Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Giovanni Giove

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

Giovanni Giove

 * Code letter: F
 * User:Giovanni Giove is banned:
 * The three alleged socks (one of whom, Olitwist, is inactive) are all clustered around the articles Lady Nicholas Windsor, Giovanni Luppis and Marco Lupis.
 * GG and all of the three accounts are/were frequent contributors to Giovanni Luppis.
 * GG and all of the three accounts infrequently use edit summaries, but when they do, "fix" is used a disproportionate number of times:
 * GG - ; there are many others, see
 * Holytrully -
 * Nosferamus - ; there are many others, see
 * Olitwist -
 * Code letter: F
 * User:Giovanni Giove is banned:
 * The three alleged socks (one of whom, Olitwist, is inactive) are all clustered around the articles Lady Nicholas Windsor, Giovanni Luppis and Marco Lupis.
 * GG and all of the three accounts are/were frequent contributors to Giovanni Luppis.
 * GG and all of the three accounts infrequently use edit summaries, but when they do, "fix" is used a disproportionate number of times:
 * GG - ; there are many others, see
 * Holytrully -
 * Nosferamus - ; there are many others, see
 * Olitwist -
 * Code letter: F
 * User:Giovanni Giove is banned:
 * The three alleged socks (one of whom, Olitwist, is inactive) are all clustered around the articles Lady Nicholas Windsor, Giovanni Luppis and Marco Lupis.
 * GG and all of the three accounts are/were frequent contributors to Giovanni Luppis.
 * GG and all of the three accounts infrequently use edit summaries, but when they do, "fix" is used a disproportionate number of times:
 * GG - ; there are many others, see
 * Holytrully -
 * Nosferamus - ; there are many others, see
 * Olitwist -

and the IPs
 * Olitwist reverting "to the previous version of Giovanni Giove"
 * GG posting on Olitwist's talkpage, getting a quick affirmative reply
 * Holytrully and Nosferatus tag-teaming at Lady Nicholas Windsor
 * GG was in the habit of saying things were "better" a certain way
 * As is Holytrully

and the IPs
 * GG and the three accounts are strongly focussed on the Italian identity of people born in what is now Croatia. See and many others
 * New user Holytrully is not a "new" user, making his/her first ever user talk page post a vandalism warning
 * New user D'Agrò's first contribution was to reinsert an image, uploaded by GG , with the very blunt Giovesque edit summary Are you able to read?

Regarding the IP addresses:

and by the IPs
 * GG's last known IP address (a bit stale, I know) was Special:Contributions/84.220.68.146, which WHOIS locates to Cagliari.
 * All of the listed IPs also locate to Cagliari.
 * 78.13.167.236 also uses fix or fixed as an edit summary:
 * Some classic Gioveisms in talk page edits: Insults: ; using tx instead of 'thanks'
 * ops (meaning 'oops') as edit summary by GG
 * The IPs mainly contribute to History of Alto Adige-South Tyrol and Tyrol where GG was a contributor only once,, but GG contributed to the articles on Cultural assimilation and Italian irridentism  as do the IPs
 * Comments


 * Many thanks to have added me to this Happy brigade! I'm sorry, but I'm not "Giovani Giove", I'm not him. Ask for a CU. --D&#39;Agrò (talk) 15:25, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
 * What's a CU, D'Agrò? Please explain. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 15:48, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
 * CU - Check User .. too difficult to understand? --D&#39;Agrò (talk) 21:51, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
 * No, GG, very easy to understand, for people like you and I who have been around Wikipedia for a while. But for purported newbies like your creation 'D'Agrò'... well such knowledge would be surprising. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 05:53, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
 * But, Is this a Circus?: AlasdairGreen27 wrote: "New user D'Agrò's first contribution was to reinsert an image, uploaded by GG "... absurd!
 * The image I reiserted IS NOT the same uploaded by that "Giovani Giove" ! --D&#39;Agrò (talk) 23:02, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
 * BTW, from where are you got the idea that I'm a "newby" on Wikipedia? Im I stated that somewhere? Did you ever thought that I could be on Wikipedia from longtime on some others wikipedia-projects and/or languages? You, AlasdairGreen27 (talk), had included me in that "Happy brigade providing FAKE AND WRONG evidences, as I already proved and wrote to you in your talk page here. Until now, you weren't so honest to admit that your "evidences" to include me in that "suspected sockpuppetry" are wrong (in case you were in good faith) or fakes (if you were in bad faith...) and to  recognise that and remove them. IMHO you are only trying to intimidate me (without any results, thought) to be free to erase entire section on the Giovanni Luppis page and pushing to force your POV.--D&#39;Agrò (talk) 22:41, 11 September 2008 (UTC) Suspected sock puppets/Giovanni Giove (6th) (section)


