Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/SirIsaacBrock

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

SirIsaacBrock




This user appears to have a long history of utilizing sockpuppets and IPs disruptively on Wikipedia. Despite an overwhelming amount of evidence this user has denied utilizing sockpuppets and now is facing the possibility of an Exhausted the community's patience ban that would be bolstered by confirmation of the sockpuppetry herein alleged. Please see the entirety of this WP:ANI report and in particular ArbCom clerk User:Tony Sidaway's commentary toward the bottom. Additionally, this RfC re: User:WritersCramp is of pertinency to this case. Thanks. (→ Netscott ) 17:29, 13 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Checkuser is for difficult cases. This is not one. Hipocrite - &laquo; Talk &raquo; 17:53, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * The IP in particular is slightly difficult but certainly appears to have been used by the editor in question. It has significant pertinence as to whether or not the blocked editor was utilizing it toward block evasion ends. (→ Netscott ) 17:55, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Other than to pursue other possible sockpuppets relative to User:Porky Pig checking if that was a sockpuppet of User:SirIsaacBrock is not needed, as this edit by User:SirIsaacBrock establishes that User:Porky Pig was indeed his sockpuppet despite his previous denials. (→ Netscott ) 18:28, 13 July 2006 (UTC)


 * COMMENT - These people have been stalking me for ages. I hope they are having fun.  SirIsaacBrock 18:29, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Here's a link that will bring up an ANI history page with the discussion on it that should work after the bookmark above gets archived. Thatcher131 19:18, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Discussion moved to talk page. If the checkuser admins need more information, they'll let you know. Thatcher131 02:26, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

. There may or may not be a case for checking here, but at this point, it's gone beyond what RfCU is here to do. This needs to be taken up with the Arbitration Committee in the form of an RfAR, and if there is basis for a check, they are more than capable of doing it. Essjay  ( Talk )  15:19, 16 July 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.''