Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lapitavenator/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Also creates hoax dinosaur articles on various Wikis, as discussed here: FunkMonk (talk) 19:25, 2 April 2018 (UTC) FunkMonk (talk) 19:25, 2 April 2018 (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

 * is . .--Bbb23 (talk) 12:40, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
 * This and this seams enough to me. Dinoharrias blocked and tagged. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:12, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
 * This and this seams enough to me. Dinoharrias blocked and tagged. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:12, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Lapitavenator and their socks was blocked (11 March) following an ANI report about competence, verifiability, and copyright issues (Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive978). Three weeks later, Laossaurus registered and has since proceeded to produce the exact same problems in the same subject areas: creation of unverifiable stubs about obscure fossil genera (Nicksaurus; Gspsaurus; Rarosaurus; Sidormimus - the first two apparently derived from a welter of salami-sliced conference proceedings ,, the other two unfindable by searches); pushing nomina dubia over synonymization (Gronausaurus - ); incompetent edits to taxonomic templates, that create errors (Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dinosaurs/Archives/ 27). Behaviour and outcome (enormous timesink for all involved) seem identical (as is name choice, btw). Elmidae (talk · contribs) 14:12, 13 April 2018 (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
✅, blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:36, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Rapid creation of hoax dinosaur articles, same style citations of non existent sources. ex: 1, 2 CHRISSY MAD  ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  16:42, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Added IP for obvious block evasion, not for CU. CHRISSY MAD  ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  17:20, 5 July 2018 (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

 * - TNT 💖 17:22, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
 * . - TNT 💖 17:25, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Mixture of legitimate and obvious hoax (with nonexistent references)  edits on paleontology articles coming immediately after previous block. Please check for sleepers, because master is known to use multiple socks. 2001:569:782B:7A00:CC63:F34:25EF:D946 (talk) 02:45, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Interesting because Lavalizard101 nominated an Iceiguana13 hoax for deletion, and the sockpuppet Ozarcusmapesae self-nominated a hoax for deletion. 2001:569:782B:7A00:3C36:D2F4:66FC:82AD (talk) 04:24, 8 July 2018 (UTC) (nominator IP on another device)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Good hand, bad hand: and  are a CU match. BTW they're the same type of names too. Drmies (talk) 02:49, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Drmies's findings plus:
 * TruthINJC is another bad hand. . These four accounts are ❌ to Lapitavenator. Please create a new case with Lavalizard101 as the master.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:32, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅. Closing. Sir Sputnik (talk) 18:51, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
 * TruthINJC is another bad hand. . These four accounts are ❌ to Lapitavenator. Please create a new case with Lavalizard101 as the master.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:32, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅. Closing. Sir Sputnik (talk) 18:51, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Returning with another mixture of legitimate and illegitimate  articles about extinct animals, poorly referenced either way. Also uploading copyvio'd images (e.g. ). Please mass delete created pages if possible. 128.189.193.65 (talk) 22:19, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I don't think the legitimate articles should be deleted, though. FunkMonk (talk) 22:26, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I would agree with that also, the image for the Anarthraspis article (as with all other images uploaded by the user) they falsely claim to be the author of. In this case the image was actually produced by User:Apokryltaros, and wasn't uploaded to commons. Given that most of Apokryltaros's other images are on wikipedia I'm not sure what to do in this case, whether it's possible to transfer the copyright to him or it would have to be reuploaded, the rest of the images on commons should be deleted for clear copyvio though Hemiauchenia (talk) 12:28, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
 * comment While I will eventually upload either that version or an updated version of that picture, since I did not give permission to have someone else upload it, it should be deleted as soon as possible.--Mr Fink (talk) 14:11, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
✅ the following accounts are related: that the following account is related to the above accounts: I don't know whether these accounts are related to Lapitavenator; it seems likely that they are, given that Sus memes was potentially related to Lapitavenator, and these accounts are likely related to Sus memes. --Deskana (talk) 08:50, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
 * All . These don't appear behaviourally similar to the offshoot case at Sockpuppet investigations/Lavalizard101, and I assume you checked.  I can't quite follow the discussion about articles/files to delete, so please tag as WP:G5 or WP:G12 as appropriate. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:51, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
 * The file in question has already been deleted, kind regards Hemiauchenia (talk) 15:07, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Shared: Adding overprecision in geological ranges  2001:569:782B:7A00:28D8:7D68:B793:B05B (talk) 02:24, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Surryhhe: Adding and misleadingly labelling images that depict the wrong dinosaur: (see ) 2001:569:782B:7A00:28D8:7D68:B793:B05B (talk) 02:08, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Globgogabgalab33321: Adding copyvio images uploaded by WP:DUCK Commons user Susmsmsmsmsm:   etc.
 * , maybe Commons contributions need deletion.

