Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Iamandrewrice

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

Iamandrewrice (2008-05-01)



 * Code letter: F
 * Supporting evidence:
 * Ban discussion for Iamandrewrice.
 * Suspected sock puppets/Iamandrewrice (2nd)
 * Code letter: F
 * Supporting evidence:
 * Ban discussion for Iamandrewrice.
 * Suspected sock puppets/Iamandrewrice (2nd)
 * Suspected sock puppets/Iamandrewrice (2nd)

Evidence at the latest SSP page links (in my view) banneduser Iamandrewrice with Gozitancrabz, showing that he's evading his ban again. Not only is there a similarity in areas of interest (particularly Maltese surnames) but the IP addreses used by Gozitancrabz are from the same ISP provider as IPs identified in previous checkuser submissions. I request a checkuser to help determine links between the accounts and if there are any other socks hiding out there. BencherliteTalk 16:55, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Having been involved in previous sagas with this user, may I just point out that I don't think it is iamandrewrice. The new user has a far better usage of the English language, for one George The Dragon (talk) 17:10, 1 May 2008 (UTC) On second thoughts, the style of argument used in the constituent country debate, and the lapse into "reformed English" is very reminiscent of IAR George The Dragon (talk) 17:44, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I'd also add that the name is a Maltese reference. Iamandrewrice claimed to have Maltese ancestry, and a "Gozitan" is someone from the Maltese island of Gozo George The Dragon (talk) 17:47, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, that was one of the things I mentioned on the SSP report; also his creation of Maltese name with his first edit, similar to editing by user:Crystalclearchanges, a confirmed IAAR sock. BencherliteTalk 18:01, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I've been heavily involved with Iamandrewrice in past incidents as this page will show. Unfortunately it does appear to be him. The persistent refusal to accept was is being said and his editing style in general seems to match as do the IPs. If Alison has time to look at this it would be great. I hope I'm wrong though and apologies if I am. That said, I don't have the best experiences with AGF and this guy so I fully support this request. EconomicsGuy (talk) 17:24, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Gozitancrabz has been indef blocked as a result of the SSP report. EconomicsGuy (talk) 18:24, 2 May 2008 (UTC)


 * ✅ - A l is o n  ❤ 20:10, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * (Recusing as clerk, speaking in a non-clerk capacity) I have already blocked Gozitancrabz, a few hours before this case was ran, on the basis of my conclusions at Suspected sock puppets/Iamandrewrice (2nd); this technical evidence has reinforced those findings, and I will update the sock puppet pages as necessary. Additionally, I have not blocked the IP addresses as yet: I shall try and hunt down a CU and consult therein. Anthøny  20:20, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Iamandrewrice (2008-02-28)



 * Code letter: F
 * Supporting evidence: Ban discussion for Iamandrewrice.
 * Code letter: F
 * Supporting evidence: Ban discussion for Iamandrewrice.

Case has been filed at SSP and, subsequently, AN/I. Crystalclearchanges has denied being Iamandrewrice, and has also expressed a willingness to undergo checkuser (directly confirmed). Considering the gravity of the suspicion (given the extensive history of disruptions and ban evasions by the sock puppeteer), I feel this case should be handled through a checkuser. Ayla (talk) 22:51, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I have private correspondance of importance in this case. For now though, consider how a new user can e-mail a throw-away e-mail account set up only to e-mail Iamandrewrice when I didn't have e-mail enabled when it was sent tonight. EconomicsGuy (talk) 23:03, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * 88.108.0.0/17, to which 88.108.106.86 is a part, is already known to be used by Iamandrewrice. See lower down. --Yamla (talk) 23:04, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Do 89.241.246.10 and 89.241.219.79 fall within the confirmed ranges as well? They're (almost) conclusively linked to Crystalclearchanges per and Talk:Malta. Ayla (talk) 23:16, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * 89.241.246.10, confirmed as Crystalclearchanges, is part of 89.241.192.0/18, confirmed as part of Iamandrewrice's block. Similarly, 89.241.219.79.  Pretty hard, at this point, to believe CCC's claim of not being an Iamandrewrice sock.  --Yamla (talk) 23:31, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Crystalclearchanges could argue that the common ISP is a matter of coincidence. Maybe the checkuser could be performed by searching for overlapping editing times with one of the recent confirmed socks (using an identical IP address). Ayla (talk) 23:45, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * The checkusers have some other information available to them as well. Still, the fact that an account suspected to be a sock of a banned vandal coincidentally happens to use the exact same ISP and has a very similar editing style is almost enough by itself under WP:DUCK.  --Yamla (talk) 23:58, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Seems like you're right.
 * Iamandrewrice: "the majority of media content that Malta receives is actually in Italian", "Italian still remains used in much of Maltese society in every day life"
 * 89.241.246.10: "Malta is referred to as part of Latin Europe due to the vast use of Italian, especially in the Media, with many television channels being in Italian"
 * 89.241.219.79: "Italian is a compulsary subject at secondary school"

