Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Howdypardner

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

Howdypardner



 * Code letter: G


 * Supporting evidence: See a new ANI  report about JIDF for the rationale.  was previously blocked for a year by Jehochman, and a new single-purpose account has appeared, sharing most of Einsteindonut's opinions, to work solely on Jewish Internet Defense Force. See also the original ANI discussion of 5 October that led to the block of Einsteindonut. EdJohnston (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Also add DontbeaPOVPUSHER is an admitted predecessor account of Howdypardner that I blocked for a username block. They made their first edit on 16 November, which was when the account was created. who was blocked at the same time as Einsteindonut had a sock blocked on 13 October and I'm now wondering whether we this is actually Puttyschool as the timing fits from their last sock being outed. See Requests for checkuser/Case/Puttyschool for details of the last chechuser investigation. I'm strongly smelling DUCKS here. Spartaz Humbug! 20:42, 19 November 2008 (UTC)


 * If this request is accepted, could the checkuser also look at ? PhilKnight (talk) 21:00, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I took care of that one already per WP:DUCK. Not sure which one he was but the immediate POV pushing and extreme statements on the user page show that they weren't going to offer anything constructive. Spartaz Humbug! 21:15, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Could I also mention Only one edit from this IP and that to the talk page. The pointers are that it is POVPUSHER/Howdy having forgotten to sign in, but the IP range may fit with one of the suspected puppetmasters. And there is a crytic reference "11/17/08 6:36 by User GR:" at the beginning. Is it worth asking at WP:IPCOLL whether anyone knows who GR might be?--Peter cohen (talk) 22:44, 19 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Looks like we have multiple sock groups; difficult to determine if there is overlap between them.
 * ✅ and, which also matches an IP once used to bother Ashley kennedy3.
 * ✅ and, recently became active again.
 * ✅ and, though inactive for a while.
 * Others ❌ or no comment. – Luna Santin  (talk) 00:30, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I got edit conflicted here. To Luna Santin's results, I'd like to add that I found it that  =  – same city, same ISP, same MO. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 00:38, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Oop. Looks like I was checking User:User:DontFwithTheJIDF without noticing. ;) Something did seem odd about that one. – Luna Santin  (talk) 00:55, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Here comes another one: Admitted sock puppet of a blocked user, declaring war on WP for a minor content question. (See user page.) --Hans Adler (talk) 00:41, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Already confirmed above. – Luna Santin  (talk) 00:55, 20 November 2008 (UTC)


 * All confirmed accounts blocked and tagged. I will leave it up to others to determine what to do with and  seeing as they are both on a 1 year block, maybe post to WP:ANI?  Tiptoety  talk 06:02, 20 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Can I just clarify re ? The equation with * isn't sockpuppetry as Spartaz, the blocking admin, had given POVPUSHER permission to reincarnate. If the block is for those two ids being supposed pupets of each other, it needs rethinking. The history of IP abuse v Ashley kennedy3 is another matter, especially given how Einsteindonut and Ashley clashed over the JIDF.--Peter cohen (talk) 09:45, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I second Peter's request. I am not sure that the block reason "abusing multiple accounts" is technically correct, although it seems clear there was some meat puppetry going on. --Hans Adler (talk) 11:29, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * There is no functional separation between meatpuppetry and sockpuppetry and the link to an IP that has previously been used to harass wikipedia editors is clear enough evidence for us to say against the balance of probabilities that this is one of two blocked users. Having studied this more further yesterday I was prepared to apply a block per WP:DUCK - especially as one of Puttyschools socks was showing evidence of a user who knew how to blur ip addresses to confuse matters. Since the CU had gone in there seemed no reason to hurry along a decision but I am convinced that Tiptoety got it exactly right with the block on Howdypardner. Spartaz Humbug! 13:41, 20 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh I have nothing against his being blocked. It makes for a quieter life. I just wanted to make sure that justice was seen to be done.--Peter cohen (talk) 13:48, 20 November 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.''