Also obvious mix of hoax and viable content in created pages: 2001:569:782B:7A00:28D8:7D68:B793:B05B (talk) 02:30, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

And pages that are just hoaxes outright, as usual:  2001:569:782B:7A00:28D8:7D68:B793:B05B (talk) 02:38, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Strong evidence of a WP:DUCK with given by reference 1 here:  2001:569:782B:7A00:702A:DA27:CE3B:6083 (talk) 03:04, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Jfraatz: No obvious pattern of hoaxing for this user, but in September 2017 the user uploaded a number of (now deleted) poorly-edited compilations of copyrighted images:

And Globgogabgalab33321 has recently done the same thing as well (also now deleted): 2001:569:782B:7A00:702A:DA27:CE3B:6083 (talk) 05:36, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

80.225.87.142: Participating in the same hoax:  2001:569:782B:7A00:28D8:7D68:B793:B05B (talk) 02:39, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Also a UK IP, like 82.32.50.222 2001:569:782B:7A00:702A:DA27:CE3B:6083 (talk) 02:46, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.'' I don't think Jfraatz fits here, for one they have a detailed description on their userpage, which none of those socks had. And I also think they have edited for a long time. FunkMonk (talk) 17:01, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Please don't endorse a CU without commenting here. It's very confusing. As long as I had to trawl through the history, the endorsement came before the IP added Jfraatz to the list of suspected puppets.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:49, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Bbb23, sorry. Didn't know it was a big deal. I figured that the next CU would know why I endorsed without commenting or blocking, given that--well, I suppose you ran CU so you know what I saw, and you know that I didn't really know what to do. Drmies (talk) 00:48, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Globgogabgalab33321 is ✅ and Surryhhe is . Insufficient evidence for Jfraatz. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:40, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

More ambiguous than previous socks, but the same pattern of uploading copyrighted images on Commons under one account (Cochggg6, ) and adding them to Wikipedia on another account is here (see Globgogabgalab33321 and Susmsmsmsmsm). 2001:569:782B:7A00:CD8B:471F:5E43:9EDC (talk) 04:58, 21 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Pinging to deal with the Commons sock.

There is also overlap with Globgogabgalab33321 on Yizhousaurus: 2001:569:782B:7A00:CD8B:471F:5E43:9EDC (talk) 05:05, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Stronger evidence in the form of labelling images as the wrong genus: 2001:569:782B:7A00:CD8B:471F:5E43:9EDC (talk) 05:20, 21 September 2018 (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

 * ✅, blocked and tagged, in addition to . Closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:00, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

User with incoherent username creating hoaxes such as Alamotyrannus and Duranteceratops. 2001:569:782B:7A00:1CAE:952A:EB09:4CDA (talk) 16:40, 13 October 2018 (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

 * - TNT 💖 16:52, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
 * is ✅. Sleepers found - & . All  - TNT 💖 16:55, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Same habit of creating new articles by redirecting articles from draftspace, containing copyrighted images. 2001:569:782B:7A00:4130:E586:5F5A:2839 (talk) 23:31, 24 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Also making breaking edits on Template:Ornithodira as before. 2001:569:782B:7A00:4130:E586:5F5A:2839 (talk) 23:32, 24 November 2018 (UTC)