Having the same ISP and same topics of interest is suspicious enough. What makes the connection conclusive, however, are the identical cases of fact distortion. I had already notified 89.241.246.10 that he/she was "misleadingly inflating the importance of the Italian language in Malta", a dispute which continued at Talk:Malta. What is important to note is that the edits performed by the user are erroneous. Italian is not widely used in Maltese society: only 36% of the population report that they speak it fluently, and only 2% use it as a first language of choice (see Malta for sources). There are no Italian television stations in Malta: the Italian channels originate from Italy itself, and arrive in Malta due to its proximity. Finally, Italian is not compulsory at secondary school: only 51% study it as a first foreign language (Malta).

I filed the checkuser request because I was not familiar with the Iamandrewrice case, and the evidence in the AN/I discussion did not appear convincing enough to me. However, I no longer find it is necessary now. Ayla (talk) 00:55, 29 February 2008 (UTC)


 * As a side note: To be fair to Crystalclearchanges, the Talk:Malta dispute was resolved amicably, and he/she agreed to the removal of all the erroneous information when presented with sources demonstrating otherwise. To my knowledge, the Crystalclearchanges account never exhibited any uncivil behaviour or seriously disruptive editing (excluding the propaganda pushing, but even then, the user might have been genuinely misinformed). Notwithstanding, this should not influence the sock puppetry outcome – I just wanted to give some positive recognition where it was due. Ayla (talk) 01:58, 29 February 2008 (UTC)


 * As I wrote above (some people seem to have missed it) I have e-mail turned off here yet I was e-mailed by Crystalclearchanges after the ANI thread on an e-mail address used only to talk with Iamandrewrice... Even disregarding the private correspondance that policy won't let me post on-wiki that should tell you who that account is. That said, please run the checkuser anyway to look for sleepers. I don't want a repeat of what happened last time. EconomicsGuy (talk) 03:39, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * As always with Iamandrewrice the rule here is block, revert and then ask questions. Anything else is ineffective. The only other way to stop him is through massive rangeblocks. EconomicsGuy (talk) 03:51, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Having had the Jay Turner run-in, I concur with EG's assessment. If you wanted to, you could forward the private correspondence to the Arbcom.  But if its just more of the same stuff as before, than its probably not worth it.  Also, this user did many page moves according to the log, that haven't been undone.  If it is the sock, an admin will need to do a lot of overwriting moves.   MBisanz  talk 04:00, 29 February 2008 (UTC)


 * - once again, this took ages to work through :( Accepting given the nature of this banned editor and that we need to get this resolved quickly, given the banned editor's past history. I am disregarding any hearsay, off-wiki evidence in this evaluation.


 * - highly, that this is Iamandrewrice, evading his ban. Everything indicates this and all the main IP ranges are the same, spanning more than one disparate geographical area, but there is no socking going on that I can discern. However, he's constantly logging out to edit in controversial areas - A l is o n  ❤ 07:37, 29 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Blocked registered user indef per policy. Leaving any IP blocks to those who know stuff better.   MBisanz  talk 08:19, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Despite denial linked to above, user subsequently admitted to being a sockpuppet of Iamandrewrice. --Yamla (talk) 23:41, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Iamandrewrice (2008-02-13)



 * Code letter: E
 * Supporting evidence: Block log of banned user Iamandrewrice, block log of Jay Turner
 * Code letter: E
 * Supporting evidence: Block log of banned user Iamandrewrice, block log of Jay Turner

Helics appeared earlier today a few hours after I blocked several accounts based on the results of the previous checkuser request. The account may or may not be an obvious sockpuppet of Iamandrewrice, who is banned; I came here due to my relative lack of experience in dealing with Iamandrewrice's socks.

