Neutralizer[edit]

• Neutralizer (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• 70.48.205.126 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• 70.48.205.78 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• 65.95.148.35 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))

• Code letter: B

User has the same behavior as an editor that is currently under indefinite block by community consensus due to puppeteering and contentious editing - he particularly used the User name User:Neutralizer and User:Ottawaman as well as User:Canuckster. He has used a wide range of IPs in the past to evade his block that have resulted in a number of temporary range blocks. I'd like to get a check to make sure that it's probable this is the same guy. Please see [1], [2] and [3] as well as the edit history of the article Michael Ignatieff. Strothra 22:52, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Two of the ranges Essjay pulled up and blocked when he ran a check last December were 70.48.0.0/16 block log) and 65.95.0.0/16 (block log); see the rangeblocking section of Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Ottawaman. I'd suggest that this is Neutralizer again, and a checkuser should replace these blocks. Daniel 04:34, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Declined The account's edits are stale. So old date/CIDRS is all we have to go on anyway. Voice-of-All 04:42, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Even if it is stale, the edit histories are far too alike - ie the single minded obsession with this topic alone and hard line pushing a political agenda while also attacking other editors who revert him. The anon user attempts to point out that he only began editing a week or so ago yet has a surprisingly in-depth knowledge of wiki for a novice. What gives it a larger element of suspicion is that both of these IP ranges had to be blocked last time as well. I'd say that it wasn't close enough if it were just one or the other, but not both that happen to be back contentiously editing the article again. --Strothra 05:50, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd blocked the ranges pursuant to the ANI comment and this. See the block log links above. This is Neutralizer, 100%. Daniel 07:11, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I appreciate your help. It's amazing that someone is this incredibly persistent to edit war in this article and deceptive in attempting to make others seem crazy for making the connection. --Strothra 13:12, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, I was talking only about checkuser data, certainly edit similarities are another matter. Voice-of-All 20:49, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, no worries. --Strothra 21:54, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]