Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/AirFrance358

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

AirFrance358

 * (already confirmed and blocked)
 * (already indef blocked)
 * Code letter: F
 * Code letter: F
 * Code letter: F

Evidence of disruptive page moves in the Sea of Japan article, recently by : Group 2: Some of these were coordinated attacks, operating in the same time frame as  socks in January below: Group 3: Problematic IP address used in January: Submitted by: Endroit (talk) 17:01, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Toyko: 05:23, 9 March 2008
 * Iambillgates / cut & paste: 15:10, 31 January 2008, 15:10, 31 January 2008
 * Jangjuseong: 03:46, 18 January 2008
 * Fixersfixers / cut & paste: 24 September 2007, 24 September 2007, 03:20, 24 September 2007
 * (already indef blocked)
 * (already indef blocked)
 * (already indef blocked)
 * (Reverse DNS check shows: "Could be forged: hostname ... does not exist")


 * that is also  but unrelated to the rest.
 * Jangjuseong is probably unrelated to the rest.
 * ✅ sockpuppets:, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
 * No technical proof that these accounts are AirFrance358 because AF358 is too old to check; however, it seems likely based on behavior. Thatcher 12:11, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

AirFrance358

 * stale
 * (former master 2) stale
 * (former master 3) stale
 * (former master 4) stale
 * Code letter: C, E, F
 * Supporting evidence: 3RR violation in if sockpuppets:
 * 1st revert: 03:30, 17 January 2008 (Bkinght5) — added "and is often refered to as East Sea"
 * 2nd revert: 10:16, 17 January 2008 (Bkinght5) — added "(or East Sea)"
 * 3rd revert: 15:22, 17 January 2008 (Water Bear 87) — added "and is often refered to as East Sea", etc.
 * 4th revert: 20:14, 17 January 2008 (Water Bear 87) — added "and is often refered to as East Sea", etc.
 * Version being reverted to: 08:21, 16 January 2008] (Bkinght5) — added "(refered often to as East Sea)"
 * Similar revert-warring in in the same time-frame:
 * 14:50, 16 January 2008 (DrinkNaval) — added "(refered often to as East Sea)"
 * 17:50, 17 January 2008 (195.158.204.2) — added "or more commonly known as the"
 * 03:46, 18 January 2008] (Jangjuseong) — moved the article to Sea of Japan (East Sea)
 * 19:17, 18 January 2008] (Appletrees) — added "and is often refered to as East Sea", etc.
 * Version being reverted to: 08:21, 16 January 2008] (Bkinght5) — added "(refered often to as East Sea)"
 * Similar revert-warring in in the same time-frame:
 * 14:50, 16 January 2008 (DrinkNaval) — added "(refered often to as East Sea)"
 * 17:50, 17 January 2008 (195.158.204.2) — added "or more commonly known as the"
 * 03:46, 18 January 2008] (Jangjuseong) — moved the article to Sea of Japan (East Sea)
 * 19:17, 18 January 2008] (Appletrees) — added "and is often refered to as East Sea", etc.


 * Revert-warring across, , , , , , , ,


 * Previous bans for similar revert-warring:
 * , see [block log]
 * , see [block log] (additional evidence: Requests for arbitration/Liancourt Rocks/Evidence)
 * , see Requests for checkuser/Case/Bason0 (additional evidence: Requests for arbitration/Liancourt Rocks/Evidence)
 * , see Requests for checkuser/Case/Etimesoy
 * , see Requests for checkuser/Case/Room218
 * , see Requests for checkuser/Case/Goguryeo
 * , see Requests for checkuser/Case/Appleby
 * , see Requests for arbitration/Liancourt Rocks/Proposed decision

This is a violation of the "Parties reminded" remedy of the Arbcom case Requests for arbitration/Liancourt Rocks. Revert-warring is occurring accross multiple articles, along nationalistic lines (Korea vs. Japan), and there appeared to be no civil discussion in the talk pages in most cases. (For the other side of the revert-war, see Requests for checkuser/Case/KoreanShoriSenyou and Requests for checkuser/Case/Amazonfire.) --Endroit (talk) 17:50, 19 January 2008 (UTC)


 * What is "the violation" done within your report? By your own standard from Japanese nationalistic party? I know you have been always suspected as a sockpuppet master by many people, so it is worth to include you in my report. So where are evidences that I'm the same person of Ecthelion83 and possible 3RR violation. You need to faithfully make differs on your suspected incidents, but no with this untidy mess. And why are you including yujacha article? It is rather much helpful for me to find out sockpuppetry of your party or you. As I see the old cases, I need to dig up the past reports on you as well. Cheers! --Appletrees (talk) 18:15, 19 January 2008 (UTC)


 * To start with, ✅ that and  are socks of, along with  and . Evdince regarding  and  is . Thatcher 14:46, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Please provide evidence of policy violation by Ecthelion83 and Appletrees. Thatcher 15:10, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Addition I suggested Endroit to make differs but he didn't. I think the inclusion of me appears to be arbitrary per Endroit's commnet at his talk page.. He accused me of a sock of Ecthelion83 or banned user User:Appleby due to similar name. The case was actually irrelevant to Sea of Japan and AirFrance358.