Helics identifies himself as a 13-year-old named JT (Jay Turner?), claiming to have "quit" Wikipedia a while ago and returned. Most of the user's edits are to the user mainspace (similar to Jay Turner and previous Iamandrewrice socks), but not to userspace "games" (which is something Iamandrewrice was associated with). The user's third edit was to ask me for proof for my block summary on Jay Turner and associated sockpuppets. The user claims to attend Hartsdown Technology College in Kent, which is where Iamandrewrice claimed to live. Kirsten richardson is also included in this request. Core desat 23:12, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


 * - - sorry, there's insufficient evidence to take a case at this time -  A l is o n  ❤ 01:13, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Not exactly sure how this is fishing, I think there's sufficient evidence (particularly the third edit being to my user talk page asking why Jay Turner was blocked). --Core desat 01:44, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Helics, at the very least, is undisputably Jay Turner. See this.  Blocked indefinitely.  --Yamla (talk) 04:07, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Yep. It's pretty self-evident & checkuser isn't going to gain you much here - A l is o n  ❤ 04:25, 14 February 2008 (UTC)


 * - Could someone please merge this with Requests for checkuser/Case/Iamandrewrice? Thanks!  --Yamla (talk) 17:34, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * done. Spebi 08:47, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Jay Turner



 * Code letter: G
 * Supporting evidence:, , ,.
 * Code letter: G
 * Supporting evidence:, , ,.
 * Supporting evidence:, , ,.

Seems like this user has created several sleeper socks. Would like to know if there are anymore.  MBisanz  talk 19:55, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

- initial checks shows this is back again -  A l is o n  ❤ 05:20, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
 * MfD vandalism, again, and again, again, admission of joint IP, possible attempt to evade block.  MBisanz  talk 05:25, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

✅ - the following, including the IP address, per policy, section 6 - A l is o n  ❤ 05:32, 13 February 2008 (UTC)




 * - A l is o n  ❤ 05:32, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
 * So the above users are controlled by User:Iamandrewrice?  MBisanz  talk 05:39, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


 * They share a number of common IP addresses, yes - A l is o n  ❤ 06:38, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
 * All of the above have been blocked and tagged. --Core desat 08:33, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Iamandrewrice
suspected accounts
 * (Joe)
 * (No one to do with us)
 * (Alex)
 * (No one to do with us)
 * (Alex)
 * (Joe)
 * (No one to do with us)
 * (Alex/Craig)
 * (No one to do with us)
 * (Alex/Craig)
 * (Me... I think anyway)
 * (Me, from what I remember)
 * (No one to do with us)
 * (Joe)
 * (Andrew Rice)
 * (No one to do with us)
 * (Joe)
 * (No one to do with us)
 * (No one to do with us)
 * (No one to do with us)
 * (No one to do with us)
 * (No one to do with us)
 * (Craig)
 * (Craig)
 * (Craig)
 * (Alex/Craig)
 * (Craig)
 * (Craig)
 * (Craig)
 * (God knows... I think this was me...)
 * (Me)
 * (No one to do with us)
 * (No one to do with us)