 * This case should be considered a part of the currently open RFCU and not taken separately from it. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 18:16, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Interest areas: article [|Italian irredentism]. Similar edit pattern can be seen in adding of new rows, so it's hard to follow what's been changed in the text. It looks like whole paragraph was changed, but there're smaller changer in whole paragraph. Because of new rows, whole paragraph is in red, so any user checking behind him has to read whole paragraph, instead comparing actual changes. The other thing is attitude: he presents contemporary Italian irredentism as some kind of imagination of Croatian media ("Croatian sources today, still claim for a supposed Italian Irredentism"), as something that actually doesn't exist. This IP openly told that (edit summary: "deleted propaganda: this article is about Irredentism and not about what few Croat newspaper present as irredentism"). Similar edits had Brunodam ("Some Croatian and Slovenian nationalistic organizations and institutions complain that Italy - in their opinions...". This edit  reminds me on Giove's attitudes. IP-user changed "stamp with a photo of the Croatian city of Rijeka" with "remember the former Italian city of Fiume (today Rijeka)". The other things that gave me ground to believe that this is Giove are the edit summaries : use of words like "source, corrected controversial claim, proper, unjustified, fix, nonsense" and his typical short sentences (no use of capital letters and the beginning of summary). Please, compare special:contributions of Giovanni Giove and of those users from IP-range 78.13.16x.xx. The pattern is recognasable and typical. Giove had aversion towards Croat names of Croatian littoral cities. This IP done the same (changed Rijeka to Fiume). Similar habit had infinitely blocked user Brunodam. Area of interest and the same word used comment in summary "nonsense" by these two accounts,. Same remark about translation "gia italiana" made these two users: Cherso ("even if the correct meaning in Italian syntaxis is "previously Italian") and this IP  (" formerly Italian"). Greetings, Kubura (talk) 10:05, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Supporting evidence:: Very similar behaviour of Giovanni Giove. He has similar areas of interest, though he behaves this time more cleverly. Since Giovanni Giove is the banned users, we must remove any suspicion.


 * There is a considerable overlap between this CU application and the currently open Suspected_sock_puppets/Giovanni_Giove_(6th). Some of the IPs are mentioned in both. I would propose that these two matters be merged (I don't know how to go about doing that) or that, at least, the evidence presented there should be taken into consideration when the checkuser is reviewing this case. Many thanks, AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 09:27, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

I have blocked and tagged the first four named accounts based on behavior. Checkuser may want to continue checking the IPs, but hopefully the workload here is now reduced. Jehochman Talk 18:39, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Blocked

Giovanni Giove and Olitwist are stale. ✅ = ✅  =  all four are the same person. There is no registered user obviously associated with the IP edits, it is a different ISP than the named editors. The named editors are using an Italian mobile phone service, so there is no way to prove or disprove a link to the IP editor(s). There is no relationship between D'Agro et al and the previous batch (Generalmesse etc) so even though there is socking in both cases, they are probably different groups of socks. — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 02:56, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

blocked and tagged, all others have already been blocked. Tiptoety talk 02:59, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Giovanni Giove

 * Suspected sockpuppets

an IP probably associated with the above

likely socks but to few edits to prove (yet):

