Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Racepacket/Archive

Report date June 10 2009, 17:48 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets
 * blocked in 2008... -- Luk  talk 10:09, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * blocked in 2008... -- Luk  talk 10:09, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

All of the editors listed above have been actively involved in editing the article Dane Rauschenberg, its talk page and other related articles pushing the same POV regarding his non-notability, with most editing almost nothing else. While gory details of the overlap between theses editors and the various IP addresses is provided below, the behavioral evidence should be more than adequate to demonstrate that sockpuppetry is involved. Feel free to review the hidden material below if any questions exist.
 * Evidence submitted by Alansohn

The syllogism of Racepacket = Xcstar = 207.91.86.2 has already been conclusively proven at Requests for checkuser/Case/Racepacket. User:Runreston was added to the family as a result of Suspected sock puppets/Racepacket (2nd).
 * Comments

Despite the previous blocks for sockpuppetry, User:Racepacket has continued use of the IP addresses User:158.59.27.249 and User:158.59.91.249, both IDs being used by Racepacket to perpetuate an obsession with Dane Rauschenberg. After a sequence of previous blocks, Racepacket had been quiet following informal third-party intervention to address the problem. Racepacket resumed in April 2009 with the use of User:66.173.140.100 to make edits in edit warring fashion to the Dane Rauschenberg article, a singular obsession of all his sockpuppetry.

I am sure that some of Racepacket's edits using the 66.173.140.100 IP address are the result of being inadvertently logged out from his Racepacket user ID. But it appears that Racepacket deliberately logs out and uses the 66.173.140.100 address to make "bad cop" edits, especially to articles where he seems to want to hide a connection to his main user name as at Dane Rauschenberg. The extensive overlap in articles edited, the times they are edited and the occasions where one has signed as the other make it incontrovertible that the two are one and the same and that Racepacket is deliberately using 66.173.140.100 as a sockpuppet.

Racepacket has a very clear and disturbing obsession with Dane Rauschenberg. While Racepacket has only edited the Rauschenberg article once using his own ID, banned sockpuppet User:Xcstar leads with 96 edits, banned sockpuppet User:Runreston has another 20 edits, and 66.173.140.100 has edited the article 20 times. At Talk:Dane Rauschenberg, Racepacket has also edited once using his own ID, but his sockpuppet User:207.91.86.2 has edited 49 times, Xcstar 40 times, Runreston 23 times and 66.173.140.100 another six times. While there have been other Rauschenberg-related edits to other articles, the Dane Rauschenberg article and its talk page have been edited by Racepacket and his sock puppets on more than 250 occasions.

An extremely lengthy if not permanent block is clearly justified for User:Racepacket, in light of the fact that multiple blocks have been imposed for sockpuppetry related to editwarring about Dane Rauschenberg covering hundreds upon hundreds of edits using his various sockpuppets and that these blocks and warnings have been so blatantly flouted over a period of years. A topic ban on Dane Rauschenberg should also be imposed.

Alansohn (talk) 17:48, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

See Articles for deletion/Dane Rauschenberg and evidence above re previous sockpuppet cases that ended in blocks for confirmed / likely abuse and pattern of editing using Username and IP.

This complaint has been filed in apparent retaliation for Requests for comment/Alansohn and Requests_for_arbitration/Footnoted_quotes/Proposed_decision which imposed a one-year restriction on User:Alansohn for incivil behavior. That year is now ending.
 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.

The background of this problem is that starting in Janaury 2007, Dane Rauschenberg and/or his brother Gregg created a series of special purpose accounts to publicize a forthcoming book that was ultimately published by a vanity press. Instead of requesting speedy deletion, one or more members of Mr. Rauschenberg's running club repeatedly vandalized the Dane Rauschenberg and fiddy2 articles. The weekly discussion of Mr. Rauschenberg's wikipedia efforts at the running club held the entire Wikipedia up for ridicule and made recruiting more Wikipedia editors with running expertise difficult.