confirmed accounts

established Wikipedian, real name "Craig"; sockmaster says he was involved in some harassment.
 * (Andrew Rice)
 * (Andrew Rice)
 * (Andrew Rice)
 * (Me)
 * (Me)
 * (Me)
 * (Nothing to do with us)
 * (Nothing to do with us)
 * (Me)
 * (Nothing to do with us)
 * (Nothing to do with us
 * (Me)
 * (Nothing to do with us)
 * (Nothing to do with us)
 * (Nothing to do with us)
 * (Joe)
 * (Nothing to do with us)
 * (Craig)
 * (Craig)
 * (Me)
 * (Alex... it could have been me though, to be honest I have no idea)
 * (Me)
 * (Nothing to do with us)
 * (Alex)
 * (Me)
 * (Joe)
 * (Joe)
 * (Nothing to do with us)
 * (Nothing to do with us)
 * (Andrew Rice)
 * (Andrew Rice)
 * (Joe)
 * (Nothing to do with us)
 * (Joe)
 * (Alex)
 * (Joe/Me)
 * (Nothing to do with us)
 * (Joe)
 * (Alex... but Im not sure)
 * (Nothing to do with us)
 * (Nothing to do with us)
 * (Me)
 * (Me)
 * (Nothing to do with us)
 * Code letter: "F"

The banned user Iamandrewrice appears to be evading his indefinite community ban by means of disruptive sockpuppets.One such account recently claimed to have "over 120 accounts and that number is multiplying by 6 everyday".

I am requesting a checkuser to block underlying IPs and identify further sleeper sockpuppets.

Tonywalton Talk 14:57, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I actually think, from reading that statement in context, that Iamandrewrice really meant to say: "that number is increasing by 6 everyday". עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:21, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * These were all new accounts as far as I could tell so I seriously doubt his claims. The rangeblocks last night seemed to stop him. EconomicsGuy (talk) 07:27, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Supporting evidence:


 * Special:Contributions/Newlinecinema: addition of many spurious barnstars, some offensive, such as this.
 * Special:Contributions/Ricestormdramadesk, particularly this
 * The thread WP:AN/I started by Ricestormdramadesk.

Additional evidence for User: Turkeyhazel :


 * 

and User:Hazeltheturkeyfarmface:

User:Pollypenhouse added from current SSP case. — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 00:32, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 
 * Note: User:Listsvery added from current SSP case Whitstable (talk) 12:18, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
 * is already confirmed and blocked. --Yamla (talk) 17:23, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
 * As has user:listsvery now. User:Clarissamelissa added per current SSP case. Range block requested. Whitstable (talk) 17:55, 26 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Adding User:Bilecheck - see contributions compared with by User:Andrewricethelavalamp Tonywalton Talk 23:35, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Comment Everything is getting quite involved here and it would appear there could be two individuals working together. On the MySpace related to the email address once on the page of User:iamandrewrice there are messages from a friend referring to and article that has since been deleted, and asking whether User:iamandrewrice can use his account (presumably User:Pollypenhouse to help with said article, to quote "Ben... ..help me with my Peggy Sue & the Pirates page on Wikipedia...i've left a link on your talk page". The two accounts active in editing that article were User:Pollypenhouse and User:Listsvery, and it would appear by WP:DUCK that User:Pollypenhouse was the User:iamandrewrice sock while User:Listsvery was a sock of User:Joeseth1992 - even though a previous CU showed User:Joeseth1992 = User:iamandrewrice (school access, perhaps?). However, clearly even if there is more than one user physically operating the accounts, we still appear to have a meat farm of sorts. I believe other editors may have been in contact off-wiki with the person behind the iamandrewrice, and that person has made claims and such, and perhaps this would add up? Whitstable (talk) 02:36, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * There is valid reason to believe that this may be the case. Can checkuser confirm that Iamandrewrice and Joseth1992 are connected only via the school ip? Is it possible that these appear as one person simply because they share the same ISP and live in the same neighborhood? I don't believe for one second that Iamandrewrice is as innocent as he claims but he may not have complete control over this. EconomicsGuy (talk) 05:41, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, I find this rather disturbing to say the least... EconomicsGuy (talk) 05:49, 27 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't know whether this helps or merely confuses - but here is some more circumstantial evidence:


