Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/RRaunak

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

RRaunak



 * Code letter: G

I'm opening up this case again. I strongly believe these are coming from the same IP or maybe or possibly meatpuppets. What bought to me as evidence is User:DualHelix's edits on image talk pages as tagging for CSD images that were already on commons. This is highly suspicious of being one user at this edit with User:Deepak D'Souza that i quote with this: Er,No! I applied the ducktest to you, not to RRaunak. Nor did I mention ducktest anywhere else except for the message above. Surprisingly you learnt how to edits scripts and employ templates on WP rather quickly for a new user. Just like RRaunak and ElementR. All three have a facination for the India article. And isn't it also a coincidence that RRaunak comes out of a long hibernation only to ask for a deletion of his userpage, and then you go and ask for a deletion of his talkpage soon after? --Deepak D'Souza (talk • contribs) 19:50, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Supporting evidence:

To me, that's enough evidence of being the same user. -- ɔɹǝɐ ɯ ʎ! Talk 23:32, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Notice. I have recreated and fully protected User:RRaunak by request (requested by User:Cream) to gather evidence for this case.  Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 00:20, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

I have added User:Rnkroy to the checkuser request per this evidence: On 4 July 2008, after denying him access to use the ACC interface, I noticed he had shortly afterwards copied the upper-right floating icons from my userpage (, the first block of added text). I would normally have no problem with this, except they were directly copied - to the point it indicated he was in WikiProjects he was not in, using tools he was (based upon looking into his contributions) not using, and even included my contact information (one of the icons linked to Special:Emailuser/FastLizard4. I reverted the edit  and as a "side note," removed a fake "You have new messages (last change)" banner .  This was mostly reverted approximately 5 hours later by Infraud  (the only difference being he used a modified fake new messages banner which didn't look the same as the interface message).  I navigated to Infraud's userpage, only to find the same icons there (, Cream subsequently removed the icons from both pages)! In addition, Infraud's userpage had many similarities to Rnkroy's, an identical signature block (right down to symbols and color patterns), the same "Dihydrogen Monoxide warning" at the bottom, and similar - if not the same - order of userboxes (with some minor changes to the content of each one).

Note: Infraud has been blocked by Gwernol on 14 July 2008 as a vandalism-only account. RRaunak and Infraud are mentioned at a previous thread over at ANI here. -- FastLizard4 (Talk•Index•Sign) 02:57, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

The R team is readying Act 1 Scene 2 for Wikipedia. Element R RRaunakRoy
 * More evidence by Deepak D'Souza: An update to User:Cream's message up there: At the time of posting those messsages; RRaunaks user page had been deleted. I had assumed that the requests were made by RRaunak since we could not view the history. But that was not the case. The first request was by RRaunak: which came nearly a month after his last edit. I reverted it. The next request comes, not from RRaunak but from DualHelix. Why would DualHelix be so concerned about getting someone else's userpage deleted?--Deepak D'Souza (talk • contribs) 05:04, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Potential case of meatpuppetry: At first RRaunak seemed to be a script kiddo, someone who was too enthusiastic to display his scripting skills. An unrelated event that happened recenlty was a sockpuppet attack on Brahmoism related articles, particulary Keshub Chunder Sen involving User:Ronosen and his army of socks. Please see Requests for checkuser/Case/Ronosen. User:Priyanath, who followed up on Ronosen and c/o discovered that Raunakroy was also a part of the plan from their yahoogroups site: . Please see Ronosen (2nd case) in Requests for checkuser/Case/Ronosen. The message clearly says that they were expecting ElementR and RRaunak to do their bit.

Sufficient, in my view to show that Raunakroy was also preparing his socks for a long drawn battle.--Deepak D'Souza (talk • contribs) 19:27, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

May I begin by appealing for a little more brevity in CheckUser requests?! :-)

Right, we have ✅ the five listed users. Also: There may be more -- the range has so many users that it is difficult to tell for certain, but these are the obvious socks.

Ronosen is a different user -- this would be collaboration, not sockpuppetry.