When the article was proposed for deletion in October 2007 in Articles for deletion/Dane Rauschenberg, Mr. Rauschenberg contacted various people about the deletion debate outside of Wikipedia.  At this time, User:Alansohn was not aware of any of the above, and had not edited these articles, but took an active role in the AFD for Dane Rauschenberg and Fiddy2 as a part of his "inclusionist" battle against "deletionist" editors. The AFD for Dane Rauschenberg resulted in keeping the article and merging the fiddy2 article into it.

User:Alansohn then took on an incivil posture in the subsequent efforts to shift the article from an autobiography to one that was neutral. This resulted in a mediation that was completed on May 18, 2008 by User:Fish and karate.

However, since that mediation, various IP editors have made changes to the results of the mediation which would further plug Rauschenberg's book and plug an upcoming race that he is promoting. I have not "enaged in an edit war," but merely asked that changes contain documented facts and be discussed on the talk page. I am making every effort to follow all Wikipedia policy. I think that a third party mediator was helpful in removing the autobiographical content from the article, and although I would not have written the new article with those words myself, I have made every effort to honor the mediation.

I know that there are a number of other runners in the Washington DC area who are active on Wikipedia, and I do my best to recruit more runners to Wikipedia. There are edits being made from other IP addresses which are not mine, and this IP address is also shared.

If you read through all of the stuff listed above by User:Alansohn, the only allegation is one "vote stacking" in October 2007. However, 66.173.140.100 did not cast a vote there. User:Alansohn then goes on to state, "Dane Rauschenberg edits made by 66.173.140.100 before / after Racepacket edits articles using his real ID." His phrasing may create a misimpression that the two users are editing the same article. If you check the history of Dane Rauschenberg, you will see that is not true. There is no Wikipedia policy against two users editing different articles in Wikipedia at about the same time of day. The Wikipedia definition of "sockpuppetry" is "A sock puppet is an alternative account used for fraudulent, disruptive, or otherwise deceptive purposes that violate or circumvent enforcement of Wikipedia policies." None of that has been shown here.

Let us go forword in good faith and work to improve Wikipedia rather than engage in personal attacks. 66.173.140.100 (talk) 18:48, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Interesting claims, but the evidence is clear that User:Racepacket and User:66.173.140.100 are one and the same. The evidence is clear that the two have edited the same articles, often on the same day and with no other editors editing the same article, that the two have used the IP to edit as Racepacket and that Racepacket has used the IP to deliberately hide edits made to the Dane Rauschenberg article. Racepacket has used a series of sockpuppets, first the banned User:Xcstar and the equally banned User:Runreston, and is now using 66.173.140.100 as a sockpuppet to further disrupt the Dane Rauschenberg article. I agree that "there is no Wikipedia policy against two users editing different articles in Wikipedia at about the same time of day". The problem is that there is clear and uncontested evidence that Racepacket and 66.173.140.100 are one and the same. That "66.173.140.100" is now denying that he is the same editor as Racepacket, without offering any possible explanation (valid or otherwise) for the sockpuppetry, eliminates any possible rationale that this is not part of an effort to violate or circumvent enforcement of Wikipedia policies for deceptive purposes. While 66.173.140.100 falsely claims that "66.173.140.100 did not cast a vote" at Articles for deletion/Dane Rauschenberg, this edit makes clear that 66.173.140.100 did indeed cast the third of Racpacket's three separate votes to delete the article. While the multi-year edit warring and deceptive editing after multiple sockpuppetry bans and blocks is more than enough to justify a ban, the votestacking only cements the case. Alansohn (talk) 20:27, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * With all due respect, the above comment by User:Alansohn shows why a simple task of handling a WP:COI violation has become so difficult. The edit  cited by User:Alansohn as a "votestack" refers to a vote by User:Greswik, who is not claimed to be an alter ego of anyone.  There is no deception in that edit or in any of the ongoing edits of the article Dane Rauschenberg  Perhaps administrators should review the deleted portion of the edit history on the Talk:Dane Rauschenberg page. 66.173.140.100 (talk) 21:16, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * This edit was cast by User:66.173.140.100. While it does follow User:Greswik's vote and was unsigned, it was undoubtedly the third of at least three votes cast by User:Racepacket at Articles for deletion/Dane Rauschenberg. Further research shows a fourth vote cast here at Articles for deletion/Dane Rauschenberg by User:207.91.86.2, another IP sockpuppet of User:Racepacket listed and documented above. With only one vote from a clearly legitimate editor, the effort at votestacking by Racepacket came just short of his goal of deleting the article by whatever means necessary, including rather blatant votestacking. Alansohn (talk) 22:23, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * User:158.59.27.249, another of Racepacket's sockpuppets, had been quiet on Rauschenberg until the past few days, apparently with the heat on at 66.173.140.100, including four edits in the past week, in addition to two in May and three more in April. There is ample evidence provided above that Racepacket and User:158.59.27.249 are also one and the same in the case studies provided above, and this only adds to the evidence of Racepacket deliberately and maliciously using alternate IDs for "fraudulent, disruptive, or otherwise deceptive purposes". Alansohn (talk) 03:51, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Raising a Request for Deletion that was closed in October 2007 strikes me as a stretch. I don't see any signed vote by 66.173.140.100 in the edit which Alansohn references. Perhaps there is an honest misunderstanding about what peoples' intent were back then, but the there is no reason to sort through it for the third time now.  Regarding Alansohn's most recent post, it appears that he uses the word "sockpuppet" as being synonymous with "someone who disagrees with me."  The sockpuppet rules prohibit a person from creating multiple Wikipedia accounts "used for fraudulent, disruptive, or otherwise deceptive purposes that violate or circumvent enforcement of Wikipedia policies."  Alansohn's argument appears to be based on the incorrect theory that IP address edits are somehow invalid and suspect without a showing of the fraudulent purpose. (In contrast, please review: Sockpuppet investigations/Alansohn/Archive where circumvention of Alansohn's civility restriction was at issue.)  Wikipedia management needs to come up with a workable system for handling aggressive people who seek to use Wikipedia to legitimize their book proposals.  It is interesting that because of the unique and troubling environment created by Dane Rauschenberg, everyone debating and editing his article (perhaps including User Alansohn) have dropped using their Wikipedia sign-ons (if they have one.) 66.173.140.100 (talk) 21:44, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

I am not sure exactly where I am supposed to respond, but I would like to defend myself against this accusation. Look at my history of edits, I have done nothing but attempt to make this article better. I have made stylistic changes, grammatical changes, deleted information that wasn't substantiated (Rauschenberg as a member of Penn State Rugby team or an amateur boxer) or corrected factual errors in the article(located correct times for 800m and 1 mile). I have no idea who user RacePacket or these other ip addresses and I am certainly am not working in concert with them. I think User Alansohn is lumping legitimate users with others and I am certainly a legitimate user. Other than the change I made on April 16 -- where I mistakenly misread the sentence -- all of my changes have been legitimate and geared toward improving the article.--Pats2001 (talk) 22:53, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I think that User:Alansohn is misstating history here. I understand that it is very frustrating that Dane Rauschenberg has used a number of different user names and IP addresses to create and modify his autobiographical article.  A lot of this dates back to 2007, and I am surprized that User:Alansohn is recycling all of this as if it were new. Please note that Requests for checkuser/Case/Pats2001 determined that
 * DocDetroit = TheGoldenBoys = Bella de Ball = Mr.DaneGer
 * MrPreston = Parrson
 * That checkuser did not make any conclusive findings about any other users. However, based on a pattern of editing, I believe that the following are all Dane Rauchenberg (who has lived in Northern Virginia and Utah during this period):
 * fiddy2
 * 69.143.16.194 - Comcast Arlington, VA
 * Arric
 * 68.55.224.168 - Comcast Arlington, VA
 * 69.143.1.252 - Comcast Arlington, VA
 * Revertedlesbo
 * 75.169.94.36	Salt Lake City Utah
 * 198.36.194.3	Qwest - CONCOURSE COMMUNICATIONS (probably an airport hotspot)
 * 70.192.118.79	West Linn, Oregon (probably just a visit)
 * 75.169.58.50	Sandy, Utah


 * 75.169.89.100 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.173.140.100 (talk) 13:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 198.202.202.21	Denver International Airport (probably an airport hotspot)
 * 12.105.229.198	San Diego, CA - two days after Dane ran a marathon there
 * It appears that since User:Alansohn's original complaint, he has spent June 11-13 harvesting a lot of old edits to the Dane Rauschenberg and Fiddy2 articles to in order to expand the scope of his "sockpuppet" investigation, but selectively left out the sources of the disruptive WP:COI edits. I hope this list is helpful to the sysops trying to sort through all of this stuff.


 * On a procedural note, I wonder whether the User:Alansohn has justified his assignment of codes "C" and "E" to this case? The October 2007 vote stacking was resolved at that time and did not affect the outcome of the AFD, and the only sanction in place during the period in question was the probation on User:Alansohn for incivility. Thanks. 66.173.140.100 (talk) 02:52, 14 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Feel free to open a Sockpuppet investigation of your own, but remember to act quickly before any blocks or bans take effect. Alansohn (talk) 03:06, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, yet another example of WP:CIVIL. Thank you for your advice. 66.173.140.100 (talk) 03:20, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments by other users

— Jake   Wartenberg  21:57, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

✅ that Racepacket is using 66.173.140.100. No evidence that it is shared, except possibly by housemates; when accounts sharing an IP act in concert, they are treated as the same because we can not look through the wire to see who is actually sitting at the keyboard at any particular time. Pats2001 is geographically similar but probably unrelated. The other IPs are local to both and are probably libraries and other public hot spots, so impossible to determine.
 * Conclusions


 * Because Racepacket has a prior 1 week block for sockpupperty, and has clearly been editing while logged out to try and avoid scrutiny to his edits, blocked for 10 days.
 * Racepacket is further banned from making any edits to for 3 months, under any user name or IP, to be enforced by a one month block and a reset of the 3 month ban timer should he violate the ban. He may make suggestions on the talk page.
 * will be semi-protected for 3 months to prevent logged-out editing by any parties, including Racepacket and associates of Mr. Rauschenberg. Editors who wish to contribute to the article are invited to create an account, provided they respect Wikipedia's guidelines and policies. Thatcher 03:17, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Ryulong
has a history of sockpuppetry. The fact that has only two prior edits to this comment on an RFC/U which really does not have any sort of wide audience (except to users related to the dispute and three subsequent users that Racepacket contacted to comment on his behalf). The IP address is included because it is known to be Racepacket's and has not really been used inappropriately, but is here to supply a known positive.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龙 ) 00:15, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

CheckUser requests
Requested by — Ryūlóng ( 竜龙 ) 00:15, 22 October 2009 (UTC)


 * privately informed by that this is not a sockpuppet. NW ( Talk ) 02:59, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Conclusions

 * Close per above comment. NW ( Talk ) 03:00, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

29 March 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

I suspect this edit here was made by Racepacket in order to avoid the block. DUCK may apply. Reasons for suspecting that this duck is Racepacket :
 * 1) IP address originates in Virginia, where Racepacket lives.
 * 2) Edit tone extremely similar to User:Racepacket
 * 3) Edit content extremely similar to User:Racepacket
 * 4) Only one person supported the position of Olympic's recognising federations, not sports
 * 5) User:Racepacket was blocked for actions directly pertaining to this page
 * 6) Timing of edit in relation to dispute over Netball_and_the_Olympic_Movement
 * 7) No other IP address edits have been made to the article
 * 8) General topic should primarily of interest to people in Commonwealth countries in terms of random users discovering and contributing
 * 9) Article has very few page views, limiting the potential number of contributors
 * 10) February edits coincide with previous block of contributor
 * 11) User:Racepacket has gotten into other disputes about what constitutes a sport
 * 12) Has a history of sockpuppeting: Sockpuppet investigations/Racepacket and Suspected sock puppets/Racepacket (2nd)
 * 13) User:158.59.127.249 contributed to Article for deletion request that Racepacket was involved with. LauraHale (talk) 05:24, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

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

is a confirmed sock of. He edited Foundation wiki feedback while logged out here as part of a discussion related to and an RfC/U. This IP has been blocked on enwp by for block evasion in the past when Racepacket was blocked for copyright violations based on this edit.  Imzadi 1979  →   05:35, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments by Imzadi1979

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - All previous socks (Amend, except the master 11:28, 30 March 2011 (UTC)) are stale and unlikely that a CU will connect the IP to the account in this case. -- DQ  (t)   (e)  11:41, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Not sure what you're saying - what about the main Racepacket account? --Rschen7754 17:19, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Per a my talkpage request to cross post Well Racepacket has been confirmed by a checkuser to live in the same approximate location. And from the amount of evidence LauraHale has presented (I haven't read all of it), it looks like a WP:DUCK case, which means block. My third reason is There are exceptions, but this looks like enough of a duck case not to connect. --  DQ  (t)   (e)  02:48, 30 March 2011 (UTC) --  DQ  (t)   (e)  11:28, 30 March 2011 (UTC)


 * IP blocked 2 weeks for evasion. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 22:30, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

29 February 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Racepacket has previously edited from Arlington County Govt IPs and has also edited on articles relating to Netball in the South Pacific, Cook Islands, etc. This is an obvious WP:DUCK case. Russavia ლ(ಠ益ಠლ) 00:21, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

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


 * User:Courcelles has blocked the IP as a DUCK sock of Racepacket. Not really sure if any further action needs be taken. If ArbCom want to heap more upon Racepacket, given the blocking admin is also an Arb, they'll find a way. If not, we don't really need any further discussion at SPI. —Tom Morris (talk) 01:08, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - Checkuser will not be used to connect IP addresses to accounts, even in cases of Arbitration Enforcement. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 00:46, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Close per Tommorris. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  01:17, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

03 July 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

IP previously used by Racepacket; attack on page largely created by User:LauraHale, with whom Racepacket has a mutual interaction ban. Stuartyeates (talk) 00:07, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Blocked by User:Courcelles. --Rschen7754 04:55, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment The IP has recently been editing articles related to netball, which was an area in which Racepacket was heavily involved (see Arbitration/Requests/Case/Racepacket, et al.). —Eustress talk 14:55, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
— Berean Hunter   (talk)  13:46, 3 July 2012 (UTC) — Berean Hunter   (talk)  14:35, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * - because checkusers will not disclose information that link IPs to accounts. This case will have to be decided on behavioral evidence alone.
 * IP already blocked so closing.

16 July 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Another IP focused entirely on Netball and the Olympic Movement and gender mentions in Netball-related pages. Stuartyeates (talk) 19:46, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * IP address resolves to Alexandria, Virginia, which is the known physical location of the Racepacket account.  Imzadi 1979  →   03:20, 17 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Blocked by User:Courcelles. --Rschen7754 20:41, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
I'm sorry, but CUs don't generally link IPs to accounts publicly. Elockid  ( Talk ) 20:36, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Blocked by User:Courcelles. Rschen7754 06:28, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

20 August 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

A Virginia based anon IP contributing negatively to Talk:Netball and the Olympic Movement; the pasage "Reading this article and its edit history shows a serious breakdown of that corrective process" implies that the editor has previous involvement with the article (or at least a strong opinion on previous editing on the article); seems like a WP:DUCK to me. Stuartyeates (talk) 05:28, 20 August 2012 (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
IP looks stale to take any action. Please re-report if there is further activity. Elockid  ( Talk ) 17:11, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

08 December 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Obsession with 'logical flaws' in Netball_and_the_Olympic_Movement and related articles. Stuartyeates (talk) 05:26, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

I don't know what a "sockpuppets" is, but I am not "obsessed" with Netball and the Olympic Movement. I am just trying to fix a bad article, which misapplies the materials that it cites. Please read the sources before you decide for yourself. Many thanks to you. 50.76.30.17 (talk) 05:32, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * As a party to the related Arb case, and who has seen the subsequent editing, I think this is a definite behavioral match. --Rschen7754 05:47, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I am not a party to the related Arb case, but based on a review of the edits, I also agree that this is an obvious sockpuppetry case by a user attempting to circumvent a ban.  Ono pearls  (t/c) 06:08, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I've blocked the IP. Closed. Reaper Eternal (talk) 14:40, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

30 January 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

IP address resolves to Alexandria, Virginia, which is the known physical location of the Racepacket account. Address was blocked for six months in July 2012 by User:Courcelles as a sock of Racepacket. Sockpuppet investigations/Racepacket/Archive Block has no sooner expired than IP is active again, on the very same pages, with the same POV pushing agenda. Hawkeye7 (talk) 18:11, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

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


 * User:Courcelles has blocked the IP for 1 year. --Rschen7754 18:44, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * And a year this time, closing. Courcelles 18:57, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

09 June 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

More edits to Netball and Netball and the Olympic Movement articles from an IP address in the Virginia area, along the same lines as before. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:00, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I'm permanently recused from admin actions with this editor, but a clear DUCK to me especially with the edit summaries. --Rschen7754 21:02, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Blocked for 2 weeks, closing. Legoktm (talk) 21:19, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

06 October 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Another spate of edits, all to the same Netball-related articles associated with the banned user Racepacket. , all the same comments, and originating from the same geographical area as before. Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:16, 6 October 2013 (UTC) Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:16, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I'm recused on this, but :  --Rschen7754 07:43, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Blocked 2 weeks, closing. Legoktm (talk) 19:01, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

04 May 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Another spate of edits, all to the same Netball-related articles associated with the banned user Racepacket, all the same comments, and all originating from the same geographical area as before. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:50, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.'' Actually, they are from a different region. Racepacket lived in the area of Washington (city) in the District of Columbia; this IP resolves to a location in Seattle (city), Washington (state). The locations are on the opposite sides of the continent from each other.  Imzadi 1979  →   21:34, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Aaargh you're right. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:11, 4 May 2014 (UTC)


 * My application at Requests for page protection to protect the page has been decined. Stuartyeates (talk) 00:33, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Because of the obvious geographical disparity, this request is . I am very much aware of the extent and nature of the socking related to this topic, and the changes made this time are very similar to the point that a duck result wouldn't be out of the question, even considering the geographical disparity (the IP is a wifi hotspot, so please avoid blocking if it doesn't repeat). I'm going to note, however, that an objective reading of the edits made by this IP generally improved the Netball and the Olympic Movement article (in particular, getting rid of weasel words and reducing the use of the passive voice); the changes weren't perfect, and references would still have been needed for some inclusions. Even GA articles can be improved, and knee-jerk reversions because of a past history of problem editing does not excuse reverting to a poorer version of the article. I urge the editors who keep reverting to actually look at the edits being made and consider doing some actual article improvement instead of just article baby-sitting. Risker (talk) 04:21, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Both IPs blocked for 3 days. Closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:31, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

06 May 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Continuing the editwar on Netball and the Olympic Movement Stuartyeates (talk) 06:49, 6 May 2014 (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. Closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:32, 7 May 2014 (UTC)