 * Both the 81.149.73.210 and 89.240.91.220 accounts that are involved in this mess show WHOIS records pointing to the RIPE NCC organisation. RIPE NCC is not an ISP - they are, however related to domain name activities and are something to do with academia in Europe.
 * Clarendon House School is where Iamandrewrice claimed to attend when he/she was intermittantly claiming to me to be female. Iamandrewrice also abusively edited our article about that school in the past.  Interestingly, Clarendon House has it's web site and email server on 194.80.21.42 - which (according to WHOIS) is also a RIPE address.  So it seems quite likely to me that RIPE hold all of Clarendon House's domain names - which would suggest that the 81.* and 89.* addresses are also Clarendon House addresses because it seems unlikely that an ISP that Iamandrewrice has access to out of school hours would have a WHOIS record held by RIPE.
 * However, Clarendon House is an all-girl school - and if (as many believe) Iamandrewrice is male then he may actually be attending Chatham House School (who's article Iamandrewrice had also abusively edited in the past). Chatham house is Clarendon's 'twin' all boy school.  However, the two schools do have some sort of an 'exchange' program - so it's remotely possible that students from one might have access to school computers from the other.  Hence, even if Iamandrewrice is male, he could still be visiting Clarendon to use the school computers there.  Chatham house uses HopeOne as their website/email ISP (that's the WHOIS holder for: 209.160.9.111) - but I suppose they might use RIPE for their general Internet access.  But I think it's unlikely that this abuse is coming from Chatham house school computers.
 * However, there is a problem with the theory that the 81.149.73.210 and 89.240.91.220 addresses are for Clarendon House school computers.
 * Iamandrewrice's "Contributions" list shows a pattern of editing that starts at around 10 or 11am (UK local time) and ends at around 9pm UK time.
 * Also, there are many contributions made on Saturday and Sunday as well as during the week.
 * It seems rather unlikely to me that a school's computers would be available for student access as late as 9pm and throughout the weekend. So that suggests that Iamandrewrice is not using school computers exclusively. But edits made between 11am and (say) 4pm on weekdays could hardly be made from home.


 * Interestingly, User:Joeseth1992 has only once edited on a weekend (the very first edit - July 1st) and is only ever online between 8am and 7pm. Joseth1992 is MUCH more likely to be using a school computer.


 * Perhaps someone with the right permissions would be able to tell whether a certain range of IP addresses (I suspect the 81.* and 89.* IP's) are used during UK school hours and some different address is used during the evenings and weekends. Relating the timings of posts to the IP address used to the user doing the editing might shed some considerable light on this matter.


 * SteveBaker (talk) 07:03, 27 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Well in some ways you've moved closer, but I'd like to leave you with one last clue... pollypenhouse's facebook account was fake, as is Afgb's myspace (ill leave that for you to go figure), Jose's myspace (not Joeseth), Ben's, and Tash's. But which of those is operating the real real account? You see, not only are there many accounts on wikipedia, but gathering from what we needed in the past, the number of myspace, facebook, and email accounts is certainly enough to carry it through. I suggest you think long and hard about this... oh come on... I wouldn't have thought it was THAT difficult gathering the name alone of the original account... Iamandrewrice... but... then again... Andrew Rice has two myspace accounts alone anyway. Well it seems like you'll just have to ask the right questions if you want the right answers. Until then, ciao — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.13.24.16 (talk • contribs) 09:24, 27 December 2007


 * Oh and one last pointer. User talk:Andyman949 (look at the NAME people) created a vandal page aimed at 'Mr Furgusson'... well what do we find when we look at the list of user names above? Hahaha, its really a lot more complicated than you think, so if I were you, i wouldn't just take this at face value... oh wait, is that a giveaway? 89.241.192.147 (talk) 10:29, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * What it is, is childish. Is it possible to hard block the school IPs until they cooperate with us? Or at least contact the school to alert them of the abuse? For the rest, I plan on just reverting the socks as I see them, giving their names to checkuser or an admin for blocking, and ignoring. I have better things to do than play games with bored teenagers. Jeffpw (talk) 10:37, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Can someone who knows how to do this properly report this on Abuse reports? I don't know what the school IP is and I'm reluctant to file a report that would cover around 200.000 IP's (the three main ranges used). Can a checkuser initiate this process, thank you. EconomicsGuy (talk) 10:50, 27 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I have now contacted both schools, requesting their cooperation in sorting this problem out, and telling them I have suggested hardblocking the schools until we figure it out on our end. I'll let an admin know when I get a reply. Jeffpw (talk) 11:00, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