I copy and paste these differs from, 's job who vandalized my report on Amazonefire. 4 times 


 * 1th rever 07:56, 7 January 2008 by Ecthelion83
 * 2th rever 22:18, 7 January 2008 by Appletrees
 * 3th rever 05:03, 8 January 2008 by Ecthelion83
 * 4th rever 22:13, 8 January 2008 by Appletrees
 * 5th rever 22:20, 8 January 2008 by Appletrees
 * 6th rever 22:36, 8 January 2008 by Ecthelion83
 * 7th rever 00:51, 9 January 2008 by Ecthelion83
 * 8th rever 20:22, 10 January 2008 by Appletrees
 * 9th rever 20:19, 14 January 2008 by Ecthelion83
 * 10th rever 20:19, 14 January 2008 by Appletrees
 * 10th rever 20:19, 14 January 2008 by Appletrees

Supposed that I'm a sock of the aforementioned people, the articles Endroit provides for evidences are just random and irrelevant from any possible violation on 3RR except Kofun period‎ article. So please check it. I hope everything becomes clear soon. --Appletrees (talk) 15:23, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Evidence of collusion between Appletrees and Ecthelion83 is limited to two articles and one revert violation, so for now, insufficient basis to check. Thatcher 16:12, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * For the record, here is the one 3RR violation in (if sockpuppets):
 * 1st revert: 05:06, 8 January 2008 (Ecthelion83)
 * 2nd revert: 22:13, 8 January 2008 (Appletrees)
 * 3rd revert: 22:20, 8 January 2008 (Appletrees)
 * 4th revert: 22:36, 8 January 2008 (Ecthelion83)
 * 5th revert: 00:51, 9 January 2008 (Ecthelion83)
 * Version being reverted to: 22:19, 7 January 2008 (Appletrees)
 * The other links were for the disruptive revert-wars, in violation of the "Parties reminded" remedy of a recent Arbcom case.--Endroit (talk) 18:01, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * More evidence of meatpuppetry involving Appletrees and :
 * Removed a tag from  (20:24, 18 January 2008).
 * Removed a warning in User talk page from  (17:19, 23 January 2008), leading to this WP:AN discussion.
 * --Endroit (talk) 20:29, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't know what "meat-puppetry" has to do with those diffs. Obviously there are some deep divisions here, but as far as Appletrees and Ecthelion83 are concerned, one 3RR violation and two total articles with possible collusion is insufficient grounds to check/reveal private information.  This can be re-opened if further instances of possible collusion occur. Thatcher 20:52, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * What is the likelihood of Appletrees' being related to the others I listed above (involved in Sea of Japan)?. Is it "inconclusive"?--Endroit (talk) 20:58, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment: Thatcher, why don't you just check on me as his request? I feel annoyed by this false accusation of causing edit warring. If he made diffs when to make this file as my advice, this file would be clear soon. I don't really mind being checked. But his accusation and chide is unbearable. Even though he thinks of someone suspicious, Endroit should not tag sockpupptry template before filing an official report. I don't know why my object to his ill-faith move is called "meat-puppetry". --Appletrees (talk) 21:02, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

that and  are related. Note that the overlap between the two accounts is minor and only recent, so if these accounts are the same person, then they just have to make sure not to overlap again. Of course, coincidence and synchronicity exist, and checkusers can't see through the pipe to really know who is at the other end. Thatcher 01:21, 27 January 2008 (UTC)


 * and have the word "JPOV" that only they use. These two accounts participated in the edit war of Azuchi-Momoyama period.Please confirm it.


 * 1st revert: 08:35, 7 January 2008 (Ecthelion83)
 * 2nd revert: 20:23, 14 January 2008 (Ecthelion83)
 * 3rd revert: 21:19, 14 January 2008 (Appletrees)
 * 4th revert: 05:34, 16 January 2008 (Ecthelion83)

Revert was repeated by these two accounts as for Nihon Shoki.