 * can you block the Commons sock? 2001:569:782B:7A00:4130:E586:5F5A:2839 (talk) 23:33, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Which one? FunkMonk (talk) 22:51, 27 November 2018 (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
✅ + . Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:33, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Disruptive editing on prehistoric animal articles, last edit from first proposed sock shortly precedes first edit from second proposed sock. Reasonably similar usernames. Second is already indeffed, but only for disruptive behavior. Likely puppets of Lapitavenator owing to past history of sock names ending in numbers and involving sharks. 2001:569:782B:7A00:FD75:E470:724B:FB5B (talk) 02:36, 14 March 2019 (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

 * I really don't see anything bar the usernames that could tie these accounts together. Closing. Reaper Eternal (talk) 21:09, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Recreating the exact same article as a previous sock did here, at Draft:Bandringa. Creating several new dinosaur articles of questionable truthfulness (Draft:Ischyrotherium). – Thjarkur (talk) 03:26, 3 August 2019 (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
✅, blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:24, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Reverted redirect and then expanded two articles that the sockpuppet User:Sanajeh contributed substantially to:
 * 
 * 

Both are based on WP:OR interpretations of the literature, which this user is well-known for. 2001:569:782B:7A00:D401:94DB:74C0:775A (talk) 20:23, 10 August 2019 (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

 * Please, compare to the previous socks (for example ). Their only edit is to blank a draft created by Macnermack after they were blocked. Also, I blocked the IP for one year.  Vanjagenije   (talk)  08:21, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * VINUVINNY created two sleepers: and .  VINUVINNY and Macnermack are on different ISPs.  It seems  to me. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:20, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Closing for now.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  22:12, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

See the overlap with. Recreating Henderskelfe, both editing Castle Howard, Sinopliosaurus, and Bavarisauridae. I find it unlikely that two different people could show such interest in both obscure North Yorkshire houses and obscure Jurassic reptiles. – Thjarkur (talk) 20:33, 21 April 2020 (UTC)


 * I don't have anything more concrete than this, just noticed this unlikely overlap from an editor with 56 edits. Lapitavenator's first edits under a new account are often to submit a dinosaur article through WP:AFC, like Tatelumps does. I don't often see editors adding spaces before reference pipe characters (Tatelumps, sock ) or mixing citation templates and raw citations (Tatelumps , sock ), but it's not an identifying pattern. – Thjarkur (talk) 09:56, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, the above was the response to Oshwah. Now with two recreations in addition to the overlap, I do not believe these could be two different individuals. – Thjarkur (talk) 13:41, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Now that Tatelumps has self-identified as having created articles with this IP, we can see that it has twice been checkuserblocked shortly after Lapitavenator blocks and that it geolocates to the same city as Lapitavenator. – Thjarkur (talk) 21:36, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Recreation of Schoenesmahl, a previously deleted Paleofroggy production, is suggestive. Wording seems familiar to me, but an admin would have to check the deleted article for that. (For all that I'd prefer the article to stay around this time... copying it now in case it gets G5'd again) -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 14:02, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Here's another five Paleofroggy recreations that Tatelumps just claimed to have created as an IP: Pachygonosaurus, Bandringa, Lutraeximia, Sphaerodontes, Bohemiclavulus. I don't think there's any reasonable doubt left after that. (Particularly smart they ain't about this, I have to say.) -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 21:19, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I'm hesitant here. The timeline between these two accounts and their edits to the same pages span over a year... Is there any information or evidence that's concrete or more specific that can be provided? Similar edits? Same edit summary use? Same pattern of code use? Same grammar? Anything that would connect the two by their specific editing habits?  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:41, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Just letting you know about Oshwah's request above if you haven't seen it. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:04, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks Þjarkur. It's so I've . Closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:08, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Recreating Compsosaurus. Only person to overlap with the dinosaur hoaxer  (who must be Lapitavenator as well) over at Martín Ezcurra. Like Lapitavenator always does, Slycemyron starts off his carreer here by creating several dinosaur draft articles. – Thjarkur (talk) 15:45, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Noting for the future that Deltasaurus is an older account, but not the oldest. According to the ANI thread this user goes back way further. – Thjarkur (talk) 22:08, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * ✅ to Tatelumps. . Closing. Kevin ( aka L235 · t · c) 23:17, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