Code letter: F and G

--noclador (talk) 15:10, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Supporting evidence: Above listed users are socks of either User:Brunodam or banned User:Giovanni Giove. I believe them to be all socks of Giovanni Giove, User:AlasdairGreen27 believes them to be socks of Brunodam. Reasons, Evidence and Diff. links can be found at Suspected sock puppets (the 5th such case dealing with the many socks of Giovanni Giove) and Suspected sock puppets/Brunodam & here. If in the long list of users above one IP begins with 4.231... than it is Brunodam. I believe the above not to be the socks of Brunodam, but to be the socks of Giovanni Giove, as Brunodam's favorite topics are Italian irredentism related, while Giovanni Giove and all of the above try to include fascist propaganda in articles about WWII battles with Italian participation and to manipulate articles regarding the Falkland War. Anyhow: the above are clearly socks of one editor using them to circumvent a ban and therefore a checkuser is needed.


 * added IP 123.2.111.245 for the reasons please see: Suspected sock puppets/Giovanni Giove 2nd. --noclador (talk) 13:16, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Reason: Everything is explained at Suspected sock puppets/Giovanni Giove 2nd. Two users have expressed doubt regarding the connection of Giovanni Giove to the other accounts, but there is little doubt that Generalmesse has used sockpuppets, and the question is which of the listed accounts are his and which are not.

Accounts found to be sockpuppets of Generalmesse should be indef-blocked. Yechiel (Shalom) Editor review 20:32, 29 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Can I ask a question regarding




 * Was this editor included?  Judging by the reams of protest, on Suspected sock puppets/Giovanni Giove 2nd, he's either an innocent caught up in this, or the same user protesting loudly.  However, the personal attacks toward User:noclador make me a little suspicious.  Justin talk 08:00, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Why are there no results for 5 of the as likely socks listed users? Namely: User:Captainantoniocorelli, User:Romaioi, User:Regione, User:Ronpillao and User:Ferruccio Vio. Looking at users User:Regione, User:Ronpillao and User:Ferruccio Vio I am pretty sure that they are most definitly part of the sock circus too: i.e. Ronpillaos continuation of a edit war Generalmesse and Radio Berlin began at First Battle of El Alamein or the edit comments by Regione that are very similar to those of the other socks; all this points in my opinion to them being socks too. And then there are User:Captainantoniocorelli & User:Romaioi - the first seems to be a sock in store for later, when all the others are banned and the second, well... he protests his innocence (pretty fanatically in my view) and just to be sure I would like to know if he is or is not related to the aforementioned socks. Also I would like to know from where the IP addresses behind the socks are: South America, Italy or Australia? thanks, --noclador (talk) 08:25, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Source
 * 144.138.1.184 is Australia, Telstra Pty Ltd
 * 123.2.111.245 is Australia, unknown, possibly a net cafe
 * 121.73.14.43 is New Zealand, but also Telstra
 * 144.138.1.71 is Australia, Telstra Pty Ltd
 * I should add geographical information may not mean much if they're using a open proxy. Justin talk 08:55, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks Justin, what I'm interested in is the IP's behind the socks - where these are from. I believe them to be Australian too. --noclador (talk) 09:55, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * these are 2 cases I've merged, the list looked identical. See Requests for checkuser/Case/Brunodam & Giovanni Giove. -- lucasbfr  talk 07:17, 30 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Brunodam is ❌; Giovanni Giove is too old to check so I can't say for sure that these are his sockpuppets or someone else's, but
 * ✅ these are the same user




 * ✅ these are the same user and the same as RadioBerlin et al.


 * ✅ these are the same user and the same as RadioBerlin et al.