 * 1st revert: 22:09, 7 January 2008 (Appletrees)
 * 2nd revert: 22:15, 8 January 2008 (Appletrees)
 * 3rd revert: 22:34, 8 January 2008 (Ecthelion83)
 * 4th revert: 00:00, 9 January 2008 (Appletrees)
 * 5th revert: 10:36, 10 January 2008 (Ecthelion83)
 * 6th revert: 17:53, 12 January 2008 (Appletrees)


 * --Orchis29 (talk) 11:49, 28 January 2008 (UTC)


 * The technical investigation is over. The next step would be for someone (preferably an editor with clean hands, actually) to ask an uninvolved admin to review the situation.  Appletrees has a pretty good argument that this is indeed a matter of coincidence, although that argument should be independently reviewed, as should any evidence of disruptive collaboration by the two, also taking into account the much better documented disruption by the other side in this dispute. Thatcher 13:10, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

These compared diffs are exactly time-matched edits by Appletrees (me) and Ecthelion83 on Jan. 8th 2008. Although the time records show up to minute, but I don't see why I have to put up with this false accusation of a sockpuppeter or meatpuppter by whom many editors believe them as disruptive POV editors and possible sockpuppet masters. I didn't make a whole comparison between my edits and the other's, but I think it might clear things up.
 * Evidences against this absurd accusation


 * User:Appletrees 19:08, 8 January 2008 Japanese cruiser Tsushima (rv by 211.3.119.137 (talk) The country name is not peninsula)
 * User:Ecthelion83 19:08, 8 January 2008 Talk:Nihon Shoki →More justification, if you care to read it - new section)


 * User:Appletrees 19:04, 8 January 2008 2004 AFC Asian Cup (rv by 211.3.119.137 (talk) I read the refernce which has no mention about Sinocentrism.)
 * User:Ecthelion83 19:04, 8 January 2008 Talk:Nihon Shoki →Grounds for Caution Notes on Mythological Characters and All Historical Records)
 * User:Ecthelion83 19:04, 8 January 2008 Talk:Nihon Shoki →Grounds for Caution Notes on Mythological Characters and All Historical Records - new section)


 * User:Appletrees 18:59, 8 January 2008 User talk:211.3.119.137 (←Created page with ' .--~ ')
 * User:Ecthelion83 18:59, 8 January 2008 Talk:Empress Jingū →Grounds for caution)

Each table holds all of edits by Appletrees and Ecthelion82 on Jan. 8th 2008. And the indents are overlapped time ranges and bold texts indicate exactly overlapped time. --Appletrees (talk) 15:21, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

FYI, Orchi29, you should be aware of Suspected_sock_puppets reported by the admin. I looked through your contribution history, and not surprisingly your time ranges of editing don't overlap with any accused editors at all. I might add much more to there.--Appletrees (talk)


 * Ecthelion83 and Appletrees are editing from two different computers at some distance from one another. At first, it looked like someone making a careful effort to create two different accounts, but if they have edits that overlap even to within a few minutes of each other, than ❌. Thatcher 17:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

1st series 2nd series These interval times are too short.Amazonfire (talk) 22:31, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Code letter: C, E, F
 * Supporting evidence: 3RR violation in if sockpuppets:
 * Code letter: C, E, F
 * Supporting evidence: 3RR violation in if sockpuppets:
 * 1st revert: 13:38, 15 January 2008 (Appletrees)
 * 2nd revert: 15:23, 15 January 2008 (Appletrees)
 * 3rd revert: 21:47, 15 January 2008 (Appletrees)
 * 4th revert: 22:36, 15 January 2008 (Saranghae honey)
 * 1st revert: 19:28, 2 February 2008 (Saranghae honey)
 * 2nd revert: 21:10, 2 February 2008 (Saranghae honey) with added some other facts.
 * 3rd revert: 21:18, 2 February 2008 (Saranghae honey)
 * 4th revert: 21:26, 2 February 2008 (Appletrees)


 * They are "too short" because we do not agree with your POV pushing. I have little to say about this case. I am confident that checkuser will not find anything because we are two different users with different interests in mind. миражinred  (speak, my child...) 22:54, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

❌ Thatcher 13:42, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) I really don't know what to say to this. I do understand that lots of accounts who appear to have related interests can look as if a single person is behind all of them, but to be honest, this is absurd. I know everyone's finally agreed on the truth of the fact that Appletrees and I are unrelated, but all you would have had to do is check some of the contribs I've made that are unrelated to Korea/Japan topics. Even from my point of view, my other contribs are pretty much all over the place, and they're just my way of trying to clean up this user-generated source of information we call Wikipedia.

And you know what - even though I probably don't have to, I wanted to apologize to Appletrees for overlapping a little and giving these puppets (some might go so far as to call them douchebags and other four-letter-plus words that are inappropriate for civil conversation) any ammunition. I was just trying to correct mistakes where I found them (if you looked at the listing of my edits - the really long one, you'll also see one edit on the "spermatogenesis" article; it's a spelling correction). Too bad that other people use their accounts (or multiple accounts) to cause all sorts of problems and delay the progression of Wikipedia into a reliable, professional-looking, finished (well, for those articles that no longer need editing) product. Ecthelion83 (talk) 12:34, 8 March 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.''