Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gouncbeatduke will be burned alive./Archive

24 February 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

Both socks appear to target editors who revert anti-Arab POV-pushing edits on Wikipedia to bring about a more NPOV. Both socks are known for making anti-Arab and anti-Muslim statements. Statements made on my user page included "== You deserve to ₫ie for your support of genocidal Islamic settlers. == I will make sure you suffer greatly." and "I can arrange for you to die in Gaza. Keep it up, raglover."

JarlaxleArtemis is known for masking his IP address to appear to be outside the USA. The "Gouncbeatduke will be burned alive." IP address appeared to be outside the USA. (I know that is not evidence, I just thought it was worth noting.) (comment: As the identity of JarlaxleArtemis is known, and his location appears to be Los Angeles, CA, I would like to know if this is the person who made death threats against me.) Gouncbeatduke (talk) 14:53, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * The account has been blocked, so the SPI end of it has been handled. It more than likely that your request will need to be entertained off-wiki. I would recommend getting in touch with the foundation via email. They might be able to assist you with your concerns or point you in the right direction. Mike V • Talk 18:59, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Why is this case logged under "Gouncbeatduke will be burned alive."? There is no such a user with that username. Shouldn't it be ? And, by the way, there is also User:Gouncbeatduke hates Jews.. Maybe we should run a CU check for sleepers?  Vanjagenije  (talk)  19:16, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
 * The account does exist. :) A number of the logged entries have been oversighted. (There's a number of things that points to that fact, but per BEANs I won't elaborate.) If this is JA (or someone who's picked up his modus operandii), it's very likely that he's used a proxy to create the account. A checkuser might be able to block the proxy, but it's not likely they'd be able to find additional accounts. I've been told by a few CUs that it's best to just RBI. Mike V • Talk 20:08, 24 February 2015 (UTC)