 * Captainantoniocorelli and Ronpillao are.
 * Michaelsweatt and Rasputin65 are ❌.
 * Regione and Ferruccio Vio are too old to check, and User:Romaioi is ❌, being, as best I can determine, on a different ISP and 4000 km away. Thatcher 10:51, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Giovanni Giove





 * Code letter: B, G, possible E

Giovanni Giove was few time blocked because of 3RR violations. Recently, he got the ARBCOM penalty (1RR with obligatory explanation on the talkpage, as a result of Requests_for_arbitration/Dalmatia) of limited editing. These accounts've shown similar interest (Croatian Littoral areas, mostly Dalmatia and persons) as Giovanni Giove, as well as showing similar "knowledge" and propagandist attitudes. Some of these appeared with same edits (literally same words, attitudes, style and typos, like here ) when 3RR violation was about to occur) - like user RomanoDD (Special:Contributions/RomanoDD. He was especially active on 22-27 Apr 2007, with several reverts on article Jakov Mikalja (several times making 2RR on few articles, nigh-on-3RR, cleverly evading 3RR or forcing the opponent to make 3RR violation). That's why is the codeletter E. After 27 Apr 2007, he disappeared, like a forgotten sockpuppet. User London321 has started an article with the title that was a matter of dispute. Also, that user was active for a while and ...dissappeared, like it's the case with forgotten/used sockpuppets. His contributions Special:Contributions/London321. Some of these have registered solely for the purpose of support (later, these began to edit, to hide their intentions, like user Cherso. See his edits Special:Contributions/Cherso. He began earlier editing the article, than making a userpage. Also, he's editing like a user who's not a newcomer to Wikipedia. Here, he refers in Italian to Giove, expressing him his solidarity ("by us exiled Dalmatians", Giove's favourite topic). Possibly the latter three are accounts of some previously banned users (user:GiorgioOrsini, user:NovaNova). Also, there's a possibility that it might be the person with whome problematic user Giovanni Giove and/or banned user GiorgioOrsini are in contact. Though, in that case, it's not possible to do anything, because than it's a 3rd person. Also, it's possible that Giove, Orsini or their lookalikes act from another computer, from other location (public library, faculty, internet club...). The IP check might not be helpful anymore, but the edit pattern and vocabulary and typos etc. are easy to recognise. Although I've wrote several times above "forgotten sockpuppet", these aren't necessary "forgotten", but probably "currently inactive", or in "sleep mode", as "reserve accounts". When necessary (a block, or some other need to evade ARBCOM remedy or other wiki-rule), this might woke up. So, because these accounts are possible candidates for code letter B (and "E"), because they don't have limitation or other remedies issued by the arbitration committee. Sincerely, Kubura (talk) 10:26, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

More about user Cherso. This text in edits and pseudoscientific approach is as same as in Giove's edits. Also, "Cherso" defends Giove's contribution (POV) in this change. Giove must explain his edits, according to ARBCOM. Cherso not. I suspect that Giove uses this account as a sockpuppet, to evade ARBCOM's decisions. Kubura (talk) 10:59, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Things got more serious. Giovanni Giove recently got a ban from editing Wikipedia. Kubura 09:27, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I've added this IP-address, per. He's banned user, so this'd be reported. On this edit, he signs himself as "Giovanni Giove". Kubura (talk) 09:09, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment: What is this supposed to achieve? and  haven't edited since March and April respectively, and are neither blocked nor banned anyway;  was checkusered below and lives nowhere near Giovanni Giove;  was checkusered at Suspected sock puppets/Giovanni Giove (3rd), with a verdict of "unrelated"; and  is quite obviously Giovanni given its edits ("my ban", etc: ). – Steel 18:06, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Just to be sure. These could be sockpuppets in the "sleep" mode. Kubura (talk) 09:35, 6 December 2007 (UTC)


 * - old accounts are most likely stale anyway - A l is o n  ❤ 21:12, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Giovanni Giove





 * Code letter: G

Checkuser evidence is needed for more proof of sock puppetry. Below is a list of evidence I've gathered which I believe warrants a checkuser on the accounts named &mdash; King Ivan  07:16, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

