Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Jason Gastrich

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

Jason Gastrich



 * Code letter: F
 * Supporting evidence:
 * Code letter: F
 * Supporting evidence:

Ra2007 very early in his editing career has worked on some Gastrich articles. He created a stub about Gastrich's organization in his sandbox (Special:DeletedContributions/Ra2007) and added a Louisiana Baptist University to the LBU dab page 11 minutes after it was created (meaning it was probably watchlisted). --B (talk) 15:26, 19 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I think Matthew is already on this. Guy (Help!) 16:06, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Added 208.110.82.58, this IP appeared out of nowhere to comment on LBU. --B (talk) 17:26, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The IP is an open proxy and has been blocked -JodyBtalk 18:01, 19 December 2007 (UTC)


 * -, and there are no recent confirmed accounts to cross-reference
 * -, largely due to the nature of their shared IP - A l is o n  ❤ 19:09, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Jason Gastrich


User:Steven_Taylor used his first edit to open an absurd AfD discussion. Subsequent to this, he engaged in the spamming of talk pages of Wikipedians self-identifying as Christian, in an attempt to round up a posse of like minded people to push his POV. Celestianpower for deletion/Steven Levitt (2nd nomination)&oldid=41024859 closed the discussion, after which Steven Taylor reverted not for deletion/Steven Levitt (2nd nomination)&oldid=41025385 once but for deletion/Steven Levitt (2nd nomination)&oldid=41028327 twice, for a total of three reverts of three different editors.

Following the revert warring on the article, he posted a complaint regarding Celestianpower's behavior to AN/I, in which he broke several policies, most notably WP:CIVIL, WP:AGF, WP:POINT, and WP:SNOW.

Based on the fact that this involves an abuse of the AfD process by a new user, quite familiar with the deletion process, userbox categories, gathering support, and the administrator's noticeboard, it is suspected that this user is also in violation of WP:SOCK. Given that such religious AfD warring is strikingly similar to past abuses by, and that the nominated page concerned a pro-choice article, it is suspected that Steven Taylor may be one of Jason's many socks. Please note that suspected Gastrich socks have been edit warring at Abortion over the past few days.

Given that Jason is the subject of an active arbitration request, this CheckUser request is particularly relevant, in helping locate all socks related to the case. Hexagonal 16:43, 24 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I have indefinitely blocked the IP used for this account and a large number of others; this is because it appears to be a compromised host or open proxy and is only being used for sockpuppetry.


 * Users using this IP include:


 * I note most of these if not all have already been blocked as Gastrich socks. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 00:26, 25 February 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 below, in a new section.''

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

BigBear
posted an uncivil warning on User Talk:Plover with a comment stating that it is from User:Jason Gastrich. If this is a sock it is significant in the light of the ongoing Arbcom case, if it isn't then somebody is deliberately impersonating Gastrich. It is possible that this account may, if it is not Gastrich, be related to the many Gastrichnnn impersonators above - if so it probably establishes them an attempt to smear rather than meatpuppets. Gastrich certainly has enough enemies, although I think those who are active on Wikipedia (e.g. User:WarriorScribe) are not stupid enough to try this. Guy 16:09, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
 * This is an important RFCU because Gastrich is now claiming that he hasn't edited Wikipedia in weeks and all of these latest socks are really netstalkers impersonating him and trying to get him in trouble. And I'm actually somewhat open to this idea.  -- Cyde Weys  16:20, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
 * It might also be worth checking whether these accounts are consistent with a single person:


 * It's not impossible that some of them might be "Uncle Davey" - - since he has exhibited behaviour external to Wikipedia which indicates that he may be sufficiently naive to attempt this.  It's also not impossible that they are in fact Gastrich, since he is undoubtedly technically competent, but Fred's reply to my query re "not found" above suggests they are not on a common ISP so that could be way out.
 * Apologies, I know this is a lot of work, but I think it's important to be fair; there is no doubt that astrich has used socks, but that is different in degree from running a massive sock farm. Guy 16:46, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Also, note that Davey resides in Poland. SO if a significant number resolve to that area then it is Davey. JoshuaZ 03:37, 2 March 2006 (UTC)


 * , tendentious repeating previous Gastrich edits
 * , complaining about identificaiton of likely socks (which Gastrich has done before)
 * , Gastrich language, Gastrich-type edits, created vexatious RfC against Arbustoo, states what is claimed by Gastrich to be WarriorScribe's real identity
 * Use of cuss-words makes this an unlikely candidate, and in any case blocked for multiple violations of WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL but might be worth checking. Just zis Guy you know? 23:34, 28 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Gastrich language, Gastrich-type edits (verbatim repeats of earlier Gastrich edits in one case) first edit was to nom a notable atheist to Afd with dismissive and misleading summary. KillerChihuahua?!? 00:46, 1 March 2006 (UTC)


 * again. As above. First edit also an afd, but of a User page (User:Arbustoo, who Gastrich has had issues with.) KillerChihuahua?!? 01:47, 1 March 2006 (UTC)


 * He must be going through a baby naming book or something. As before. KillerChihuahua?!? 13:27, 1 March 2006 (UTC)


 * As before, identical edit, misleading Gastrich edit summary. KillerChihuahua?!? 13:58, 1 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Identical edit, complete with misleading Gastrich-style edit summary. Justin Eiler 15:44, 1 March 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 below, in a new section.''

