Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/PravdaRuss

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

PravdaRuss



 * Code letter: F

Normally, I wouldn't copy the message from the talkpage, but the time limitation of checkuser tools made me to do so. I think that tomorrow checkuser tools won't be able to do anything in some cases here (Perjanik's last edit was June 10).
 * Supporting evidence:

These are the messages that were posted by me on Aug 29 and by user Zenanarh   on Sep 2,   on Sep 7.

Here're two possible sockpuppets of, user whose account blocked with an expiry time of indefinite on July 31. 18 July, he was blocked for a period of month. On 31st, block was extended to indefinite. Since he was creative as sockpuppeteer (20 suspicious accounts and 69 confirmed sockpuppets ), this gave me ground to suspect that these two accounts, user:Petar Montenegrin and user:Perjanik, might be his sockpuppets. Have in mind that sockmasters aren't always blatant when acting through their puppets, but very clever; some puppets "behave" oppositely to their masters.

I've never had problems with these accounts, by few things drew my attention, that makes me believe that they might be his sockpuppets: - same interest area (Montenegro, History of Montenegro) - very short edit period - this is the feature of SPA's and sleeper accounts - because of limitation of checkuser tools, it'd good to see if they are sleepers (sleeping accounts) - these accounts had communication with PaxEquilibrium (and Pax with them) 6 edits, 4 on 30 June 2008 (2 times on the talkpage of PaxEquilibrium and ) and 2 on 10 July 2008 Here he refers to Pax's opponent and In fact, Petar Montenegrin appears here as the opponent to Pax (Pax Equilibrium uporno širi prosrpsku propagandu, "Pax persistently spreads pro-Serbian propaganda"), as the one that disagrees with Pax. Was that done with the purpose of confusing the others? Out of 6 edits, he already found Pax? Even here. Pax talks with him on his talkpage (puppetmasters often do that: talk between puppet and master). Here appears favourite Pax's idea, " fully incorporated into a unified Serbian realm, the newly acquired Serbian land, then called Zeta" (saying for Montenegro as "Serbian land")" . I don't want to etiquette these two accounts, I just want to remove any suspicion. Thanks for the attention, Kubura (talk) 14:18, 29 August 2008 (UTC) ...could be his puppet too. Pax was obssessed with one shaky reinterpretation of historical source De Administrando Imperio, which he used to conquer the articles like Pagania. It appeared that Pax puppets were talking to each other, in this case Pax said "wellcome" to User talk:I am Mario 45 minutes after his 1st appearance. An anon contributing (User:Adam Bishop asked him in the talk page: are you Mario?) to DAI article transformed to User:I am Mario. Pax did distinguish himself from this anon, in the same way as he did it elsewhere too, like here , as you can see he criticized his own sock edits. While his socks were wild and extreme POV pushers, Pax as master had image of an objective contributor. This account was created in May, there's possibility that Pax created it to support his claims in Pagania article, where he was opposing consensus reached by other users involved, as well as prolong an earlier anon actions in De Administrando Imperio. See Talk:De Administrando Imperio. Can you check User:I am Mario please. Zenanarh (talk) 07:32, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Excuse me if I bother you, but I do believe this is Pax, User:I am Mario's, User:Pasha011's and User:Progwa's edit dates are overlapping: 24/25 August, 1 Sept, 6 Sept. I'd really apreciate if you check this user, I'm not ghost hunter, just don't want to waste my time with some octopus. Thanks. Zenanarh (talk) 01:15, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

You confirmed Pasha011 to be a sock of Pax, User:Progwa prolongs his game there. Zenanarh (talk) 01:16, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Also, at the case of user:Perjanik, in several edit summaries he "talks" with Pax. That doesn't mean that he's PaxEquilibrium, but also that's the thing that puppetmasters often do: puppet and master talking to each other, in order to make others believe that these two accounts are run by two different persons ("Silly anon (PaxEquilibrium? Or not?) "joke" erased"),  ("Rv to version by Closedmouth; PaxEquilibrium, I am NOT the anon in question, stop insinuating-other people share my view, none share yours; I will not explain this in the Talk page again and again"). Sorry for taking your time, sincerely, Kubura (talk) 12:25, 9 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Progwa and Rjecka-budala are ✅; all others are ❌. Thatcher 22:39, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

PravdaRuss



 * Code letter:F


 * Supporting evidence:

First 5 users are accounts created only to revert my edits and because of that they are banned.

Number 6 on this list is nationalistic SPA account user Joka because his only edits after end of article deletion discussion (his only edit this year until then) is writing warnings on my talk page and 1 revert. All in all it is weird that user after 9 months without any edit is coming to deletion discussion (and all after that)

J. A. Comment is on list because he is demanding checkuser report for Suspected sock puppets/72.75.24.245 so he will now have his wish.

72.75.24.245 is on list because he is having 1 month ban because of harass of user rjecina. If he is connected with other banned user he can be banned.

user:64.18.16.251 and user:72.75.18.173 are on list because they are blocked puppet of earlier banned user which has edited Croatia WWII related articles.

66.217.132.152 is on list because only edits of "users" from this IP range are reverts of my edits in support of J. A. Comment

If it's possible I will like that checkuser in report write if user are using Proxy servers.--Rjecina (talk) 15:24, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I have added to this list newly created accounts Rilkas and Worobiew. First is rewriting 3 of "my" articles (created by user Rjecina) and second has rewrited "only" 1 article with refusal to discuss changes (my questions on his talk pages about changes).--Rjecina (talk) 15:21, 31 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Was there already a case on ? Thatcher 15:53, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Fiumena was mentioned in an IP check you conducted here. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 17:30, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ the same user,


 * ✅ the same user and probably the same as all the above (school and home in the same city)


 * Rilkas and Worobiew are ❌
 * None of these is related to Velebit or the IPs, although as noted previously, J.A. Comment edits exclusively from a public library in a geographic area that is compatible with Velebit's prior locations. Thatcher 16:00, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Blocked. Tiptoety  talk 17:33, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * All sockpuppets block, retagged as socks of . PaxEquilibrium was recently blocked for a month by Blnguyen for sockpuppetry, but has continued to abuse multiple accounts since his block. I have extended this block to indefinite. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 17:45, 31 July 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.''