Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/J. A. Comment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] J. A. Comment

main edit links history watch
Filed: 00:43, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Supporting evidence: In article Srbosjek user 71.252.101.67 aka 71.252.102.204 is edit warring against all other users. From 20 May 2008 he is supported by newly created account J. A. Comment. This new user has been warned by SWik78 (which is using anti vandal tool) that his actions are under question but this has not stoped SPA account (history of article).

It is "public" knowledge (for small example I will use administrators Fut.Perf. and Lar) , that banned users Velebit, Stagalj and Smerdyakoff are using IP range 71.252.xx.xxx and because of this reason User talk:71.252.83.230 and User talk:71.252.101.51 has been blocked. Because it is not clear which of this banned users (Smerdyakoff or Velebit) is puppet master (or if this is only 1 user) they are all in this list--Rjecina (talk) 00:43, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Comment I am not 'warring against all other users' - as a proof, see my contributions: I am reading references and supporting the existing text. It is frivolous to link me to any other user or IP address (except those I've used when contributing to the Srbosjek article) for the reason that Wikipedia does not ask for any user identification data. The 'warring all other users' are Croats desperately attacking all non-Croat users, the text, the references - trying to ultimately destroy or remove this article despite of overwhelming evidence that the 'serb cutter' knife existed and used during the WWII. For evidence - see the talk page of this article.--71.252.101.67 (talk) 18:03, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Additional information needed Can you please provide specific diffs showing the disruption? -- lucasbfr talk 11:35, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Supporting evidence against Rjecina:Removed references, section, and baselessly inserted {dubious} tag after references [1]
This user is engaged in regular removals of my contributions to the Srbosjek article and the talk page - removal of references and pointless insertion of the [dubious – discuss] tag after each existing and not removed reference. See [2],[3],[4]
This user was warned already three times by other user and by me [5],[6],[7]
Also, his harassment of other users is already noticed by an administrator and proper warning is given here [8],[9] which reads:
You, however, Rjecina, are very clearly engaging in a campaign of harassment in order to get as many opposing editors blocked as possible. You're apparently even keeping a list of trophies ([10]). I'll wait for comments from others here, but I'm seriously considering handing out some fresh sanction under WP:ARBMAC against you at this point. Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:03, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Here he is attacking the same way other users [11] where he claims
Difference between numbers in this article and older history is much greater. It is possible that article has been edited by puppet of banned user:Velebit which can be see from history of his edits IP 217.57.46.126 and user Velebit other puppet user:NovaNova or his suspected banned puppet user:Stagalj. Creation of this article has not been noticed earlier because if has been created with only edit of SPA account.--Rjecina
It is not difficult to see that the IP 217.57.46.126 (an Italian IP address) is not an US based IP - which shows frivolity of his attacks on other users.
--71.252.101.67 (talk) 03:19, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
I am called to rewrite this so for begining I will use words of other users:
Administrator Lar has blocked IP 71.252.83.230 because contributions from this IP are nevertheless consistent with it being used only by socks of Velebit/Guivon and Velebit is still active on that IP. .[12]
Administrator Future Perfect at Sunrise has blocked IP 71.252.101.51 because Clearly a ban-evading sock IP of the same multiple sockpuppeter as User:Smerdyakoff/User:Standshown"
User SWik78 about IP 71.252.101.67 revert of banned user [13]
I am hoping that this 3 examples are enough to show that something not "normal" is happening from IP 71.252.xx.xxx and that there is need to check this.
Administrator Future Perfect at Sunrise about 153.39.144.157 apparent sockpuppet IP [14]
It this evidence is not enought to check for puppets of banned user then I will add user J.A.Comment for using multiple accounts in editing 1 article. There is no difference between J.A.Comment and 71.252.101.67 [15]. Only difference is page in the book and now I will write something about that :)
IP 71.252.101.67/J. A. Comment editing pattern, word usage on comment pages, and habit of posts (he has deleted all May posts) on his own talk page is very similar to the editing histories of permanently-banned sock puppet accounts listed above (users Stagalj and Velebit ). In editing he is always using like source his "books" from which he is writing long lines on talk pages like many other banned users:
Adding user 71.252.102.163 which has entered edit warring game in article Srbosjek. Can somebody confirm this puppets so that we can start action against this user ?
Maybe I am mistaking but now there is clear evidence that editorial style of L.A.Comment and user:71.252.83.33 is very similar with editorial style of banned editors.
Second evidence is "popular" thinking that IP address 71.252.xx.xxx is used by banned user Velebit.
3rd evidence is showing that only edits of newly created account L.A.Comment has been in support of edits from IP Address 71.252.xx.xxx
With hope that this will be enought bye --Rjecina (talk) 17:41, 10 June 2008 (UTC)