See the overlap with recent sockpuppet User:Slycemyron. 77.99.156.192's edit history begins immediately after 77.99.156.72's ends. The talk pages of both 77.99.156.72 and 77.99.156.192 reveal an extraordinary number of articles submitted via WP:AFC, exactly as Lapitavenator has a history of doing. Zigongosaurus1138 (talk) 15:59, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Comment I agree that this user is indeed Lapitavenator, but as someone who works in the same topic area they have been making mostly productive and accurate edits, they seem to have have put their previous hoaxing ways behind them. I previously reported this user at Sockpuppet_investigations/Falconfly/Archive because they had (sloppily) cited a preprint by a banned user, which I mistook as them being the author. As noted, removing the IP's work would cause "substantial collateral damage", the blanket removal of previous sock Tatelump's mostly productive work also caused unnessary headaches. If someone is substantially contributing to wikipedia in good faith I see no reason to block them simply for policy reasons. Hemiauchenia (talk) 16:29, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Hemiauchenia (talk) 16:51, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Hemiauchenia (talk) 17:40, 15 September 2020 (UTC)


 * , I agree with you that most of this individual's edits - at least from what I have noticed after the past three months or so since I've been editing frequently again - have either been constructive or neutral. However I can confirm that there has been a significant amount of unhelpful behaviour also. For example, made just today at Zigongosaurus - there was a completely unexplained changed to the dates given in the taxobox and in the lede. There was no citation added to the text, and not even an explanation of their logic in the edit summary. And another at Zizhongosaurus - in fact, this one had been reinstated after being reverted by another user less than a week earlier. This kind of behaviour has been frequent over the last few months and I have had to revert similar edits MANY times recently. I will search through my edit history and link more upon request. Unfortunately, since this individual makes so many edits, alongside the fact that their changes are often very subtle, the bad edits can be hard to identify. I don't for one second support a blanket removal of all of their creations, and am not explicitly in support of a block, but we must be aware that this habit of not explaining potentially controversial edits has continued despite it having been brought to their attention at their talk page. Zigongosaurus1138 (talk) 20:37, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree. These bad apple (edits) spoil the bunch. The user is also clearly unwilling to communicate and collaborate judging by this and past interactions. Lythronaxargestes (talk &#124; contribs) 03:29, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
 * No they don't. If they were, we really should be thinking about banning Bubblesorg. There was a recent discussion about another users profilific but lacklustre AfC's at ANI, see Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1040, and Lapitaventator's stubs are miles ahead of those, being mostly well cited and sourced. I do question his judgement sometimes when he uses dubious preprints, like those of our old friend Falconfly which put him under initial sockpuppet investigation in the first place, but for the most part he does use good academic sources, Draft:Tongoenas is not a bad start, I think it could use tightening, but for the most part it's good. He often creates obscure articles on topics that no one else would, Draft:Mikrotia is a good example, which is also good. There's no doubt he's a net benefit to the encyclopedia, even if some of his contributions are rough around the edges, and I would be sad to see him go. Hemiauchenia (talk) 15:49, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Let's say we let this editor continue: must we patrol hundreds of edits from a multitude of different IPs just so we can figure out which ones are legitimate? I would prefer it if this user edited under a single account, but our policies don't allow for that. This editor made the mistake of sockpuppeteering and there are consequences to that. Lythronaxargestes (talk &#124; contribs) 17:26, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I think we need to do something about this individual sooner rather than later. Just noticed another big change at Mongolostegus, and barely any of it was good as far as I could tell. Loads of info added that was either not referenced or didn't appear to be supported by the citation. Clearly, potentially controversial edits, unaccompanied by any kind of explanation, remain frequent. This really does need to stop. Zigongosaurus1138 (talk) 12:17, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
 * (I don't think we should have this serial sock editing here either, and most of that edit was dodgy, but: the description/publication date is indeed 2019, not 2018 -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 14:40, 3 October 2020 (UTC))
 * I realise that it says "Published: 13 February 2019", but the citation as provided later on lists the date as 2018 . Google Scholar also lists the date as 2018, as does this paper citing it . So was the paper perhaps first published in 2018, but first published online in 2019? Incidentally, why on earth was this case closed? Many editors have left comments here expressing concerns over this individual's behaviour and it is clearly continuing yet still undealt with. It's obvious sockpuppeting and that's against the rules. There must be consequences. Since this has been closed, am I able to just relist it? Nothing's been bloody done.Zigongosaurus1138 (talk) 15:19, 4 October 2020 (UTC)


