Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Davenbelle

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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/Davenbelle}}
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.


Jack Merridew[edit]

request links: main • edit • links • history • watch
Filed: 17:34, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Confirmed sockpuppets
Suspected sockpuppets
  • Code letter: B
  • Supporting evidence:

While I am aware of the result ([1]) of this case. The case got rather complicated and checuser info is getting lost in the colossal workshop. Per the request of arbcom the issue is now in front of WP:SSP at which I would like to be able to link to a clean checkuser case.

It may be best to let Dmcdevit process this.

-- Cat chi? 17:34, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Can someone else close this because Dmcdevit seems to be too busy. -- Cat chi? 17:34, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I've been out of town. As noted, Merridew and Davenbelle share the same city (in the Third World, with fewer editors) but are on different ISPs. Now, in the amount of time between the last check and this, there are several ways that ne person's ISP counld have changed, but this is not conclusive based on CheckUser alone, it's on the  Likely side of  Possible. ;-) Dmcdevit·t 19:00, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Would it be possible for us to learn how many ips from Bali, Indonesia region edits English wikipedia? How many of those are in the IP range of Moby Dick and how many are in the IP range of Jack Merridew? Assuming neither user was on a dynamic range this may be helpful in identifying other sockpuppets or sockpuppet candidates. -- Cat chi? 13:01, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
It would be nearly impossible to give an idea of the numbers of editors from a region. Even if I could track down every ISP and IP range specific to the city and check them all (and that's not including the likely public terminals, hotspots, etc.), which I couldn't, it wouldn't mean much because there would be no reference point. What I can say, however, is that neither of the IP ranges used by Merridew or the old Davebelle sockpuppets has any appreciable traffic on them at all besides those editors, so sockpuppets are unlikely to be found that way. Dmcdevit·t 23:34, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Diyarbakir[edit]

From Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Diyarbakir
request links: view • edit • links • history • watch
Filed: 12:28, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Code letter: B

Although both users are probably too old to check, their checkuser data should have been preserved after the RfArs. Although I feel the user is borderlining disruptive "throwaway" account used only for a few edits with less than 100 "professional" edits, a consensus was not reached to this end: Wikipedia:Community_sanction_noticeboard#Diyarbakir and Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Diyarbakir.

Additional evidence:

Overall the user made no edits on wikipedia/wikipedia talk name space that isn't 'concerning me' (his edits came after mine) even though he demonstrates he knows how to get around with his 10th edit. User made no edits on category namespace that are not contradicting my edits. He may have completely opposite views, this shouldn't prevent him in making edits that are not contradicting my edits specifically. Individually most/all these edits are sane but collectively I feel they fall under WP:HA which would follow the edit pattern of User:Moby Dick.

I suspect a Moby Dick sockpuppet more but it could also be Xebat or half a dozen other such banned/disruptive users.

-- Cat chi? 12:28, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Xebat is very stale, and I don't know of any records (or don't have them myself). However,  Confirmed that Diyarbakir = Moby Dick. Dmcdevit·t 21:23, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Moby Dick (again)[edit]

Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Moby Dick

Since a checkuser for Davenbelle is not possible (as davenbelle last edited on early december) and as per the evidence at WP:ANB/I#Sock_investigation I'd like to request a CheckUser to establish weather or not Moby Dick is editing from a +8 UTC country or better if from bali (assuming this does not violate privacy issues). Thanks. Cat out 07:53, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Checkuser is not for fishing. See above: You must lay out clearly the evidence for sockpuppetry. You must explain how your request fits the policy above. Checkuser is not used to confirm "gut feelings" or curiosity; it is only used for cases where there is strong evidence of a connection and a serious matter of policy violation. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Essjay (talk • contribs) .