This user has been disrupting numerous articles for quite a long time now. I believe that GiorgioOrsini, Giovanni Giove and recently NovaNova are all the same person. They use the same style of writing (grammar mistakes, spacing, etc.) and they all have the same subject of interest which are Dalmatia-related articles and removing or vandalising every mention of Croatia in them. I have looked around their history pages and I have found striking similarities in their reverts. I found out that these two members have been involved in numerous edit-wars where they have "collaborated" to such a degree that it took my attention right away. Looking closer I found out that they in fact made exactly the same methods and when there wasn't one there was the other doing the same revert and replying in the same manner. Some of the articles included are: List of Croatians, Giovanni Luppis, Francesco Patrizi, Benedetto Cotrugli, Andrea Meldolla and so on. If these are all accounts of the same person (which I am convinced they are) he is also guilty for vote stacking on as can be seen on Talk:Francesco_Patrizi, this page can also be observed for striking similarity in argumentation of these supposedly two people (it is in fact identical). Recently it seems he introduced another sockpuppet at Giulio Clovio named NovaNova, this article is also where GiorgioOrsini is involved in a edit-war for very long time and now he obviously introduced another sock to help himself. In short due to long-term disruption, vandalism, incivility and extremly striking similarity in edit style, argumentation and exactly the same interests I am forced to request an indefinite block or ban of this user and all of his accounts.

It is certain to assume that Giovanni Giove is the master account, as it is the oldest account out of the three. This person then created his other two accounts in a short amount of time - during November 2006. GiorgioOrsini and NovaNova are his two accounts which are used for rampant edit warring, and personal attacks, and they are also used to create the illusion that their is more than one person who holds these opinions. To get a taste of this report, please see that after a user gave him a legitimate warning, Orsini removed it and was uncivil. Also take a look at this threat/attack.

Looking at each user's contributions, it is highly likely that GiorgioOrisni was created by Giovanni Giove to create the illusion of support for his views on the article "Juraj Dalmatinac". Another point to notice is that GiorgioOrisni's first ever edit was to the talk page of Juraj Dalmatinac, where he immediately started repeating the same words spoken by Giovanni Giove, and immediately engaged in edit warring over that article - quite an unusual thing for a genuine new user to do. Both accounts edit the same articles - often edit warring with other users, most notably on, and other articles of famous Croatian/Italian figures. Both account seem to have the single purpose of removing all references to Croatia or Croats on articles of famous historical figures, and claiming them as exclusively "Italian", while calling all other views "pseudo-historical". Both account use the same style of language in talk pages and edit summaries. The account GiorgioOrsini is also guilty of vandalism, by removing people from article lists and then adding words such as "falsifier" to describe someone. It can clearly be seen that these users are in fact the same person.

Name changes/removals
All three users constantly move pages from Croatian names to Italian ones. All three remove sections of articles regarding name controversies and such - and always use the same or similar "reasoning" (e.g, "removed name nonsense", or "pseudo-historical nonsense".
 * Diffs:


 * Giovanni Giove -, , , , ,.
 * GiorgioOrsini -, , , , , , , , , ,.
 * NovaNova -,.

Neo-Nazism
In "their" mad fanaticism, "they" frequent the articles Neo-Nazism and Neo-Nazism in Croatia, and try to insert inflammatory POV, and more lies and falsifications.
 * Diffs:


 * GiorgioOrsini -, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,.
 * NovaNova -, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,.

Giulio Clovio
The Giulio Clovio article is a frequent target of this one user's heavy POV edit warring. He frequently removes references and text referring to the man as a Croat. On the talk page, and in edit summaries they are always uncivil, and usually use personal attacks.
 * Diffs:


 * Giovanni Giove -, ,.
 * GiorgioOrsini -, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,.
 * NovaNova -, , , , , , ,.

Blocks
All three have been blocked at least once for disruption, personal attacks, edit warring etc. Giove obviously has the most blocks as this is the master account. ,,.


 * . None of them are IP-related. Giorgio and Nova are geographically very close to each other. Giove is not even hemispherically related. --jpgordon&#8711;&#8710;&#8711;&#8710; 15:15, 5 April 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.''