Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Goguryeo

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

Goguryeo

 * Code letter: E.
 * Code letter: E.
 * Code letter: E.
 * Code letter: E.

This is a new request.

From edit history of Sea of Japan. --Endroit 16:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

- Diffs? The Uninvited Co., Inc. 20:32, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

3RR violation, if confirmed:
 * 1st revert: 16:50, 20 November 2006 DanKim
 * 2nd revert: 17:38, 20 November 2006 DanKim
 * 3rd revert: 19:09, 20 November 2006 Hairwizard91
 * 4th revert: 23:10, 20 November 2006 DanKim

Version being reverted to (bolding of East Sea): --Endroit 21:00, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
 * 1st revert: 06:45, 16 November 2006 Dixielander
 * 2nd revert: 15:36, 16 November 2006 Dixielander
 * 3rd revert: 15:44, 16 November 2006 Dixielander
 * ✅ all, (and it looks like the ones confirmed in the previous checkuser were never blocked). Dmcdevit·t 00:48, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

All socks, and some old ones, indef blocked.  Voice -of- All  01:07, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Goguryeo



 * Code letter: E.
 * Code letter: E.
 * Code letter: E.
 * Code letter: E.
 * Code letter: E.
 * Code letter: E.

From edit history of Sea of Japan naming dispute

see also: There article keeps being interfered with by the Korean Users

--NekoNekoTeacher 19:30, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


 * These were a series of vandalism and/or Japanese POV pushing revert war by anonymous Tokyo IP addresses and (and ). Several editors tracked these to maintain article stability. You can see from the article histories and NekoNeko's edit history that he "worked closely" with countless anon reverters on specifically anti-Korean edits, with similar edit comments, and many editors worked to stop them, warn them, and sprotect various articles. More sprotection is probably needed until the attacks stop. Korealist 20:39, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


 * NekoNeko and anon reverters have revert warred and simply ignored consensus like Talk:Toyotomi_Hideyoshi. Also, Room218 and RichardMPT have already been shown to be unrelated . Korealist 21:31, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

This is really long. Could one of the clerks please cut it down to just the essential points? Essjay  ( Talk )  09:13, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Removed the posts of the entire history of the articles. Hope its better now. --Srikeit 10:13, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

. I'm seeing a lot of usernames on that list, including the name of the requesting party, and I'm not entirely clear why. My reading of the summary is that we're looking at NekoNekoTeacher and a bunch of IPs...Who are the other usernames? Essjay  ( Talk )  10:22, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

It returns it to the first request.  A lot of users were added by the IP user.

The request was filed by  to check pro-Korean vandalism and possible sockpuppetry in edit wars over multiple articles. complained about the pro-Japanese side of the edit war, and then added NekoNekoTeacher and a large number of IP addresses. I have reverted to an earlier version of the request above (the "pro-Korean" side, I think) and formatted the "pro-Japanese" side at Requests for checkuser/Case/Goguryeo. Thatcher131 11:48, 3 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Note: The above of is most probably added by  (see Requests for checkuser/Case/Room218) and the part of the request by  has been divided into Requests for checkuser/Case/NekoNekoTeacher. Jjok 14:58, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

✅, as follows:


 * Goguryeo, RichardMPT, TRS81, Korealist, Room218, & DanKim are all the same user. I brought Dmcdevit in on this, and we are both in agreement.
 * NekoNekoTeacher & ShinjukuXYZ are the same user, and are most if not all of the IPs listed.
 * The other users appear to be distinct users.

Q.E.D. Essjay   ( Talk )  10:08, 3 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Please check already archived case Requests for checkuser/Case/Room218. Goguryeo's case should be marged to this case. Thanks.--Gettystein 12:06, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

We have had a similar situation: a huge pro-Korean fleet (Requests for checkuser/Case/Appleby) vs. pro-Japanese silent services (Requests for checkuser/Case/Kamosuke) (though I think some of wrong targets got entangled in all cases..) and application of the same policy, indefinite block for the fleet commander/choose one user account to save for the submariners, or choose each user account to save for both sides, is appropriate. The last case was taken care by User:Nihonjoe. Jjok 16:01, 3 December 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.''