DifensorFidelis (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

• Veritas2016 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• 173.238.79.44 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))

• User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
• Editor interaction utility

The shared preference for Latin usernames whose meanings imply NOTHERE motivations aside... 173.238.79.44 admitted[1] to being DifensorFidelis and was accordingly blocked[2] for three months. Veritas2016 admitted[3][4] to being 173.238.79.44. It's possible that some other individual took over the IP during the block, but immediately before the block[5] the IP was editing exclusively in articles on ethnic groups, and since the block expired[6] has continued doing so. The IP also made edits that look very similar to the logged-in edits of both Israelites/Hyksos-focused DifensorFidelis[7][8] and race/genetics-focused Veritas2016[9][10] at roughly the same time. Not requesting CU as I am not sure if a CU is needed given the DUCK nature of the case, and I also don't know if a CU is even allowed to formally confirm that an IP is the same person as a named account even if it has already been admitted. Either this was a shared IP in February and still is now, in which case either the three-month block was unwarranted or another three-month block of logged-out edits by the IP is called for, or Veritas2016 and DifensorFidelis are the same person. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 08:31, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

• CheckUser requested - I've blocked Veritas2016 indefinitely and blocked the IP for three months, as the evidence is very strong that they are DifensorFidelis. Requesting CU for sleepers. Katie^talk 14:32, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• As there is no reason to expect sleepers, I'm closing this. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:23, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• ItaloCelt84 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• 173.238.79.44 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))

• User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
• Editor interaction utility

Compiling evidence from a related case and my talk page, and subsequent investigation.

173.238.79.44 is a purportedly static IP previously blocked twice as a sockpuppet of DifensorFidelis (see block log) by the sockmaster's own admission. The IP is also linked to ItaloCelt84 by that account's admission. This investigation is focused on determining whether the user using the IP since early October (ItaloCelt84) is the same user as was using it in June (Veritas2016 (talk · contribs), also a DifensorFidelis sock by admission).

Evidence

• The IP appears to be static. There are no contributions from any other addresses in this IP's /24 range.

• The IP had an interest in articles on ethnic groups (eg) prior to being blocked in February, and resumed editing in the same scope (eg) after the block expired in May. They were blocked again in June, and returned to the same subject again (eg) when the block expired in October.

• The IP often comments in the edit summary on the contents of a source when making and/or reverting edits. Examples from May, May, June, October, November

• The IP often asserts in the edit summary that an article is about ethnic groups. Examples from May, October, October

• Personal attacks related to Marxism/Italian nationalism in edit summaries: examples from June, June, November

• Editing history of Sardinian people: the IP has been a consistent contributor to this article, arguing a particular viewpoint regarding the Sardinian language's dominance among the Sardinian people, first in November 2014, continuing in February 2015, again in February 2016, and most recently two days ago.

Thus I assert that the user editing as 173.238.79.44 in June and blocked as a DifensorFidelis sockpuppet is the same user editing as 173.238.79.44 in November who created ItaloCelt84, thus ItaloCelt84 is a sockpuppet of DifensorFidelis.

Please note that due to good-faith concerns about my handling of the related case, I am going to recuse from clerking in this case. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 21:19, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Hello, I've seen the notification about my mention by Katie. I would like to say that I'm not related in any way to ItaloCelt, I've been accused to be a sockpuppet before by an anonymous user making edits while changing IP every day (that, in my opinion, is also vandalizing the page) for having few edits on the English Wikipedia. But, as I said to him, if that's the reason for the accusation it has no sense, since my account has a lot more in other languages (Italian and especially Sardinian). I've even been an admin in the Sardinian Wikipedia for a while. I saw the page as I every now and then check for edits in Sardinian-related articles.--L2212 (talk) 19:05, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Based on admissions from the master, ItaloCelt is  Confirmed to DifensorFidelis. In addition, since the edit war has resumed on the article and ItaloCelt has not edited since the page protection expired, I was suspicious of L2212 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki); that account is  Possilikely (a mix between possible and likely) to ItaloCelt.  Behavioural evidence needs evaluation. Katie^talk 16:52, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • After consultation with another CheckUser, the technical evidence for L2212 is closer to  Unlikely, though the behavioral evidence still needs evaluation. Katie^talk 21:37, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
•  Blocked and tagged ItaloCelt84. I will give L2212 the benefit of the doubt, and the IP is too stale to do anything about. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:28, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]