Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Iraqi dinar vandal

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

Iraqi dinar vandal



 * Code letter: A.
 * Code letter: A.
 * Code letter: A.
 * Code letter: A.
 * Code letter: A.
 * Code letter: A.
 * Code letter: A.
 * Code letter: A.
 * Code letter: A.

These are only a few of the throwaway accounts used by the vandal known variously as the Iraqi dinar vandal and the angry Bahraini. The full list would be dozens of names long. This started in December of 2005, when someone from Bahrain using an anonIP edited the Rafidi and Nasibi articles to reflect a strongly Shi'a POV. AnonMoos and I reverted these edits (which were made multiple times) and the anon user was furious, accusing us of being Shi'a-hating Salafis. He has been returning to the articles again and again, reverting to his preferred versions and refusing to discuss on the talk page. He escalated to attacking me (Zora) and AnonMoos by reverting our edits. The anonIPs were blocked and the two articles in question were semi-protected. Whenever the semi-protection was dropped, he returned to the attack, with different anonIPs. A few months ago, he stopped using IPs and started using socks, which were then blocked. In the last couple of weeks, he has gotten even cannier. He has apparently created a stock of socks, which he is allowing to age before he uses them. Once the sock has aged, he can use it to breach the semi-protection on Rafidi and Nasibi and attack Zora and AnonMoos. To see the evidence for one prong of this attack, just look at the edit histories of the two articles.

I have emailed the state-run ISP (Batelco) in Bahrain, asking them to find and block this user, but have never received a reply. It would seem that the only way to stop these attacks would be trace the IP used to create the accounts, and block all accounts created with that IP, and all edits from that IP. However, if someone can think of another solution, AnonMoos and I would be happy to try it. This campaign is hurting us and wasting a lot of admin time. Zora 12:49, 2 February 2007 (UTC)


 * ✅ Basically, there's not a lot of blocking that can be done that wouldn't be either underkill (they'll just get another dynamic IP) or overkill (like, entire networks in Bahrain.) Here's the list I gleaned of accounts created from the IPs that the editors listed in the request used:




 * So, yeah, they're rolling up sockbabies right and left. --jpgordon&#8711;&#8710;&#8711;&#8710; 17:22, 2 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, if overkill is the only way to get the attention of Batelco, let's do it! If we don't, then the abuse will continue forever -- and possibly spread, as other nogoodniks figure out that this is the way around blocks. The precedent is there; we've blocked entire school networks for continuing abuse. Zora 01:13, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't think that I want to be unilaterally responsible for blocking an entire country. --jpgordon&#8711;&#8710;&#8711;&#8710; 03:15, 3 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I refuse to accept being harassed because Batelco is irresponsible. Who are The Powers That Be who can decide on such a thing? Zora 09:01, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Um, can we determine how many responsible Bahraini editors there are, leave their accounts open, shut all the vandal accounts, and disable new account creation and anonIP editing from the Batelco IP blocks? Zora 09:06, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Bring the issue up on AN/I, please. --jpgordon&#8711;&#8710;&#8711;&#8710; 16:58, 3 February 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.''