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

At the Bob Cornuke (Gastrich related) article white washes criticism. These others are suspected or confirmed socks. Arbusto 02:23, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
 * white washes accreditaion at the LBU article at 01:02, 3 April 2006
 * white washes accreditaion at the LBU article at 00:58, 3 April 2006
 * Makes his only of the day at 00:50, 3 April 2006
 * white washes accreditation at the LBU article at 0:37, 3 April 2006
 * Three of the four listed here have been blocked already as socks. Mackensen (talk) 02:13, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Regarding the fourth, he is not a sockpuppet. Mackensen (talk) 02:20, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

,, et al.
Suspected voting fraud at Articles for deletion/List of TRACS members by sockpuppets of the abovementioned two users, believed to be in connection with Requests for arbitration/Jason Gastrich case. See my talkpage for details if further reference is needed. - Mailer Diablo 14:54, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Suspected users are as of follows : Two more users with three messages, including two with personal attacks on User talk:Arbustoo : Further spamming by, and a number of throw-away accounts at AN/I
 * (blocked)


 * Confirmed that ,,,,,, and are Gastrich sockpuppets. Inconclusive results on all the rest. I'll be blocking presently. Mackensen (talk) 02:24, 3 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment: That's a very serious accusation, since Gastrich is on a 1 year ban. Are you saying that those accounts are using the same IP address that Jason Gastrich used to use when he posted, before he was banned? --Nancy5671 07:16, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Note: Users third edit. The Minist   e   r of War   (Peace) 19:04, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not obligated to disclose that kind of information; it would be an invasion of privacy. By the by, thanks for reminding me that I missed that account the last time around. Mackensen (talk) 11:04, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * With all respect, I think you're either lying or mistaken. What is the process for having someone review your findings? You may not be obligated to say why you think all these people are Gastrich, but you certainly should have some sort of reason that you can tell us. It's hard to believe all of these are Gastrich, so you have the burden of proof and the burden of proof can't be met with "I say so". --Steve Jackson1 18:58, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Note. Users fifth edit. The Minist   e   r of War   (Peace) 19:04, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Indeed. I suggest that he stop creating socks (like the one above). My reasons are that your puppets have the same behavior, edit the same articles, edit from the same IPs, and in many cases were obviously created by the same badly-written script. They also have the common behavior of wasting my and other user's time. Cheers, Mackensen (talk) 21:17, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I know some things and I believe you, Mackensen, are being dishonest. I believe you are abusing using your IP checking privileges and making assumptions, not based on facts. I've posted this discussion on your talk page . --207.200.116.69 00:47, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
 * So tell me, what is it that you know? I'm bound by privacy concerns and common courtesy from not revealing the IP addresses involved. The findings are devastating. Do you have any facts of your own to offer? I've removed your post from my talk page; this discussion deserves the full scrutiny of this forum. Incidentally, repeating the claim that he "hasn't edited in quite a while" is laughable; his main account hasn't edited because it's blocked. Funny, that. Mackensen (talk) 01:15, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: I am seriously disappointed. I never thought Gastrich was that stupid.  Create socks while on a block for sockpuppetry? Foolish?  Bring them to RFCU and wave them in front of people who can prove they are socks?  Seriously bad idea! Somebody pass me the cluebat... Just zis Guy you know? 13:44, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

It's pretty much certain that is a sockpuppet of someone, but although it looks like  again, the editor sharing the revert binge on, and thus the editor who avoided that all-important fourth revert, was JJay (talk &bull; contribs &bull; [ page moves] &bull; block user &bull; [ block log]). I would be very sad if it was JJay, since I have thus far viewed him as completely honest. To set my mind at rest, and because if it is Gastrich the ban timer meeds to be set again, could you please confirm? Thanks Just zis Guy you know? 19:27, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Confirmed. JohnDoe5 is a sockpuppet of Gastrich. Mackensen (talk) 22:13, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Just zis Guy you know? 22:42, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Two more:

Ferreting out Gastrich Sleeper Socks
Jason Gastrich, who is currently serving a one year arbcom imposed ban has been abusively using sockpuppets to further disrupt Wikipedia, despite his ban. Gastrich has been found to farm sockpuppets in the past, and I don't see any reason why he wouldn't be doing so.

I request that the proven post-arbcom socks have a CheckUser run on them to see if any sleeper socks have been created from the IPs used to create the currently blocked disruptive puppets.

The proven puppets whose IPs should be investigated for sleeper accounts are: "Jeffrey Tuttle", "BryanW4C", "Jon Calla", "Angelina Y.", "Shindig Me", "No Jobs", and "Doe, John".

Also, shouldn't Gastrich's ban be reset for use of sockpuppets?

Thanks for the help.Hexagonal 08:26, 6 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Declined. There's already been a thorough investigation. Mackensen (talk) 04:20, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Not sure if this is an impostor or a disruptive sockpuppet, but it would be helpful to know if there are any additional sleeper accounts to be aware of. Can&#39;t sleep, clown will eat me 00:38, 4 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Declined. This request does not meet any of the criteria listed in the instructions. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 02:29, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Possible Gastrich sock, listed separately because he requested unblock, which is atypical, and I have unblocked. Contribs follow Gastrich pattern: communication does not. May be meat not sock. KillerChihuahua?!? 04:38, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Doesn't really follow the usual pattern. Check was inconclusive. Let the fellow edit. Mackensen (talk) 05:54, 8 April 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.''