Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Mister ricochet

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

Mister ricochet (2nd)





 * Code letter: F, G
 * Supporting evidence:

I suspect Sixstring1865 due to the articles of interest, and userbox overlap. Kodster has engaged in sexually-themed harassment, Note that Kodster made this telling remark, even though no such pictures appear in the edit history of Sixtring1965. I believe this is user Sixstring1965 returned, or some other troll. Additionally, the user's first few edits were to start an AfD. How often do we see that with bona fide new users? Jehochman Talk 21:35, 26 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Oddly enough, I already ran checks looking for just this connection. See my talk, User_talk:Lar. My finding then was ... block on behaviour if appropriate. I missed that later diff, actually, so thanks for sharing that. I can run more checks if needed but these were run a day or two ago. ++Lar: t/c 22:07, 26 February 2008 (UTC)


 * This is the Kodster. I would like to say that on Mister Ricochet's user page, if one clicks history, you will find that picture. It is not, as you said Jehochman, "a telling remark." It is a fact. While I was unable to find that on his edit history myself, I did find the disturbing picture on the history of his user page. Please click here for the proof. (Note: This is an offending picture of a female reproductive organ). As to how I was informed of this picture, I looked at his comments to see why Andreasedge was accusing me of being him. There I was informed of a picture (the picture in question), which he described to be "anatomical" (of which I disagree completely). All the same, thank you for the advice Lar. I have no connection to this Sixstring.

Also, what is wrong with starting off with an AfD? Long before I started created this account (my first account), I have read the manuals of Wikipedia. As I have told Andreasedge, I created an account when I got a free moment. As I know much about Queen (and the Beatles as well), I noticed that the 1998 version of Another One Bites the Dust article had the "merge" template with the original. I had seen that the article was already mentioned in the original article, so I simply thought, "Well, what's the point of this?" So I looked up deletion guidelines, and I found that the article met the deletion requirements. So I simply did what it said. Just because I'm new, doesn't mean I'm stupid. I have some common sense. It's ridiculous how I am connected to this user who apparently has nothing else to do than make idiotic comments and put offending pictures where everyone can see them.

Wait. "Userbox overlap"? You have got to be kidding. Okay, so we both are male, we both live in the U.S.A., and we both like the Beatles. So we have to be the same people? He has less than ten user boxes, I have more than thirty. You have got to be kidding.

Did you see my contributions? Besides one comment on Sexybabe10's talk page (which I sincerely, deeply regret), all of my contributions are positive. I am sorry, but why are you connecting me to this sick loser who apparently wants nothing more than to make lives harder? It makes no sense.

It has been four days since I have been here at Wikipedia, and already I have been so hassled and have written so many comments about this Sixstring in exasperation that...it is too much. Why can't I just be left alone? I am truly, at the bottom of my heart, sorry. And Sexybabe10, I am truly sorry for the offending comment. I really wish I could take it back. I am just so sorry.

As I always end my posts, have a great day. Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kodster! (talk) 21:04, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Have a good day. Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kodster! (talk) 20:50, 27 February 2008 (UTC)


 * How about this: If you behave yourself, then we will not take further action.  Whether you are Sixstring1965 or not, as long as you don't act like them, and don't do anything anti-social, we'll just assume you aren't them.  Jehochman  Talk 20:54, 27 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks Jehochman. I am truly not anyone else. I promise to behave. Please see my contributions to see what I've done to help better Wikipedia articles. Have a great day! Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kodster! (talk) 21:19, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Mister ricochet





 * Code letter: F
 * Supporting evidence: Admission . Note very obvious and improbable use of identical userboxes by MindGuerilla and Mister ricochet:  and

See also Suspected sock puppets/Mister ricochet. We need to know if MindGuerilla was SixString1965, an indefinitely blocked user. It appears that Mister ricochet is his latest sock puppet. Please also identify any other sleeper socks.

I will block Mister ricochet for 48 hours while this request is processed. - Jehochman Talk 14:29, 16 December 2007 (UTC)




 * - all of them




 * - A l is o n  ❤ 17:52, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

all blocked and tagged. — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 20:50, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The service here is fantastic. I'll be back soon. - Jehochman  Talk 20:51, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

One more please!

This account has had it's user page edited by and by. It has the same problematic editing pattern, including apparent, a focus on John Lennon, and biograhy of living persons problems. - Jehochman Talk 00:12, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * As the primary filer of this RFCU, I kinda know how SixString1965 is. I don't think Hotcop2 is a sock. The aforementioned edits to the user page are comments left by Six (who was helping out Hotcop try out new sig appearances) and Mister ricochet (who put comments incorrectly on the user page and not User Talk; the same comments appear shortly thereafter in User Talk). Hotcop acts differently than SixString; he gets angry differently, his edit style is more plodding and sure, whereas Sixstring (and all of his puppets) seem to always go for the quick fix. I am aware of the similarity in image upload issues, but I honestly think that's nothing more than having received awful lessons from Sixstring on how to upload and license images. Up until today, Hotcop didn't even know how to archive his page.
 * If Hotcop2 is a sock of Sixstring, Six is missing out on a career on Broadway. I don't think sixstring is smart enough to create an entirely different personality with another account. it would smack of a sophisitication and imagination that SixString1965 simply does not possess. - Arcayne   (cast a spell)  00:57, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Let's get a result. If it is unconnected, that will put the issue beyond doubt.  - Jehochman  Talk 01:01, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * True; pity the same couldn't have been finished for the last contributor you and I discussed. that would have solved a lot of people a lot of trouble, - Arcayne   (cast a spell)  01:08, 18 December 2007 (UTC)


 * ❌ - A l is o n  ❤ 01:16, 18 December 2007 (UTC)


 * That's a relief. Thank you! - Jehochman  Talk 01:20, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * It sure is. i am glad my skills of observation aren't all crap. :) Btw, thanks for all the incredible expediting. Most singularly awesome. :D - Arcayne   (cast a spell)  01:26, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks Alison, R. Baley (talk) 01:29, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * See also User_talk:Lar (or User_talk:Lar/Archive_37 once I archive December), where I was asked about this. I concur with Alison's findings. ++Lar: t/c 13:08, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * FWIW, had I seen this thread before the check came in I would have said that I was absolutely sure that Arcayne is correct on this.   Hotcop's interest in and knowledge of Lennon is fully explainable, not that he needs to do so, and his editing quite different from the Sixstring sockfarm.  I'm glad the magic pixie dust worked this time, because it would have been a travesty if it had not and the wrong action been taken.  Thanks to all for diligence and speed.  I wish this were the end of it (meaning the end of the sockfarm), but I'm not optimistic.   Tvoz | talk 05:52, 20 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.''