As a point of information, RIPE NCC is merely the overseeing domain registrar for Europe. (Akin to ARIN in the US or APNIC in Asia/Pacific). They are not specifically anything "to do with academia". .co.uk addresses and similar are administered by nic.uk (http://www.nic.uk) while the .school.uk and .ac.uk (and others) SLDs are administered by JANET (Joint Academic Network, http://www.ja.net). Tonywalton Talk 13:24, 27 December 2007 (UTC)


 * - because of the utter nonsense going on and because of the debacle at WP:ANI, I'm going to accept this case today and hope to close it off. Can someone make sense of what's requested here, please, and I'll get to it. Thanks! - A l is o n  ❤ 18:31, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * To the best of my understanding, it is requested that every suspected sock on this page, as well as those listed in the ANI discussion, be checked to see if they are actually socks of Iamandrewrice. If some are determined not to be, the question from one admin was how did the false positives occur. Thanks, Alison. Jeffpw (talk) 19:45, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok - thanks for that, Jeff. Can someone gather up the ANI socks and add them to the list here. I will group the results in terms of sockmaster(s) and we can work from there. As there is, and has been, a school IP involved here, I'm strongly considering hardblocking it, given the disruption that has come from there. I should have last time, I guess. Thoughts? - A l is o n  ❤ 19:48, 27 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I am adding and formatting now. This is going to take a while, to format them all and remove the duplicates from the top of the page. I'll be back in a few minutes to finish it. Jeffpw (talk) 19:59, 27 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Jeff. And - ugh! - this is going to take hours of checkusering to nail down. What a complete and utter waste of everyone's time :( - A l is o n  ❤ 20:11, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * List is now complete. If I may make a suggestion, that would be to hold off on the hardblocking. The users have promised never to edit again if we do not contact the school, and I believe they mean it now. I really scared them when I took action regarding the school. If you could establish if there was actually more than one person doing all this nonsense, that would be great. Jeffpw (talk) 20:21, 27 December 2007 (UTC)


 * The school has actually already been hardblocked since December 7 as it happens. After blocking, the IP became abusive and made legal threats, etc. Block was extended by someone else to indef and I have marked the page now as checkuserblock. Checking the accounts underneath the IP shows hundreds (yes!) of accounts which have been used for nothing but abuse. Many of them come under the "Nothing to do with us" comments above. - A l is o n  ❤ 20:27, 27 December 2007 (UTC)


 * - I can state with certainty right now that the commentary following all of the accounts above does not correlate with Checkuser results. For example:


 * ✅ : =  =  =  =  - 100% certain. More information to follow


 * - as a result of the massive disruption caused here, I will most likely be revealing underlying IP addresses per policy in order to possibly organize rangeblocks and prevent further disruption. It's time to stop all this nonsense - A l is o n  ❤ 21:11, 27 December 2007 (UTC)


 * - I'm now fairly certain that all accounts here (at least, all those not from the now-blocked school IP) are one and the same person. They have been using 3 basic ranges from TalkTalk (Telecommunications Company) / Opal Telecom and I have enough information here now to possibly perform some narrow rangeblocks as well as having the data necessary to have them shut down at their ISP. More later - this has taken me ages to compile - A l is o n  ❤ 21:47, 27 December 2007 (UTC)


 * All the blocking and tagging now seems to be done. If there is new work to be done, please list below so it doesn't get lost in the above maze ;-). Thanks. — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 17:11, 28 December 2007 (UTC)


 * - I think it's time to wrap up this checkuser case. It's safe enough to say that pretty-much all accounts above, apart from the stale ones mentioned here below and the school IP and unrelated ones are one and the same editor. They all have identical user agents and are slightly unusual in the nature of the useragent string. Note that some of the "confirmed" ones below are new accounts that have been created in the interim.




 * ✅ - the school IP -, , , , , , , , , , , , .... and others. This school IP has now been indefinitely hardblocked due to abuse and legal threats subsequent to previous AndrewRice blocking.


