Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/AZJustice

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

AZJustice


More editor harassment (over factual, but "undue weight" edits): Fecapedian threatens to call an editor's boss here (see also thread on his site for confirmation of intent: http://www.HISNAMEHERE.net/board/showthread.php?t=18364 "Shitapedia Bounty"). He directly calls 's attention to his campaign here. --Dhartung | Talk 17:38, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * What do you need a checkuser for? Dmcdevit·t 09:00, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't "need" a checkuser, it's pretty obvious. What procedure should I follow when a new sock pops up? --Dhartung | Talk 18:10, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I've gotten no answer and thus no guidance. --Dhartung | Talk 08:36, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Obvious sockpuppets can be blocked without checkuser. Just ask an admin or post to WP:ANI. Dmcdevit·t 22:31, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Fine, I didn't need actual confirmation anyway. Is there no appropriate place to centralize information on a user's sockpuppets (other than opening new WP:SSP cases)? I believe it is inappropriate for me to track that information under my User page, which is not something I would want to do anyway. --Dhartung | Talk 22:41, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Never mind, the rotating socks have become a topic on WP:ANI and sufficient eyes seem to be on the problem now.--Dhartung | Talk 18:35, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

AzJustice (fourth request)
Newest sock of, et al. Pattern of abusive usernames, abusive edits to Don Murphy page and related user talk pages. This sock engaged in debate in Talk for some hours then felt this necessary. -- Dhartung | Talk 08:50, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Code Letter: C
 * Code Letter: C
 * Per the instructions above, please list a code letter. Real96 08:54, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: previous CU turned up a different IP than the above, this may instead match, which may be a Vancouver-area IP rather than SoCal. -- Dhartung | Talk 09:02, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * do all the people who point out you are wrong get treated this way? How is that Start Up going anyway Dan? PanFordThunder 09:14, 20 March 2007 (UTC)


 * ✅ for PanFordThunder. TeaBagPG is only geographically related. --jpgordon&#8711;&#8710;&#8711;&#8710; 15:40, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

AzJustice (third request)

 * Diffs: ,
 * Diffs: ,
 * Diffs: ,


 * Diffs: ,
 * Diffs: ,


 * Code letters: C, F

Groanio's only edits are to articles that other AZJustice socks have edited. He uses the same terms that AZJustice used. See also deleted article Paul Watkins (Manson Family). --BigDT 23:00, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Per C (Ongoing, serious pattern vandalism involving dozens of incidents), list the diffs of Groanio. And, per F, (Evasion of community-based bans or blocks), list the discussion that resulted in the ban or block. Real96 23:54, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * What do you need to see? Just look at the two closed requests under Requests for checkuser/Case/AZJustice.  This is a sock puppeteer who has created a number of abusive sockpuppets.  This user appears to have been created by the same person and I'm seeking confirmation so that he can be blocked. --BigDT 00:51, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Never mind ... the user has been blocked based on contributions under this account.  It would still be nice, though, to find any more socks this person has created. He obviously isn't getting the message. --BigDT 00:53, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Newest sock is named and has already been indef. blocked.-- Dhartung | Talk 02:47, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I only listed 2 diffs for each, I feel that they adequately show the patterns. Both edit the page about Don Murphy and both seem to have a personal vendetta against me. The material they use isn't even original any more. The relevant discussion resulting in the block of AZJustice is below, seeing as he was blocked as a result of the below checkusers. Both are already indefblocked, but I think this could be used to further the block of AZJustice. I also wouldn't be suprised if the results are negative, I have reason to believe that Donny boy is shooting in Vancouver and therefore the I.P could be different. Philip   Gronowski  Contribs  03:04, 14 March 2007 (UTC)


 * ✅ that AZ matches Groanio. TeaBagPG is not IP-related. --jpgordon&#8711;&#8710;&#8711;&#8710; 04:13, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, he has a forum full of acolytes. -- Dhartung | Talk 05:43, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

AZJustice (second request)




See below request (archived). — Preceding unsigned comment added by BigDT (talk • contribs) 15:44, February 28, 2007

that TZmaniac is a sockpuppet of AZJustice. Mackensen (talk) 18:05, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

AZJustice





 * Code letter: C

The first three are apparant attack accounts that exist for the purpose of harassing. All three have been indefinitely blocked. They appear to be one in the same with AZJustice, though I am not positive on that point. If possible, please (1) confirm whether AZJustice is the same user and (2) locate any IPs or other attack accounts this individual may have created. Thank you. --BigDT 06:13, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

This should go on a request page. Essjay  ( Talk )  09:59, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Moved from IP check section. See original diff from WP:RFCU. – Luna Santin  (talk) 10:05, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

✅:



All the above are the same user. Essjay  ( Talk )  10:37, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - the block log for says that this user was blocked as a sock of .  In Requests for checkuser/Case/ColScott, it was suspected, but no evidence was found, that ColScott was .  Spawnopedia also seemed to not get along with .  AZJustice appeared four days after Spawnopedia was blocked.  Would there be anything gained from re-examining the previous check against Spawnopedia and ColScott to potentially find other socks and/or open proxies?  Using the transitive property (ColScott=PimaMental=AZJustice et al=Spawnopedia), it may be that this individual has other IPs at his or her disposal. (Or am I just going out on a limb?) --BigDT 00:20, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment is accused of being a sockpuppet of ColScott in this SSP case: Suspected sock puppets/ColScott (2nd), for whatever that's worth. --Akhilleus (talk) 05:53, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I apologize if this is not the correct place to bring this up, but showed up today placing the Phil Gronowski, Portrait of a Sad Young Man link on a couple pages, and mentioned Phil with his other 2 edit summaries. --Onorem 14:47, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Blocked. I have added checkuser links for TZmaniac, ColScott, and Spawnopedia below in the hopes that we can find/block more socks/open proxies.--BigDT 15:44, 28 February 2007 (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.''