Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/ForestH2

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

ForestH2





 * Code letter: Other (please see below).

Please see Requests for adminship/Trebor Rowntree. The allegation has been made, which I tentatively do not credit, that Trebor Rowntree is a sockpuppet or multiple account of ForestH2, which was the sockpuppeteer of multiple accounts revealed at Requests for checkuser/Case/ForestH2. Among the accounts blocked in that sock investigation was 72.134.40.171, which is a RoadRunner account resolving to California (RoadRunner itself is headquartered in Virginia). Checkuser is requested for the limited purpose of confirming whether Trebor Rowntree edits from the United Kingdom, as reflected on his former userpage and external evidence, or from the United States. Priority attention is requested in view of the effect the pending allegations are having on the RfA. Newyorkbrad 03:49, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I would like to add that it might be useful to compare Trebor Rowntree and Carpet9; I've already said that I believe that these two are the same user (and also ForestH2). Specific edit-by-edit comparisons may be found on the talk page of that RFA.  Ral315 » 03:58, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Carpet9 added to request above. Newyorkbrad 04:00, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

✅ for Carpet9; ❌ for Trebor Rowntree. Dmcdevit·t 04:16, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The whole purpose of this discussion was to see if I edit from the United States, California than from the UK? Pathetic. Carpet 15:29, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

A new request: Can you check Squirepants101? Carpet9 appears to be admitting that he's this user. I'm not sure that I'm seeing the connection; however, at worst, it would clear Squirepants101 of any connection. Ral315 » 07:33, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

❌. Dmcdevit·t 07:44, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

ForestH2
Already confirmed:

To be checked:

More sockpuppets: I'd like to request a checkuser look at these, particularly those that are still editing. I understand the whole "checkuser is not fishing" thing, but providing specific reasoning on every one would be extremely time consuming. Basically, they all edit articles relating to children's shows, particularly SpongeBob SquarePants, Little Einsteins, and Ned's Declassified School Survival Guide. If more specific evidence is needed, I'm happy to provide it. Ral315 (talk) 07:32, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Please list the user names on this page using the checkuser template. Discussion moved to talk page. Thatcher131 07:43, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

✅ some. I have blocked the underlying IPs and several of the usernames. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 15:42, 27 September 2006 (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.''

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

ForestH2



 * (admitted alternate account)



(Please note more names at User:Ral315/ForestH2 sockpuppets, as well as a request for more checks.)

This RFCU was initiated because of the now-withdrawn RfA of Sugarpine (Requests for adminship/Sugarpine). This user admitted to being ForestH2, which is all well and good, but the first few supports made me wonder. The names Sugarpine, Streamwater, and RainbowSwirl strike me as very similar in their inspiration and combination of words. Add to this that RainbowSwirl's only edits have been to create a userpage first thing (so that it's not a redlink?) and then to support a few adminships, including that of Sugarpine. Add to this the similarity of Streamwater's and RainbowSwirl's userpages, and I felt compelled to request a checkuser, after giving Sugarpine/ForestH2 a chance to admit to it quietly. Mak (talk)  03:29, 21 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I will be interested to see where this goes however I am leaving Wikipedia due to this. I may check in to update status on this though. Sug  ar  pin  e  t/  c  03:32, 21 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't want to make this too long, and I don't know what sort of cross-wiki powers you have, but RfA on Simple at almost exactly the same time might also be of interest. Mak (talk)  04:04, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

I am an admin over on simple: and I recently blocked five user accounts there that belong to this same person. I would recommend STRONGLY that you check out User:Treebark and User:Carmelapple as being related to ForestH2. In addition to these, two brand-new accounts were created just to vote in is RFA over there on simple:. -- Netoholic @ 05:03, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Checkuser rights are not inheirently cross-wiki. Stewards of the wikimedia foundation can perform cross-wiki checkuser if they so choose. Or if collaboration can be made with a checkuser there and here, they could possibly connect accounts together. (Take note that I myself am just an editor and do not hold checkuser rights, so don't ask me) --Kevin_b_er 05:05, 21 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I know it's not crosswiki, but the Treebark and Carmelapple accounts are also duplicated here on en:. Simple does not have anyone with CheckUser, but then, I've already blocked all these socks over there.  -- Netoholic @ 15:04, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

I have no idea what made you think I am related to ForestH2 or Sugarpine. I just supported his RFA, what's wrong with that? Anybody can support him without having to go through a checkuser right? Or...was his RFA so silly, that anybody that did support him would have to go through a checkuser? Why wasn't that on the nomination page? I have no clue wether the others are related but I AM NOT. Carmelapple lives in Canada so I don't think he's related BUT you might want to add GrasslandT to your search because Daniel5127 reported a checkuser on them earlier this year; saying they were both reverting the same thing on one page. Somewhere on WP:ANI. You may also wish to know that all the users have been blocked on simple which is completly unneed...unless they were socks. How could RainbowSwirl be even in it? She/he only has a few edits.... Stream water  14:32, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

✅ on ENWP except in regard to User:Carmelapple for which data are inconclusive. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 20:03, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much. I don't know the intricacies of checkuser, but is it possible to tell whether there are other sock accounts lurking? The number and the timing of these sockpuppets, in addition to this user's last comments after this RFCU was filed make me believe that they will continue to edit Wikipedia, and would probably have no compunction about using sockpuppets again/some more. Mak (talk)  02:18, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Makemi - keep watch over ForestH2's IP address (maybe block it for a while) - Special:Contributions/72.134.40.171. -- Netoholic @ 02:26, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Why was Carmelapple blocked anyway? Powers T 15:07, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Because a steward confirmed that he was a sockpuppet. See above conversation. Mak (talk)  19:36, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm looking, and all I see is that the data on Carmelapple were inconclusive. Can you be a bit more specific?  Powers T 16:10, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I talked to User:Danny who used information from both simple and here to confirm that Carmelapple is a sockpuppet of ForestH2, which should not be at all surprising at this point, since he has been lieing about his sockpuppets even after he was caught. Mak (talk)  16:13, 23 September 2006 (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.''