Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/JGoldwater

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

JGoldwater





 * See also the blocked (blocked for username, but almost certainly the same person)


 * E - 3RR block evasion using socks

Shortly after, a single purpose account, was blocked, the two IPs appeared and started adding the same disputed passage, using the same type of edit summary. The 147 IP is from the UK, so it is either an open proxy or a meat puppet. (I really tend to think that it is the same person, though, the edit summaries are too similar.) The 74.220.207.95 user admitted in this edit that there is meat puppetry going on. BigDT 21:28, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * per E, please provide diffs showing the 3RR violation. -- lucasbfr talk 09:29, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Reverts from JGoldwater:
 * 1st revert: 12:28, 20 June 2007
 * 2nd revert: 12:37, 20 June 2007
 * 3rd revert: 13:10, 20 June 2007
 * 4th revert: 14:50, 20 June 2007
 * 5th revert: 15:11, 20 June 2007
 * Reverts from 74.220.207.95:
 * 17:02, 20 June 2007
 * 17:11, 20 June 2007
 * 17:22, 20 June 2007
 * Reverts from 147.197.215.15:
 * 14:26, 20 June 2007
 * 15:47, 20 June 2007

Please note that both the user and the two IPs used very similar edit summaries like "added information" and "added new info". The IP addresses appear to be on opposite sides of the world, so maybe the 147 address is an open proxy? Also, the 74 address mentioned on the talk page that he was from a message board and that they were planning to send meat puppets, so it is at least possible that 147 is a meat puppet, not a sock. --BigDT 13:19, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

✅. JGoldwater = RalphReed  Voice -of- All  18:32, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok ... thanks ... but RalphReed was blocked earlier for username ... there's no problem that he came back as a different name. (The username block message invites him to do that.)  The issue is whether he is either of the two IPs in which case the 3RR block should be extended.  I'm assuming the answer there is either no or no comment? --BigDT 18:36, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * If he was, I would have said so, the others are unrelated.  Voice -of- All  02:23, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thx. --BigDT 02:36, 26 June 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.''