to 3RR rule. They seem to have similar editing patterns. As well as that Metb82 (talk · contribs) issued a personal attack against me stating that I am, "a living proof of how annoying and violent you british hooligans are". Thanks. Englishrose 14:54, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

    Metb82 (talk · contribs) is 85.96.215.120 (talk · contribs). No associations to anyone else. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 00:31, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

    Possible Abusive Sock

    User:Steven_Taylor used his first edit to open an absurd AfD discussion. Subsequent to this, he engaged in the spamming of talk pages of , in an attempt to round up a posse of like minded people to push his POV. Celestianpower closed the discussion, after which Steven Taylor reverted not once but twice, for a total of three reverts of three different editors.

    Following the revert warring on the article, he posted a complaint regarding Celestianpower's behavior to AN/I, in which he broke several policies, most notably WP:CIVIL, WP:AGF, WP:POINT, and WP:SNOW.

    Based on the fact that this involves an abuse of the AfD process by a new user, quite familiar with the deletion process, userbox categories, gathering support, and the administrator's noticeboard, it is suspected that this user is also in violation of WP:SOCK. Given that such religious AfD warring is strikingly similar to past abuses by Jason Gastrich (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), and that the nominated page concerned a pro-choice article, it is suspected that Steven Taylor may be one of Jason's many socks. Please note that suspected Gastrich socks have been edit warring at Abortion over the past few days.

    Given that Jason is the subject of an active arbitration request, this CheckUser request is particularly relevant, in helping locate all socks related to the case. Hexagonal 16:43, 24 February 2006 (UTC)


    I have indefinitely blocked the IP used for this account and a large number of others; this is because it appears to be a compromised host or open proxy and is only being used for sockpuppetry.
    Users using this IP include:
    I note most of these if not all have already been blocked as Gastrich socks. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 00:26, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

    Gianni ita (talk · contribs)

    I believe this user may be a sockpuppet of an anonymous BellSouth user (who has used a number of IP addresses - presumably dynamic proxies) whom I blocked yesterday for 3RR violations on Kosovo-related articles. Could someone please check the IP address of User:Gianni ita and run a whois query to establish whether this user is also on BellSouth? -- ChrisO 21:32, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

    User:Gianni ita is in Italy. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 10:43, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

    TJWhite (talk · contribs) and LaRevolution (talk · contribs)

    Only edits by LaRevolution (talk · contribs) are to spam a number of user talk pages announcing a manifesto on TJWhite (talk · contribs)'s user page (saying he's his "follower"). --cesarb 22:43, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

    No proof obtainable with CheckUser. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 10:47, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

    waya sahoni (talk · contribs) and Gadugi (talk · contribs)

    From the behaviour and language of the poster, almost everyone familiar with the situation seems to believe that waya sahoni (talk · contribs) is a sockpuppet of user:Gadugi, which is the nym of Jeffrey Vernon Merkey, permanently banned from Misplaced Pages for legal threats. Jeff has consistently and vociferously tried to impose his own POV on the Jeffrey Vernon Merkey article, to the extent of threatening lawsuits, and, although user:waya sahoni was spotted early on as another sockpuppet, we turned a blind eye, since, to begin with, he wasn't materially disrupting the editing of the Merkey article. Lately however, waya sahoni has become an increasingly disruptive presence on the Merkey article and it's talk page, hence I'm asking for a check. It's pretty obvious that user:waya sahoni is Jeff, but we've no conclusive proof.

    Evidence:

    Thanks, --Aim Here 00:08, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

    Impossible really to add anything to what you say here. User:Waya sahoni has used the IPs:
    • 67.166.115.135
    • 67.177.11.129
    and nobody else in checkuserable history has used these IPs. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 10:55, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
    What other evidence should we provide to show the administrators that User:Waya sahoni is a sockpuppet of User:Gadugi? I am sure we can come up with examples of typical behaviour, choice of words, grammar mistakes, and other personality indicators. Such a list would be long and a lot of work to produce, though.
    The fact is that the user has started to make himself into a nuiceance again, and I'd like him re-shackled (as was the intention of the permanent block) --MJ 14:59, 27 February 2006 (UTC).
    These users and several others are members of the Yahoo SCOX message board and have been accusing any and all editors of sockpuppetry who attempt to improve the article in question. They engage in vandalism, POV pushing, and vicious personal attacks. They have even resorted to attacks regarding my sexual orientation, and engaged in sustained vandalism of my user page and the user pages of others with a plethera of sockpuppet IP addresses. I have reviewed the edit logs on the article in question, and I have identified over a dozen addresses from everywhere from Montana, California, North Carolina, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, and Texas. Every single editor who approaches the article is accussed of sockpuppetry and harassed until they are driven from the article. At present, I have opened an RFC and the current disputes relate to the SCOX members inserting materials which are barred from Misplaced Pages by Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources. When they loose their arguments, instead of relying on intellectual debate or sincere discussion, they mob the editor and start making baseless sockpuppetry allegations. It is quickly rising to the level of harassment and violation of WP:NPA. The dispute centers on the LKML bulletin board and whether or not the content can be used as primary or secondary sources. I am working on numerous articles for the Misplaced Pages Indigenous Peoples Porject, and this article falls into that category. I have attempted to improve the article along with the others so it will meet feature article status, but some of these editors will stop at nothing to misuse wikiepedia as a platform for POV pushing with content I am unable to verify. Waya sahoni 20:44, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

    Here is a list of the sockpuppets I've found for Jeff

    The following users and IP addresses are among Jeff's attempts to circumvent his permanent ban and rewrite his embarrassing history.

    67.177.35.25 (talk · contribs)
    Address used by 'Merkey's wife' - nslookup shows 'c-67-177-35-25.hsd1.ut.comcast.net'
    67.137.28.187 (talk · contribs)
    Address used by Merkey (see talk page) - tracert shows that the last named node is 'gw0-cust-OCWIRELESS-NET.slkc.eli.net' (a Salt Lake City wireless account). This node is not currently active.
    This "node" is indeed active. It continues to be part of a very small IP address block that formerly hosted some of Merkey's domain names (vger.utah-nac.org, merkeylaw.com) but has been purged of Merkey's domain names and now hosts various *.soleranetworks.com hosts.
    This IP address is one that Merkey continues to use in posting to the LKML (Linux Kernel Mail List). Here is a header fragement from a Merkey post as recent as Fri, 24 Feb 2006 16:48:10 -0700:
    Received: from wolfmountaingroup.com (solera_gw.soleranetworks.com ) by master.soleranetworks.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E43E2B096B; Fri, 24 Feb 2006 15:59:01 -0700 (MST)
    From "Jeff V. Merkey" <jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com>
    Ref: http://lkml.org/lkml/headers/2006/2/24/270
    Note that it is frequently possible to determine Merkey's current IP address by doing a host merkeylaw.com (currently: merkeylaw.com has address 67.177.35.222), host wolfmountaingroup.org (currently: wolfmountaingroup.org has address 67.177.35.222), or host wolfmountaingroup.com (currently: wolfmountaingroup.com has address 67.177.35.222) as Merkey is now hosting these domain names at his home.
    67.137.28.189 (talk · contribs)
    nslookup shows demo.soleranetworks.com. Solera Networks is a company that Jeff Merkey used to work for. His name does not appear anywhere in a site wide search(http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=merkey+site%3Asoleranetworks.com&btnG=Google+Search). User is banned for for threats against another user.
    Solera Networks is *not* Merkey's company. He probably still *works* for Solera Networks, or at least he still can still originate posts to the LKML from IP address/host names that belong to Solera Networks.
    67.177.35.211 (talk · contribs)
    nslookup shows 'c-67-177-35-211.hsd1.ut.comcast.net'. Self admitted Merkey account. See User talk.
    67.177.35.222 (talk · contribs)
    nslookup shows 'c-67-177-35-222.hsd1.ut.comcast.net'. User blocked for persistent vandalism to the Jeff Merkey article.
    67.177.11.129 (talk · contribs)
    nslookup shows 'c-67-177-11.129.hsd1.ut.comcast.net'. User warned about vandalism. User Waya sahoni answers in first person. Added self-referential biographical content to Waya sahoni's user page.
    67.166.115.135 (talk · contribs)
    nslookup shows 'c-67-177-115.135.hsd1.ut.comcast.net'. User adds content to Waya sahoni page that is is then MOVED by Waya sahoni to another position on his page. Obvious Merkey sockpuppet.
    Waya sahoni (talk · contribs)
    Uses both 67.166.115.135 and 67.177.11.129 IP addresses to modify this user's home page.
    24.119.59.202 (talk · contribs)
    An oldie but goodie. User blocked as sockpuppet for Merkey.