Clearly the evidence for sockpuppetry is avalible at ANB/I. The evidence pretty much convinced Administrator MONGO.
I have reviewed the evidence posted and have discussed this matter with one other editor and I see a preponderance of evidence that indicates that not only has Moby Dick wikistalked User:Cool Cat, but User:MegamanZero as well, and that Moby Dick is a sockpuppet of Davenbelle.--MONGO 09:13, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
Other admins such as Bishonen and Tony Sidaway believe it is more than likely... I do not want to copy paste entier ani discussion so as not to clutter here unless you request otherwise. The section titled "Moby Dick" on ANB/I has plenty of evidence.
Since a checkuser to compare Davenbelle and Moby Dick is not possible I have to rely on circumstencial evidence and establishing Time Zone is one of them.
--Cat out 23:47, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Seconded. I realize it's not entirely clear from Cool Cat's request, but if Moby Dick is Davenbelle, it is a matter of serious policy violation. Please see the remedy passed in Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Coolcat,_Davenbelle_and_Stereotek, or, simpler, this summary and warning of Moby Dick by User:Tony Sidaway. Even if it sounds like fishing, I think this is a case where it would be appropriate to look for any sockpuppets or sock-siblings of Moby Dick himself, if that's technically possible. Bishonen | talk 00:52, 25 May 2006 (UTC).[reply]
I get that it's violation of an AC decision if it's Davanbelle, but really, what do you expect? The best I can provide is "He's editing from an IP that is registered somewhere in one of these 20 countries, inhabited by 100 million people. Yes, Davanbelle could be in there somewhere." We can't do identification based on perceved location; if we did that, everybody on the site would be the sockpuppet of a thousand other people.
At this point, the best I can offer is for you to take the issue back to the Arbitration Committee; the vast majority of the checkusers on this project are AC members, and they can do the check and come to thier own conclusions. I'm just not comfortable putting people's IPs out there unless it is 100% clear that the privacy policy allows it, and I'm not going to be responsible for saying "He's somewhere within 1000 miles of the suspect" and have that turned into a conviction. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 02:06, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
True and you are right. But triangulating the suspect in a 1000 mile area would be usefull circumstancial evidence for this case. I can only gather circumstancial evidence as we cant checkuser davenbelle for reasons that has been discussed to death. You can just tell us country or timezone rather than an the IP list for now. The ip list will require some sort of aproval as per privacy policy... --Cat out 10:28, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moby Dick[edit]

Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Moby Dick

A detailed evidence is avalible at: [2]

There is an arbitration case involving this user which states that he was stalking me: Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Coolcat,_Davenbelle_and_Stereotek --Cat out 19:18, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

 Inconclusive; Davenbelle hasn't edited in months, there are no records to compare. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 05:48, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I already provided you with the records. He is making exact same edits from a new account in hopes of avoiding his arbitration remidies. There are over 10 similar edits. --Cat out 06:43, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
We compare IP records. There are no IP records for Davenbelle. If you want someone to agree with you that the two have similar editing patters, bring it up on ANI; this is only for requesting technical investigations. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 06:48, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I already posted it to ANI. Thats where the link I provided leads to. I see... Thanks. I'll try to dig up the IP's myself then (he did edit as an annon on occasions but he was supposively taking a trip at the time so that may also be inconclusive.) --Cat out 07:44, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Allegation Denied. User:Cool Cat is attempting to entangle me in his arbitration case. --Moby 10:34, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not format your comments in a way that represents them as an authoritative finding; the result is inconclusive. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 11:15, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Understood. It was unintended. --Moby 11:32, 11 May 2006 (UTC) (re: bold text)[reply]

80.202.25.17[edit]

Edits of User:80.202.25.17 show striking resemblance with User:80.203.115.12 as well as User:Davenbelle see: [3]. I suspect him of being davenbelle logged off paceing up his stalking campaign slowly although NOTHING remotely colse to what I am used to. It may also be a genuine edit, I just want to rule it out. --Cool CatTalk|@ 22:38, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

80.202.25.17 and 80.203.115.12 are in the same dynamic subrange (80.202.16.0 - 80.202.122.255 allocated to Nextgentel Norway) so they could easily be the same editor without any sockpuppetry being involved. Davenbelle has no edits since December 5th, so even if I felt a CheckUser were in order, and I'm not sure that it is, there'd likely be no evidence to investigate. Kelly Martin (talk) 05:07, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

D73733C8-CC80-11D0-B225-00C04FB6C2F5[edit]

Request denied due to lack of evidence of policy violation. Kelly Martin (talk) 20:21, 10 January 2006 (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 below, in a new section.


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Davenbelle&oldid=1160934301"