Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/74.208.16.55

''The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a Request for checkuser. Please do not modify it .''

74.208.16.55



 * Code letter: F


 * Supporting evidence:, particularly . Antelan talk  20:45, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
 * This is a pretty obvious IP sock, and almost certainly that of Davkal given his recurring idees fixes. I'm prepared to block it, but I'd like the opinion of someone more technically savvy than I (e.g. a checkuser) as to whether this is a proxy which should be hardblocked for a prolonged period of time. MastCell Talk 01:15, 6 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Open proxies should be listed at WP:OP for checking; it seems likely as the IP is on a couple of blacklists. There are no registered users.  If the IP acts like Davkal you don't need checkuser to block it. Thatcher 01:53, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help. Antelan talk  02:00, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi, just a suggestion here. For those of us who are late to the party, could someone please explain what "acts like Davkal" means?  Perhaps a list of behaviors could be added to Category:Suspected_Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Davkal?  I was recently asked to "block a Davkal sockpuppet", and I had no clue what was being asked.  However, it seems that to some other admins, this is tribal knowledge.  So perhaps could some of this be shared?  Thanks, Elonka 18:05, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't know how active WP:LTA is, and whether that would just be providing recognition, but it probably makes sense to compile something along these lines. On the other hand, a few quirks are probably WP:BEANSy enough that we should discuss them off-wiki. MastCell Talk 19:17, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Also you don't need a CU to determine if an IP is a proxy or not. Just use some of the tools to do that yourself. I'd say block on behaviour if necessary.
 * unless there is a more compelling reason. ++Lar: t/c 00:49, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

''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.''