Sam Korn (smoddy) 19:55, 9 August 2008 (UTC)


 * All accounts indef blocked.
 * All accounts tagged.
 * Tiptoety talk 20:41, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Mspraveen unblocked per ANI discussion over issues with evidence.
 * 59.93.48.38 blocked for 72hrs as vandalism-only account and possible sock (see ANI complaint at Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents) - checkusers might want to look into this too. Ncmvocalist (talk) 12:31, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I did the CU again and I don't think it's him. Mspraveen is on a very noisy range and it the data appears to show that his exact IP number changes every day when he starts another editing session and the ISP always gave him a new number on a different day. There was a direct hit on an exact IP number between RRaunak's socks and Mspraveen but these were two months apart. RRaunak's socks all came within one day, which suggest the socks logged in and out in one internet session, but the fact that a new IP address is assigned every day seems to imply to me that it is a complete fluke. Also the edits aren't related anyway. The range is also very noisy - almost all the Wikipedians I know from a certain geographical region of over 100 million people seem to be on this /16. At least four different guys each with FAs use this range and they total 15+ FA/GAs and 150+ DYKs.  Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 01:14, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

RRaunak



 * Code letter: G

comment I changed signature today asking rraunak and tinucherian [+]► ▪ Σ╙ΣMEΩ╦ Я ▪  (♪ ╥a|k ¿ ) ▪ 07:38, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Supporting evidence: There are many to be honest. They use pretty much the exact same signatures (RRaunak having: [+]► ▌●√Ω ЯЯΛUNΛΣ● ▌  ElementR having: [+]► ▪ Σ╙ΣMEΩ╦ Я ▪  (♪ ╥a|k ¿ ) ▪). They have the same signature fonts on their talkpages. They both edit their user pages a lot. They both seem to contact User:Cream often with headings such as "Hi" and "Hey". and . They also type the same way, some characters have no space between them, not capitalizing first letters in sentences, ect. Somewhat similar user pages and subpages.. Thanks,  RyRy  ( talk ) 07:25, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Can you please provide diffs showing the relationship and "team-tagging" (3RR avoidance, vote stacking, ...), if any? Being the same person is not a violation by itself. Thanks! -- lucasbfr  talk 07:44, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, ahem, there aren't any. They were just pretending to be different people but I really think their the same. Sorry, this is my first case request so I'm not very fluent in this area. -- RyRy  ( talk ) 07:52, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree with User:RyRy, there isnt a case for sockpuppetry in the typical sense( for team editing, editwars, 3RR workaround's etc). But this user has an annoying habbit of creating new userIDs all the time. Has been messing around with templates and has a tendency to ignore helpfull messages and warnings alike. Now he claims that ElementR is not his sock and that he is someone else named Rahul despite the fact that a multitude of editors spotting the obvious. The only common behaviours(not diffs, sorry) that I can show is that both editors love deletions and scripting. A glance at their contribs should convice you.
 * RRaunak's contibutions and ElementR's contributions
 * To run a CU investigation, we need to see some evidence of disruption. Simply that these users are the same person is not enough -- that is permitted under policy.  We need to see how these accounts would be going against policy in order to run the investigation.  Sam Korn (smoddy) 09:57, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The evidence are in the following diffs. (POints to my monobook.js as per User:Cream/newpages.js and another evidence hides in this link:  wich is a Recaptcha link to prevent spam. Once unlocked, the email is this: rraunacq@gmail.com wich matches the other username. Look at the contribs of both users: Special:Contributions/ElementR and Special:Contributions/RRaunak. Both of them are too new and they waited until they are autoconfirmed to start the use of the wikipedia tools. --  ɔɹǝɐ ɯ ʎ! Talk 13:34, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I really don't see evidence of disruption. Patently they are the same user -- the signature alone would convince me -- but I don't see any evidence of abuse that would necessitate a CheckUser investigation.  Unless there is any evidence to be brought forwards, I am marking it  on these grounds.  Sam Korn (smoddy) 14:27, 23 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.''