Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Giovanni Giove (4th)

User:Giovanni Giove (4th)

 * Suspected sockpuppeteer

and so on...
 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * Report submission by

-- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 21:21, 2 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Evidence

User:Giovanni Giove, as an Italian nationalist, was recently banned indefinetly for repeated edit-warring and multiple ARBCOM restriction breaches (ARBCOM page: ). He is rather famous for continuing to make edit (i.e., edit-war) no matter the cicumstances. In the past he ignored calls for discussion, personal agreements, and even ARBCOM restrictions. To be brief, the evidence for him ignoring his restriction with various IPs is as follows:

1) The IPs started reverting within 48 hours of Giovanni Giove's ban.

2) The IP's reverting in the exact same articles Giovanni was interested in. Giove was finally blocked indefinetly for edit-warring in the Birth Place of Marco Polo article, and one of the first edits of the IP was that same article (here: ).

3) The IP is displaying the same radical POV that got User:Giovanni Giove banned in the first place. ( as IP 87.9.234.27, as IP 87.2.235.167, and  and  as IP 87.2.63.34)

4) If there are any doubts about these being User:Giovanni Giove's IPs, have a look at his statement in his previous sockpuppet report, before he was banned (here: ):
 * "THIS IS MY IP: 84.221.67.196. (...) Giovanni Giove (talk) 14:38, 20 November 2007 (UTC)"

All in all, there is little room for doubt. These IPs do appear to be the banned User:Giovanni Giove. Could someone please do something about this guy, nothing stops him!


 * Report submission by

AlasdairGreen27 21:17, 3 December 2007 (UTC) -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 17:32, 4 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Evidence

User:Giovanni Giove was banned on 30 November 2007. From the IP addresses listed above, the following edits were made on 1 and 2 December:

•	20:23, 1 December 2007 Birth Place of Marco Polo‎

•	08:55, 2 December 2007 User talk:DIREKTOR‎

•	08:52, 2 December 2007 User talk:Giovanni Giove‎

•	16:26, 1 December 2007 Birth Place of Marco Polo‎

•	16:25, 1 December 2007 Birth Place of Marco Polo‎

•	16:14, 1 December 2007 Birth Place of Marco Polo‎

•	16:09, 1 December 2007 Birth Place of Marco Polo‎

•	16:07, 1 December 2007 Birth Place of Marco Polo‎

•	15:55, 1 December 2007 Birth Place of Marco Polo‎

•	08:53, 1 December 2007 Talk:Fascist Italianization‎

•	08:19, 1 December 2007 Fascist Italianization‎

•	08:48, 2 December 2007 Birth Place of Marco Polo‎

•	09:04, 2 December 2007 Birth Place of Marco Polo‎

•	08:12, 2 December 2007 Birth Place of Marco Polo‎

•	20:09, 1 December 2007 Fourth Crusade‎

•	20:09, 1 December 2007 Siege of Zara‎

•	19:44, 1 December 2007 Lidia Bastianich

User:Giovanni Giove made the following edits in November 2007 prior to his ban (the number in brackets is the number of his edits):

•	Birth Place of Marco Polo‎ (21)

•	User talk:DIREKTOR (3)

•	User talk:Giovanni Giove‎ (31)

•	Talk:Fascist Italianization‎ (6)

•	Fascist Italianization‎ (24)

The last three (Fourth Crusade, Siege of Zara and Lidia Bastianich) are odditities, in that User:Giovanni Giove made no edits to those pages in November. However, the Croatian city of Zadar and whether it should be called by its Italian name (Zara) is one of his favourites. Lidia Bastianich left Istria as part of the Istrian exodus‎ - (22 edits to that article in November 2007)

User:Zenanarh entered the first report of his suspicions that User:Giovanni Giove was editing pages by writing his concerns on User:Giovanni Giove's talk page at 01:37, 2 December 2007. By 08:52, IP address 87.9.236.57 was already at User:Giovanni Giove's talk page denying any connection. This he managed even though User:Zenanarh had only undone the first edit in question with the comment "(removed edits of a banned user)", without any mention of User:Giovanni Giove. A dialogue followed here between User:Zenanarh and IP address 87.8.239.37 beginning at 11:55, 2 December 2007 which included the anonymous user saying "it's really probable that 'Marc Pol' is only a Francization". I'd never heard the word 'Francization' until yesterday. I wouldn't even have known what it meant. A quick check reveals that User:Giovanni Giove edited Francization 3 times in November 2007.