    Anderson12 (talk · contribs)

    I suspect Anderson12 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is a sockpuppet of Lightbringer (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Ardenn 04:46, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

    Lightbringer has been gone too long for a checkuser. Any other checkuser have saved results for Lightbringer to compare with? Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 11:31, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
    You can check it against Basil_Rathbone (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) as he's a known puppet of LB's. Ardenn 20:28, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
    A connection bewteen between Basil_Rathbone and Anderson12 appears likely. Raul654 23:25, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

    User-multi error: "DV8_2XL" is not a valid project or language code (help). and Smokefoot (talk · contribs)

    Request made here as part of an ongoing mediation: personally, I don't think these editors even edit from the same continent! Physchim62 (talk) 11:30, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

    A match bewteen DV8 2XL and Smokefoot seems virtually impossible (one looks like he's from North America, the other from Europe) Raul654 21:53, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

    Imacomp (talk · contribs) and Skull 'n' Femurs (talk · contribs)

    Gratefull if someone could check this out. The assertion has been made before that Imacomp is one of SnFs stable of socks and when the point was highlighted the other day it wasn't denied, the response was threats and mutual accusations. Imacomp has only shown an interest in edits within a section posted by SnF shortly before his block and is refusing to contenance discussion, just accusing anyone disputing the detail as acting in poor taste (issues are related to the Holocaust). The use of threats as a response to any request for dialogue is also very similar. Many thanks. ALR 15:16, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

    Also note this diff of Imacomps user page: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Imacomp&oldid=37208018 which highlights a connection.ALR 15:23, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
    Supplementary to that last:

    None of which prove anything in their own right, but they do tend to add evidence. ALR 17:22, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

    IT WAS denied to ALR, and I asked for a retraction. However he persists. ALR is one of a stable of socks by Anti-Masons (posing as a Mason) only shown a more active interest in edits within a section posted by SnF after his block, and and is refusing to contenance discussion. "Skull 'n' Femurs" did once post an unsolicited comment on my Home page once, and I gave him a Barnstar in his early (better)days. That is the sum total of interactions - and many other editors interacted more. ALR's actions are in poor taste (issues are related to the Holocaust), as are several others. I removed stuff on the subject, and complained on the talk page of Freemasonry. The use of threats as a response to any request is ALRs style. Many thanks. Imacomp 14:05, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

    A match between Imacomp and Skull 'n' Femurs appears likely. Per Imacomp's allegation, I ran a sockpuppet check against ALR. ALR shares his IP with a great many other users, which (upon furthrer checking) appears to be a proxy server shared by many thousands of internet users. Raul654 21:48, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

    I can confirm tht I spent most of today using my employers network to access WP, circa 200,000 users on that gateway. Thanks for the checks anyway.ALR 22:06, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

    User:Pirveli, User:Irakliy81, and User:Papa Carlo

    I'm really curious if these three are the same person or perhaps just two of them. They all seem to have the same beliefs. Thanks. --Khoikhoi 03:38, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

    Yes, sock check very much needed. Papa Carlo just created his account today, shortly after Irakliy81 was blocked for violating the 3RR and curiously seems to know how to sign his name, their standard of English is similar and all their contributions are on the same two articles and talk pages. If my suspicions are confirmed, then we're dealing with sockpuppets which have been used abusively. --Latinus 08:29, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
    Irakliy81-Papa Carlo is unlikely. Irakliy81-Pirveli and Papa Carlo-Pirveli are almost impossible. Raul654 21:21, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
    Could you also check User:Decwindows? --Khoikhoi 00:39, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

    User:The Invisible Anon

    Something weird is going on here. 86.10.231.219 (talk · contribs), an IP editor who usually 'signs' his posts as The Invisible Anon (For example ) is reporting that someone else is now using the username The Invisible Anon (talk · contribs).

