Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ragusino/Archive

Report date January 24 2009, 15:02 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets:


 * Evidence submitted by AlasdairGreen27 (talk)
 * Ragusino is indeffed and a sockpuppeteer: See User_talk:Ragusino and [Category:Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Ragusino].
 * Cristian.Bilicic mainly edits articles created and/or edited by Ragusino. Typical examples - House of Gundulić/Gondola, House of Getaldić/Ghetaldi, House of Bondić/Bonda, Rajmundo Kunić, Autonomist Party.
 * Cristian.Bilicic is very keen on adding the Italian versions of the names of obscure people from the Dalmatian nobility, which was also Ragusino's m. o. - see.
 * Today, having presumably forgotten he'd already uploaded them as Ragusino in 2007, Cristian.Bilicic re-uploaded duplicates of old photos from his own collection or family album. See Special:FileDuplicateSearch/Familiar_Photo_Gravosa_1909.jpg and Special:FileDuplicateSearch/Birth_Certificate_Ana_de_Caboga.jpg


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users


 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments


 * Conclusions
 * ✅, also . Expanded my /21 Ragusino rangeblock to /19. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 20:37, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Tiptoety talk 17:57, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. Tiptoety  talk 20:50, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Report date July 24 2009, 08:39 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * Evidence submitted by DIREKTOR

The English is identical, the area of interest is identical, and the POV-pushing is identical to User:Ragusino, who was banned for violating WP:HARASS. In particular I emphasize the area of interest, since virtually noone edits the Ragusa nobility articles such as House of Kabužić. I know the guy, and have been harassed by him before - there can be little doubt its User:Ragusino, however, I added User:Caboga just to be on the safe side since User:Solitudo keeps quoting his opinions. The English is far removed, though, and Ragusino has a history of sockpuppeteering. -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 08:39, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

This user [User:DIREKTOR]], only change and revert without source, if you look the page House of Kabužić and the name Kabužić, this surname doesn`t exist and don`t have any source, this user change and remove all the official source and opinion, like the User:Caboga], than i will take restore in the page.[[User:Solitudo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Solitudo (talk • contribs) 12:31, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.

see this talk page and the revert of User:DIREKTOR http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:House_of_Kabu%C5%BEi%C4%87/Caboga  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Solitudo (talk • contribs) 12:48, 24 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by other users

Additional information needed: Please provide a code letter. SPCUClerkbot (talk) 14:57, 24 July 2009 (UTC) Additional information needed: Please provide a code letter. SPCUClerkbot (talk) 13:27, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments


 * Conclusions
 * is . is ✅. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 13:27, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Blocked/tagged confirmed. Peter Symonds ( talk ) 15:10, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Report date July 30 2009, 00:13 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * Evidence submitted by DIREKTOR

Its probably him again... the ridiculous English is the same, the interest is the same. A quick check will confirm this. If it is User:Ragusino yet again, I suggest methods other than a simple ban of the new sock be considered. -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 00:13, 30 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users

Additional information needed: Please provide a code letter. SPCUClerkbot (talk) 12:29, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
 * The sock was blocked by Nishkid. -- Kanonkas : Talk  15:33, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

-- Kanonkas : Talk  15:33, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Conclusions
 * ✅. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 12:29, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by DIREKTOR
Its another sock of User:Ragusino, same incredibly bad English mistakes, same POV, same articles. He's damaging text all over the place... on Christmas eve no less. -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 17:35, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, please don't let the HUGE completely unrelated response post deter you... -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 18:47, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
I want to translate in English the former post of October 2008 as recently required by John K., an admin of English Wikipedia (desidero tradurre in inglese il precedente post di ottobre, su richiesta dell’amministratore della wikipedia inglese John K.):

Here there are some comments received this October 2008 about the shameful denial (of an Italian school in Zara, explained in detail in my September post) done by Croatian authorities and related to the unbelievable behaviour of a group of admins of the English wikipedia (who are friends of the Slovenian-Croatian gang, that is against all the Italians writing articles on Dalmatia/Istria in their English wiki).

Indeed there are many angry and disgusted comments about the one-sided approach by some admins toward articles on Dalmatia/Istria in the English wikipedia. An approach that protects only the Croatian points of view. As a consequence, always the final result is that ONLY the Italians are banned! Not one single EDIT WAR has finished in a favorable way for the Italians and always the Slavs have received support from the admins! This is an unbelievable fact that is based mainly on the trick of the Slavs of using the MEATPUPPETRY method (helping each other in group) and the “carrot-pole” method (crazy AlasdairGreen27 and Direktor usually first attack (pole) and quickly say “sorry” (carrot) in order to seem “friendly” to the admins)

Now the Slavs are destroying another user named “Ragusino”, (Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Ragusino), but before him they have destroyed/banned at least twelve (!) Italians with the help of their friends (some english admins without knowledge of what is REAL impartiality)! This is the case -for example- of Luigi 28 (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Luigi_28&oldid=218641469#Report_.232), who is still waiting for the report confirming that he is another Italian named “Pio” and in the Italian wikipedia has successfully demonstrated (http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussioni_utente:Barba_Nane#Re:_Presbite) that this is a croatian lie!, Marygiove (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Marygiove) who is still complaining about her innocence and the different sets of rules in wikipedia(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Romaioi#Different_set_of_rules_for_different_users), Giovanni Giove (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Giovanni_Giove&oldid=175708349), Pio (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:PIO#Lay_off_Yugoslavia.21), Brunodam (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Brunodam&oldid=228141778), etc.

Even an australian named Romaioi (who wrote supporting some points of view of the Italians) was attacked by the Sloveno-Croatian gang but survived the requested ban (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Romaioi/Archive_1#Sockpuppetry_case), probably because he is not Italian (sometimes it seems to me that a few english admins harrass only Italians as a consequence of WWII……)

As usual, this coordinated attack is always done by the crazy fanatic AlasdairGreen27 (who needs help from a psychologist) with his meatpuppet friends “Direktor” (who wrote this stupidity:” BTW, AFTER WW2 YUGISLAVIA COULD HAVE ABSOLUTELY PASTED ITALY, IT HAD THE 5th STRONGEST ARMY IN EUROPE…..BELIEVE ME, YOU WOULD HAVE A BORDER ON THE RIVER PAD (PO) IF YOU HADN’T COWARDLY BACKED DOWN OVER TRST (TRIESTE). This is military fact. DIREKTOR”), “Kubura”, “Zenanarh”, etc….

What a shame this behaviour of some english admins!!

On Wikipedia some serious admins even posted this: “This IP address, 4207534, is registered to ”’EarthLink”’, an ‘Internet service provider|Internet service provider’ through which thousands of individual users may connect to the internet. This IP may be randomly assigned to a different person when the current user disconnects. ”’Warnings or messages left on this page may not be received by the intended user.”’ Caution should be used when blocking this IP or reverting its contributions without checking”.

So why they ban Italians only on the evidence of an IP that can be changing continuously (see this example:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:207.69.137.41), like they have done to Brunodam, Pio, Cherso, Luigi 28, Marygiove, etc…?? This mistake has happened recently with IP 709059748, accused by the crazy fanatic AlasdairGreen27 to be a sockpuppet of Brunodam without Check Up and/or sure evidences (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:70.90.59.74&oldid=244370415).

DEFINITIVELY, THIS IS A SHAME!

—————–

Anyway, here are some comments with the requested translations:

The first, just arrived from Pi., is simply astonishing!

“…You are right, Palazzo. I smell something wrong in the behaviour of these english admins. They are so against us Italians and this can be noted by the different behaviour they have with an Italian and an Australian attacked in a similar way by the same group of Sloveno-Croatian fanatics. Please look how the Italian user named “D’Agrò” is banned (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/Giovanni_Giove_(6th)) even if he complains againsty the crazy user “AlasdairGreen27/AfrikaPaprika”, while the australian user “Romaioi” is left -after his detailed defense- without harm and without the croatian requested ban.(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Romaioi/Archive_2 ). What a difference! Pi.

PS:Annexed it is the full tentative of survival of the poor D’Agrò, who was incredibly banned only BECAUSE HE WRITES IN A STYLE SIMILAR -according to some english admins- TO THE ONE OF OTHER ITALIANS BANNED PREVIOUSLY (LIKE GIOVANNIGIOVE):

User talk:D’Agrò From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock request while you are blocked.

Request reason: “I’m not a sockpuppet. Please check my Ip, do a Check User I’M NOT A SOCKPUPPET AND I DID’N ANY ILLEAGAL PROCEDURE!”

– Decline reason: “As noted at WP:RFCU, requests for checkuser to prove your purported innocence are rarely accepted, so please do not ask. As noted here, most administrators will decline as a matter of course an unblock request that makes such a request. I wrote that section. I’m one of those admins. — Daniel Case (talk) 20:10, 5 October 2008 (UTC)”

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read our guide to appealing blocks first and use the template again. Abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock request while you are blocked.

Request reason: “I need your help, please. An administrator named “Jehochman” blocked me. I’ll try to write to in a civil manner, but i’m really-really upset.Why do he blocked me? I’m not a sockpuppet of this “Giovani Giove”. If SOMEONE HAVE DONE a check user of my Id’s, can easily ahe checked this!I’ve just been so unlike to come across a voice “Giovanni Luppis” the has been edited by him previously and when he got a lot of disputes, referring to the voice history.I edited this voice only because Giovanni Luppis is one of my ancestor on maternal side so I’m QUITE aware about his origins, family and ancestry.He blocked me without having even done a check-user!!!He blocked me without having even READ the ridiculous “evidences” “against” me…! Because, if he would have done it he MUST have seen that the UNIQUE “allegations” are WRONG and/or FAKES, as I’m already stated here. Infact AlasdairGreen27 wrote there that: “New user D’Agrò’s first contribution was to reinsert an image [1], uploaded by GG [2]“… but this is TOTALLY absurd, because is WRONG/FAKE!!!In fact the image I reinserted [3] IS NOT the same uploaded by that “Giovani Giove[4]!I already wrote this to the administrator “Tiptoety”, asking him if could be possible to erase from my user page the sockpuppet allegations BECAUSE I HAD NOTHING TO DO WHIT THIS and he told me “yes”. So, why now an other administrator blocked me?Which are the reasons?There are NO ALLEGATIONS, NO EVIDENCES and NOBODY MADE A CHECK USER!I’m intent to accept this. this “Jehochman” declared: “I am blocking the named accounts based on behavior.” (!) Which behavior? What I did that is not allowed on wikipedia?I’m sure someone will help me because my case will be reconsidered and unblocked me quickly I’m ready to give any other details, just ask.Waiting a quick and kind reply I’m ready to prove my real name sending a copy of my documents id, to prove that i’m not this Giovani Giove! Thanks M.”

— Decline reason: “The fact that you are currently avoiding your block by editing your own user page while logged out shows that you are indeed a person who is willing to avoid a block. The evidence suggests that you are the user you are accused of being. A checkuser would be pointless; by changing your ip address to edit your user page, you have already demonstrated that you are knowledgeable enough to change your ip address, so checking to see if you are using the same ip would not reveal anything useful. — FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:03, 5 October 2008 (UTC)”

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read our guide to appealing blocks first and use the template again. Abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.

What are you sainG????? I’m not so stupid to can’t understand that If I can’t edit my own talk page ( and the n WHY because it is write that also blocked user CAN edit is own talk page?) I’m not so stupi to dont know that I can edit it whit an IP. I’m not inten to avoid ANY block, BUT THOS BLOCK IST INJUSTICE!!!! The first thing I did is have sent THREE email to the administrator how blocked me an to other two administrators TEHRE ARE NO REASONS FOR THIS BLOCK. PLEASE, READ THE “ALLEGATIOS” AND ANYBODY CAN CHECK THAT THERE ARE NO ALLEGATIONS AT ALL! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.80.59.63 (talk) 21:08, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

You aren’t logged in right now as User:D’Agrò. You’ve logged out, and are using an anonymous ip. So how can I know you are User:D’Agrò? I know because you’re continuing a conversation that User:D’Agrò was having, and you’re doing it in User:D’Agrò’s distinct writing style. That’s also how we know you’re User:Giovanni_Giove. Please stop creating new accounts. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:12, 5 October 2008 (UTC) THIS IS PURE KAFKA!! I’M NOT CREATING ANY NEW USER ACCOUNT I’M NOT THIS GIOVANNI GIOVE! THERE ARE NO EVIDENCES AGAINST ME, PLEASE READ THE page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:S…(6th) SOMEONE MISUNDERSTAND EVERITHINK!–91.80.59.63 (talk) 21:15, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock request while you are blocked.

Request reason: “I read one more carefully this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:R… the allegations said: that “all of the three accounts” did something… but my account is not AMONG THOSE THREE! IS different. Against my account there are NO ALLEGATIONS AT ALL. Nobody wrote that I’m writing in the same style as this “Giovanni Giove”. The unique allegation against me is PROVED WRONG. They accused me to have “reinserted an image uploded by this “Giovanni Giovi” but this was a mistake because the image I reinserted WASN’T the image upoleded by this “Giovanni Giove” but it is A DIFFERENT IMAGE! So WHY I must be blocked if there are NO REAL ALLEGATIONS against me?”

— Decline reason: “The unblock reviews by the last 2 administrators explained the rationale here pretty well. — Cirt (talk) 23:01, 6 October 2008 (UTC)”

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read our guide to appealing blocks first and use the template again. Abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.

You have not even read WAT i WROTE! shame OF YOU!–D’Agrò (talk) 23:18, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Retrieved from “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:D%27Agr%C3%B2“

————————————

The second comment is from Palazzo:

”……Nane, you write that the english admins are not biased against we Italians, but are being “cheated” with tricks by a group of Croats and Slovenians, who hate everything is Italian in Dalmatia and Istria. But how is it possible that they (the english admins) see a nationalistic appraisal to the subjects only from the Italian side and NEVER see anything wrong from the Slavs side? I cannot believe that they are so stupid and cannot understand that ALL the articles on Istria and Dalmatia have been totally changed -toward pro croatian points of view- since last november 2007 (when was banned the first Italian wikipedian: GiovanniGiove). Furthernore, how is it possible that no one of these admins is able to see the continuous MEATPUPPETRY done by the Slavs (mainly Direktor and crazy AlasdiarGreen27)? And the Slavs are never punished, not even for a simple 3RR, or are menaced to get a ban for a day? Astonishing! Look -for example- how, in the discussion page of the psicopatic AlasdairGreen27, he attacks with obscenities and bad words an Italian who disagrees with him about Italian Istria: no intervention of any Admin against him, but you can imagine what would have happened if an Italian wikipedian would have used such a bad words! Sorry, Nane, but THERE MUST BE SOMETHING WRONG behind all this one-sided behaviour of some English admins against we Italians who write about Istria/Dalmatia on the English wiki. Palazzo”

——————–

I totally agree with Pi. and Palazzo!

Here it is a small list of some Italians banned -from the english wikipedia- because of this “meatpuppet” group of Sloveno-Croatian fanatics (who use tactics of deceit like in the Tito/Stalin era): GiovanniGiove Pio Cherso Luigi 28 Marygiove Ragusino (soon to be banned) Brunodam D’Agro etc., etc…. Too many, don’t you believe? It looks like casualties of a stupid and crazy Balkan war of our days……

Finally, allow me to repeat: WHAT A SHAME THIS BEHAVIOUR OF SOME ENGLISH ADMINS!!

How is it possible that they don’t understand the croatian lies, evident to all of us with real knowledge of Dalmatia/Istria topics? Indeed, here it is a comment I have just received (11/27/08) from Edwin Veggian:

…”..After the ethnic cleansing of the autochtonous Italian population in Dalmatia, Quarnero region and Istria, Croatian nationalist historians are publishing books in English language and using Internet sites to spread a false history of the above mentioned regions. All Italian patrician families that governed for a thousand of years the Repubblica di Ragusa (Dubrovnik) are being given “a corresponding Croatian name”. The bishop of Capodistria (1500’s) Pier Paolo Vergerio is being presented as “Petar Pavao Vergerije” without telling readers that he was not a Slav. Natale Bonifacio, a cartographer, and Martino Rota, a portaitist, both born in Sebenico (Sibenik) are called respectively Bozo Bonifacic and Martin Rota Kolunic. These Croatian historians are cheating (and they don’t care)…”…

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 * Mljet blocked indefinitely by LessHeard vanU. NW ( Talk ) 17:00, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by DIREKTOR
Its Ragusino again... This guy has more socks than there are Wiki users. Same edits, same articles, same POV. Please check 'em and block 'em. -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 19:57, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: the user was already blocked as a DUCK. -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 21:58, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Requested by -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 19:57, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

– I would have normally declined this per WP:DUCK, but there is a previously-blocked underlying IP range involved (see /Archive) which could be checked to see if it's the same range used or different. –MuZemike 20:25, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

✅



Ranges are too large to effectively block. J.delanoy gabs adds 17:49, 27 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Blocked and tagged. Tiptoety  talk 03:40, 28 May 2010 (UTC)