Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Mod objective

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

Mod objective 2008-11-05

 * ✅ that, , , and are sockpuppet of . Jayjg (talk) 02:19, 7 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Further, the following are all ✅:
 * I blocked these on Monday but didn't mention it here. Sam Korn (smoddy) 10:48, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I blocked these on Monday but didn't mention it here. Sam Korn (smoddy) 10:48, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I blocked these on Monday but didn't mention it here. Sam Korn (smoddy) 10:48, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I blocked these on Monday but didn't mention it here. Sam Korn (smoddy) 10:48, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I blocked these on Monday but didn't mention it here. Sam Korn (smoddy) 10:48, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I blocked these on Monday but didn't mention it here. Sam Korn (smoddy) 10:48, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I blocked these on Monday but didn't mention it here. Sam Korn (smoddy) 10:48, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I blocked these on Monday but didn't mention it here. Sam Korn (smoddy) 10:48, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Mod objective 2008-10-20

 * F:
 * Supporting evidence:
 * has just appeared. His first 2 edits continue the previous pattern of Davidamos/Mod objective/La Bible, with the same unsourced content going into the same articles. -LisaLiel (talk) 11:53, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * has just appeared. His first 2 edits continue the previous pattern of Davidamos/Mod objective/La Bible, with the same unsourced content going into the same articles. -LisaLiel (talk) 11:53, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Technically entirely ❌ -- different continent. Sam Korn (smoddy) 15:38, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Mod objective 2008-10-12


suspected to be a continuation of previously banned socks



User UrianUreka appeared on the Yahweh talk page in support of Kght, with no history, and immediately stated that he was beginning to suspect the admins here -- "beginning" indicates a history, and there is no history for this user. Further, the viewpoint supported by Kght is so utterly fringe (that the Lachish letter -- which has no vowels -- proves that "Yahweh" is the correct pronunciation) that it is extremely unlikely for a random new user to hold the same unusual belief. SkyWriter (Tim) (talk) 15:19, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Code letter: F
 * Supporting evidence:
 * I've added a header to this. SkyWriter, please add a Code letter to this request. -- how do you turn this on  18:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Done. Jheald (talk) 18:24, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
 * N.B. I've blocked this account, as it's clearly the same person trying to carry on their absurd argument. If, unexpectedly, the account cannot be substantiated as a sock, please unblock. — Gareth Hughes (talk) 18:15, 12 October 2008 (UTC)


 * ✅ Technical evidence indicates that User:UrianUreka is the same user as User:Mod objective et. al. -- Avi (talk) 18:57, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Blocked & tagged. Tiptoety  talk 20:39, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Mod objective 2008-10-02


suspected to be a continuation of banned socks




 * F:


 * Supporting evidence:
 * This user has immediately resumed the contacts and discussions of the Davidamos socks -- even to the point of directly addressing LisaLiel on her talk page. SkyWriter (Tim) (talk) 17:47, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * User:Kght has just appeared, and seems to be yet another sock of the same person. Can this be checked, please?  And is there any way to prevent this serial abuser from being able to continue his misbehavior?LisaLiel (talk) 17:45, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Adding . Appeared and steamed straight into talk page discussions (and village pump) just where the preious socks left off.  Jheald (talk) 18:13, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

And what misbehaviour is that? Have I made any modifications to any article. No. Why would it be in anyones interest to return to wikipedia to simply be a vandal. Look at my discussions. I'm trying to prevent the real vandals from deleting more and more or articles which have been agreed on. I've been peacably talking to various members Kght (talk) 18:19, 2 October 2008 (UTC).


 * Once again I forgot to notify the latest username of the checkuser. In spite of my mistake, he found his way here... again. SkyWriter (Tim) (talk) 18:21, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Finally, Tweedledum and Tweedledee appeared at about the same time and addressed me on my talk page as Garzo. Garzo is an admin that the Alleichem sock suggested was the same person as myself.  Further, Tweedledum and Tweedledee appears to only have an interest in one of the same subjects as Alleichem -- the proper pronunciation of the Divine Name. SkyWriter (Tim) (talk) 13:35, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Also, just today, IP 143.53.25.116 (from the same subnet as the previously banned sock IPs), added Kght to the Wikiproject Judaism members.  Kght is Knighthood, and is using the same IP subnet as the previous banned socks. SkyWriter (Tim) (talk) 14:14, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I have completed this request, but since this is my first check, I'm going to be comparing my results with another CheckUser in a few hours. I'll update the page when I confirm my findings. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 18:47, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I have checked carefully, but there is no obvious technical relationship. There is currently no technical evidence to confirm anything for . Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 20:44, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * All confirmed named accounts indef blocked & tagged, the IP has been softblocked for one month. Tiptoety  talk 21:25, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * All confirmed named accounts indef blocked & tagged, the IP has been softblocked for one month. Tiptoety  talk 21:25, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Mod objective 2008-09-29


suspected to be a continuation of banned socks




 * F:


 * Supporting evidence:
 * This user immediately restored an edit from the Alleichem sock which was deleted by consensus under the pretext of restoring consensus.  When I asked LisaLiel to help me find the origin for this IP, this new user had apparently already added her to his watchlist (unlikely for a random user), and in fact this user added the same barnstar of dilligence to his user page that I had given LisaLiel for her work in helping to identify the Alleichem sock.  The combination of selecting to restore an Alleichem edit, to watch LisaLiel's page, and to add to himself the same barnstar awarded to LisaLiel for helping to catch the last sock -- stretch credibility for this to be a new user. SkyWriter (Tim) (talk) 16:11, 29 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Additionally -- the new user apparently had this page on his watchlist and deleted the evidence against him before I could contact him about the checkuser . SkyWriter (Tim) (talk) 16:26, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

✅. Sam Korn (smoddy) 16:27, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Mod objective 2008-09-25


suspected to be a continuation of banned socks




 * F:


 * Supporting evidence:
 * has resumed the previous pattern of Davidamos/Mod objective/La Bible/Knighthood, with similarly tendentious reverts on the same articles from the same POV, same timezone, same language being used -- and I've compared the IP addresses to the ones cited for Davidamos (all are from England). SkyWriter (Tim) (talk) 17:06, 25 September 2008 (UTC)


 * (The following is copied from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/Alleichem as posted by Lisaliel for an RfC on this username)


 * Looking at the edits of User:Davidamos (Aug 18-21, 2008), User:Mod_objective (Aug 22-27 2008), User:LaBible (Aug 27, 2008), User:Knighthood (Aug 29, 2008), and User:Alleichem (Sept 3-25, 2008), it seems there's a direct and continuous line of sockpuppetry and abuses here.


 * In addition, User:143.53.7.18 (Sept 25, 2008), User:143.53.7.76 (Sept 16, 2008), User:143.53.7.171 (Sept 15, 2008), User:143.53.7.169 (Sept 15, 2008), User:82.203.3.3 (corporate shared IP, so relevant edits Aug 21-Sept 2, 2008), and User:86.135.199.16 (Aug 25, 2008) all fall into the same exact timeframe, while presenting the same edits, content, and single issue articles.


 * It seems clear that David Amos is abusing Wikipedia to further a personal agenda. The question is how to stop him without banning everyone who works at the same company. -LisaLiel (talk) 17:58, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

✅ that Alleichem is Mod objective. Sam Korn (smoddy) 18:48, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Confirmed accounts indef blocked. Tiptoety talk 18:58, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Mod objective 2008-08-27





 * E:


 * Supporting evidence:


 * appeared immediately after  had been warned (User talk:Mod objective), and then reported  for WP:3RR.  Mod objective has since been blocked  for 31 hours.  User:LaBible's edit is another revert exactly the same as Mod objective was blocked for, and the edit summary, citing WP:IAP (sic), appears to be a direct continuation of Mod objective's claim that his behaviour was justified by WP:IAR.


 * In the last five days the other accounts have also (exclusively) made edits with substantially the same agenda. If not the same user, they appear to members of the same fringe group.  Jheald (talk) 12:45, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

✅ that Mod objective, LaBible and Davidamos are one user. No comment on the IPs. Sam Korn (smoddy) 14:10, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
 * LaBible and Davidamos blocked indefniitely, Mod objective's block extended to 2 weeks. Will extend to indef if Mod uses accounts abusively in the future. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 15:07, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Followup request

 * F:
 * Supporting evidence:
 * has just appeared. His first 4 edits continue the previous pattern of Davidamos/Mod objective/La Bible, with similarly tendentious reverts on the same articles from the same POV, same timezone, same language being used ("messy" lead, etc), and an odd 'taking up the baton' post on Mod objective's talk page.  Jheald (talk) 11:09, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
 * has just appeared. His first 4 edits continue the previous pattern of Davidamos/Mod objective/La Bible, with similarly tendentious reverts on the same articles from the same POV, same timezone, same language being used ("messy" lead, etc), and an odd 'taking up the baton' post on Mod objective's talk page.  Jheald (talk) 11:09, 29 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Highly -  A l is o n  ❤ 18:49, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 20:06, 29 August 2008 (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.''