 * I have indeed considered him to be Lapitavenator, after I preliminarily checked his IP address and found it to geolocate to the same city as known socks. That was long before he became as prolific an editor as he is now. However, I do agree with that we shouldn't block him for policy reasons, as his edits have been mostly productive, adding accurate information and creating pages (as drafts) for extinct taxa that would otherwise have no pages of their own. Atlantis536 (talk) 00:17, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
 * As for this IP, I think it is User:Extrapolaris, whose real life identity is known and was not kept a secret by him (he liked editing articles about yet unnamed species and such). He was blocked too, but that was for copyright violations, and he was generally useful. He is definitely not the same as User:Falconfly, whose real life identity is also known (he was more into pushing his own fringe POVs, not new species). Both are active in various online fora, and I have seen photos of them both, they are distinct people. FunkMonk (talk) 00:25, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Couldn't be Extrapolaris. In the rare cases these IP's talk, they don't sign their real name at the end. Atlantis536 (talk) 00:38, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Doesn't look like Falconfly either, he was always extremely rude and confrontative when asked to moderate his behaviour. FunkMonk (talk) 01:36, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

[...But, germaine to CU, I'm adding Lythronaxargestes...]
 * This is such a bizarre comment, clearly isn't the same user. What exactly is the long range block for, for contributing productively to the encyclopedia? Hemiauchenia (talk) 17:44, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , There were enough oddities there to make me suspicious. The point of the CU would be to verify my suspicions.  But, given that there's insufficient non-stale data to check, I don't see enough there to take any action based just on behavior.  But, to address the range block question, this is undeniably block evasion.  It doesn't matter that most of what they do is legitimate.  If they've been blocked, they can't edit until they get the block lifted. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:54, 15 September 2020 (UTC)


 * This is highly unlikely, wildly different styles and topic interests. If blocked, Lythronax should be unblocked immediately. FunkMonk (talk) 17:50, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
 * The above comments are about the section below. FunkMonk (talk) 18:02, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , Yes, but we still want to keep the bottom section of the page for "official business", i.e. clerks, checkusers, and admins. All other users are welcome to comment, but to keep things from become too much of a jumble, we enforce this distinction. -- RoySmith (talk) 18:06, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

OK - WTF? I did do IP editing during my time off from my main account, but I stuck to reporting sockpuppets and project discussions. I don't create drafts, certainly not about extant mammals, and the vast majority of my edits have edit summaries. I have never even set foot in the UK and if you want I'll pull up the travel documents to prove it. Lythronaxargestes (talk &#124; contribs) 19:35, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
 * For the record... THIS is my current IP. You are welcome to checkout the WHOIS information. 71.245.178.253 (talk) 19:39, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
 * One last comment... There is editing overlap because I have routinely removed some of this user's more asinine edits! Lythronaxargestes (talk &#124; contribs) 19:44, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

This is because i got a new ip address. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.99.156.192 (talk)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - I looked at 77.99.1560/24, and it's clearly all the same user. Regardless of what happens here, I'm thinking a long duration range block there.  But, germaine to CU, I'm adding



based on Lythronaxargestes's comment, "I was not capable of contributing responsibly" on their user page, their shared dinosaur interest (and dino-styled user names), and editing overlap. I wouldn't be surprised if they're the actual master here. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:29, 15 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Ugh, scratch the CU. Everything's stale.  -- RoySmith (talk) 17:32, 15 September 2020 (UTC)


 * This is obviously going nowhere, so closing. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:46, 3 October 2020 (UTC)