 * -, uses a range of IP addresses including a shared one that coincide with the AndrewRice editor. The only difference being that this account makes genuine, constructive edits.




 * ✅ -,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ... and possibly others.ñ


 * - - this address is a shared IP, owned by Kent County Council and has now been hardblocked for 1 year. It has been used extensively for sock-puppetry and vandalism and very little else, and AndrewRice has used it repeatedly.


 * IP ranges are 78.145.0.0/17, 84.13.0.0/18, 88.108.0.0/17, 89.241.192.0/18, 89.242.192.0/19 - some of these are just too wide and too dynamic for rangeblocking but they all belong to the one ISP.


 * - finally! - A l is o n  ❤ 08:54, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Iamandrewrice


User claims to have thousands of sockpuppets. While I seriously doubt this, I do have ample reason to believe that Georgereev is a sockpuppet. I request that a check be performed to disclose additional sockpuppet accounts created recently so these can be blocked. We know the user has used and  and one in the 219.x.x.x range, I think. It may be impossible to determine sockpuppets due to IP hopping, but the IP address associated with Georgereev, at least, could be blocked. --Yamla 17:29, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Code letter:G
 * Supporting evidence: WP:ANI and see first checkuser request below
 * Code letter:G
 * Supporting evidence: WP:ANI and see first checkuser request below


 * ✅ - also and . Note that this editor was using a closed proxy related to a school network. This has now been blocked -  A l is o n  ❤ 17:44, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Per this edit I suspect that all these are sockpuppets of Wiarthurhu. Adding WiArthurWho to the request. Tonywalton Talk 17:48, 4 December 2007 (UTC)


 * ✅ - also (easy one, that) -  A l is o n  ❤ 18:01, 4 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry to interject here if it's inappropriate or a moot point - but I find it very hard to believe that Iamandrewrice is the original Wiarthurhu (whom I encountered through abusive editing of articles about cars well over a year ago). I suspect that the former picked a sound-alike of the latters name as a sock because of my post here: User_talk:SteveBaker/archive7 in which I related to Iamandrewrice the story of how Wiarthurhu had been indefinitely blocked for behavior not dissimilar to Iamandrewrice's actions.  Sadly, this may have been one of those WP:BEANS things.  I strongly suspect that Iamandrewrice picked a name that's a lot like Wiarthurhu specifically in order to annoy me and as a direct result of that post.  Having battled a ton of nonsense from both Wiarthurhu and Iamandrewrice - I find them to be very different in style and I don't believe they are one and the same person.  Furthermore, I encountered Iamandrewrice by chance while attempting to calm a 3RR incident on an article that I patrol for vandalism - but don't contribute to...because it happens to be about a school I attended 40 years ago.  There is no way that Wiarthurhu could have known that and set a trap for me to fall into - and the coincidence would be just too strong otherwise.  So, no - Wiarthurhu and Iamandrewrice are 99% certain not to be the same person. SteveBaker (talk) 19:30, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * You are quite possibly correct. Please feel free to revert my tagging there.  I occasionally find it hard to separate Iamandrewrice's lies and trolling from the truth.  --Yamla (talk) 21:48, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

blocked and tagged by others. — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 19:38, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * This confirms what Benniguy, admitted sock of Iamandrewrice, says on AN/I. Thanks for that, Steve. Tonywalton Talk 19:44, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Iamandrewrice


[] This user is my adoptee. He was blocked from editing, was just unblocked, and has claimed that he is using at least one account as a sock puppet, in order to evade his block. He claims to have more, as well. User also agrees to the check user, as seen here. This is currently under discussion at the incidents board.Jeffpw 13:20, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Code letter:G
 * Supporting evidence:
 * Code letter:G
 * Supporting evidence:

I've added Christine118500. Supporting evidence: this section and this edit. Tonywalton | Talk 15:29, 3 December 2007 (UTC)




 * another checkuser for second opinion for
 * - A l is o n  ❤ 17:37, 3 December 2007 (UTC)


 * ✅ - also blocked, , as socks of
 * - A l is o n  ❤ 19:03, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * - A l is o n  ❤ 19:03, 3 December 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.''