    The IP editor believes that it may be related to some interpersonal conflicts he has had with some other editors. A CheckUser on User:The Invisible Anon would clear up whether the IP editor is being impersonated, trolled, or has created a sock. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 19:55, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

    The 'The Invisible Anon" anon has not used IP 86.10.231.219. Based on tracerouting/Ns lookups, I cannot definitevely rule out that they are the same person, but it seems unlikely. Raul654 21:02, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
    I asked David Gerard on IRC to perform a CheckUser inquiry. He confirmed that Invisible Anon (talk · contribs) and The Invisible Anon (talk · contribs) are indeed sockpuppets of Midgley (talk · contribs). --MarkSweep (call me collect) 21:47, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

    User:Rose-mary vs. User:80.90.57.154

    At Phaistos Disc (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), this anon (dynamic IP - changes every day) and Rose-mary have been edit warring to push fringe theories. I'd like to know if this IP is his/hers, because if so, then there's sockpuppet abuse by impersonation of another user to create the illusion of broader support for a position and by 3RR evasion, as the IP claims not to be Rose-mary. --Latinus 20:28, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

    It seems likely that they are a match. Raul654 20:56, 27 February 2006 (UTC)


    The accounts involved include Rose-mary (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), 80.90.38.185 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log),

    Stop icon

    Your recent editing history at 80.90.38.214 shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

    Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. :

    • All these accounts exist only to edit this Phaistos Disc.
      • 80.90.38.214 blocked for "gross 3RR violation", this article 22:11, 26 February 2006
      • Rose-mary admits to being 80.90.38.214:
      • 80.90.38.185 admits to being 80.90.38.214:

    Could you see whether 80.90.38.185 is also the same IP? Septentrionalis 21:06, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

    80.90.38.185 is a definite match to Rosemary. Raul654 21:16, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

    And 80.90.38.214, if still checkable? Septentrionalis 21:42, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

    Ha, I think it may time for semi-protection. That IP range has been trolling that article for days now. I know that the semi-protection is only to prevent vandalism, but do you think that this is an WP:IAR situation? Dynamic IPs? His IP'll be changing soon, so blocking his current on won't be much help :-( --Latinus 21:20, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
    Or just block them all for the WP:3RR violation they've pulled off today, while sockpuppets of a blocked user... Septentrionalis 21:40, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

    See this page for all details.

    See the above page for names and details and evidence. --Jared / 22:17, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

    User:WarriorScribe and User:Arbustoo

    These two user names have:

    • A similar posting history (with a special interest in religion, religions figures, and religious schools) (e.g. Skeptic's Annotated Bible, Louisiana Baptist University, etc.
    • User:WarriorScribe alleged another user was using an AOL IP address to use sockpuppets on the same day (January 21) User:Arbustoo was created
    • Both accounts were used to sway several AfD votes (within 90 minutes of each other, here)
    • User:WarriorScribe has come to support User:Arbustoo in his RfC and has deflected the blame elsewhere
    • They have no two posting times in common, yet they have days (like Feb. 18) where they switched back and forth, and back and forth, again
    • User:WarriorScribe was the initial account created, yet a significant drop off in posting has occurred since the other account was created
    • User:Arbustoo created a category for exposing religious scandals after User:WarriorScribe (Dave Horn) created a GoogleGroup2 for exposing religious scandals
    • Both have an obsession with Jason Gastrich
    • Both are apparently opposed to Christianity and religion

    --Juicy Juicy 12:01, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

    User:ALR is Lightbringer

    I think ALR is Lightbringer, hence trying to say I'm S'n'F sock to cover his tracks. Book Mouse 13:31, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

    Categories: