If you are creating a new request about this user, please add it to the top of the page, above this notice. Don't forget to add
((Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Shuppiluliuma))
to the checkuser page here. Previous requests (shown below), and this box, will be automatically hidden on Requests for checkuser (but will still appear here).
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a Request for checkuser. Please do not modify it.

Shuppiluliuma

[edit]
request links: main • edit • links • history • watch
Filed: 17:04, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Loreena McKilkenny seemed to be a fairly obvious sock of Shuppiluliuma, but I was willing to look the other way so long as they behaved. When an editor reported this user on my talk page, 151.57.161.198 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) blanked that section of my page. The IP is in the range that Shup socks from. I'm less interested in confirming Loreena as a sock, than looking into the feasability of a range block. For several years the issue has involved this individual editing from dynamic IPs in this range, as well as any countless number of user names. For every positive thing this editor does (and in fairness, he adds a lot of information), there are two or three negative things he also does, most of which involve owning pages in some form, or just flat out attacking anyone who disagrees with him. Fieldchesterman also fits the pattern as a new editor who makes a few edits, and then locks in on a Turkey, Ottoman, or Byzantine related page (usually all three).

Over the past month or so I took a more aggresive approach to the editor by applying short term protection to a number of pages, and clamping down on the IP edits from this range. This created stability on most of the pages, and allowed other editors to edit in peace, but it is not a viable long term option.

I would greatly appreciate if the CU who looks at this could take a look at the IP range and offer any suggestions. The range block has always been out of the question in the past because the range encompasses a large area, but since Shup seems to be the only one who has ever used any of these IP's, I would be interested if a range block could actually be safely applied for some set period of time.Hiberniantears (talk) 17:04, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

information Note: - I'm well familiar with this sockpuppeteer from previous cases and once again, the following accounts are  Confirmed
  1. Loreena McKilkenny (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
  2. Fieldchesterman (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
A check of the ranges shows IP addresses in the above range and little or no collateral damage will ensue whether the range is soft or hardblocked. To rangeblock, you should block 151.57.128.0/17 which should cover 100% of this editor's range and I recommend if you do this, to start at softblock and see how things go - Alison ❤ 06:28, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Alison, this is a big help! Hiberniantears (talk) 12:54, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Res Gestæ Divi Augusti

[edit]
request links: view • edit • links • history • watch
Filed: 20:14, 6 May 2008 (UTC)


Just a quick check here. Res Gestæ Divi Augusti was banned for continued edit warring on Turkey by Moreschi. My guess is that Res Gestæ Divi Augusti is one and the same as the blocked user Flavius Belisarius, who in turn is a sock of banned userShuppiluliuma. In any event, following the block of Res Gestæ, Decons22 appears and begins editing the same part of the article. It seems fairly obvious to me, but I was hoping I could get someone to run a checkuser on both Decons22 and Res Gestæ since this user has been creating many socks for a number of years now. I just want to know what I'm dealing with as far as other user names that are out there which I can take a look at. As I understand from prior episodes with this individual I would need to block a large chunk of Italy from editing Wikipedia to effectively block this guy... since that is obviously out of the question, getting an idea of the usernames that may exist would be of tremendous assistance. Thanks. Hiberniantears (talk) 20:14, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Res Gestœ and Decons22 are Red X Unrelated. The 151.57 IPs are  Confirmed as Res Gestœ editing while logged out. The other accounts are too stale to check. Thatcher 11:09, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Clerk notes -
  • Request merged to Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Shuppiluliuma from Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Res Gestæ Divi Augusti.
  • IP addresses blocked for 2 weeks each and tagged.
–Anthøny 23:12, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Shuppiluliuma

[edit]
request links: main • edit • links • history • watch
Filed: 05:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Shuppiluliuma, known also as DragutBarbarossa and CalicoJackRackham (talk · contribs), was indefbloced and community banned (here) for a number of incidents, involving edit-warring, personal attacks, block evasion, but above all the repeated uploading of a large number of unfree images. Fut.Perf. ☼ 05:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P.S.: Please cancel this request, it's no longer needed. Fut.Perf. ☼ 05:55, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rejected --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 01:45, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the Request for checkuser. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent requests related to this user should be made above, in a new section.


More