 * Report submission by

AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 10:49, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Evidence

Evidence relating to User:Cherso being a sockpuppet of User:Giovanni Giove. User:Giovanni Giove was banned at 15:57 on 6 November 2007. The account User:Cherso was opened at 21:34 on 6 November 2007.

During User:Giovanni Giove's 6-day ban which started at 15:57 on 6 November 2007, the account User:Cherso, having opened at 21:34 on 6 November 2007, went on to make 17 edits up to 9 November. During this time, his edits were all to Dalmatian Italians and its talk page (unusual in itself for a new user), such as remarking, with confident knowledge of Giovanni's state of mind, that "I am afraid you are dreaming too much. Wake up: Tito is dead! We are in 2007 and the nationalism is dead, even in the Balkans. We cannot keep saying in our contemporary Europe what you write in a bizantine way about San Grisostomo and the Zara coat of arms. I am sure Giovanni Giove will agree with this in a few days more". In typical Giovanni style, they included numerous grammatical errors and comments of a belligerent nature "(For the last time: They are not italians, they are dalmatian italians.)" User:Cherso stopped editing at 18:35 on 9 November 2007.

User:Giovanni Giove was banned again at 17:02, 16 November 2007, which expired at 14:10 on 19 November. Immediately after the expiry of User:Giovanni Giove's ban, and his return to editing Wikipedia, User:Cherso was active again, making 6 edits/comments on talk pages between 15:36 and 16:12. He was then sporadically active (4 edits on 24 November, 2 on 27 Nov and 3 on 28 Nov). User:Giovanni Giove was banned at 19:30, 30 November 2007. On 1 & 2 December the IP addresses above were active (see reports above) but have now stopped editing. Since then, User:Cherso has become active once more, with 16 edits starting at 14:35, 3 December 2007 up to 05:12, 5 December 2007.

All of the users, User:Giovanni Giove, User:Cherso and the IP addresses show the same interests. Namely an Italian nationalistic POV, especially regarding places with Italian minorities in the Adriatic and whether places in these areas should be known by their Italian names in Wiki articles. I understand that Cherso has been discussed before but the facts that his activity has mainly overlapped with User:Giovanni Giove's bans and that he is now active again is serious cause for concern.

'Cherso' in itself, by the way, is the Italian name for the Croatian island of Cres.


 * Evidences that Cherso is not Giovanni Giove

I started to write anonymously in Wikipedia since last year, mainly on articles related to the island where I was born: Cherso, in northern Dalmatia. Then I started to sign with the word "Cherso" in September/October and finally in November I opened my account User:Cherso, in order to defend the Italian points of view on Dalmatia, when I understood that the only Italian (G. Giove) discussing in the topic was attacked by a group of Croats and was soon to be banned or reduced to histerical behaviour (that was going to be punished by admins) by the continuous offenses and provocations received. I am an exiled Dalmatian Italian, born in Cherso in 1944 and moved by my father to the United States in 1948. Actually I live in Florida, where I am retired. The best evidence I can bring is my IP that is from Florida, while the one of Giovanni Giove is from Italy (I guess). If the admin AlasdairGreen27 allows me, I am ready to communicate directly with User:Giovanni Giove and in this way will be easily verified by a "wiki check up" that we are communicating from distant continents.

Answer to "In typical Giovanni style, they included numerous grammatical errors " : Sincerely I don't understand which are the numerous grammatical errors in the example, since I only corrected a mistake from a Croat (I am even an US citizen, with a Degree obtained from an accredited University). what strikes me is that the accusations are EXACTLY the same moved by User:Kubura.

Answer to "comments of a belligerent nature ("For the last time: They are not italians, they are dalmatian italians.)" " : What is wrong here? That phrase is a normal comment, without any belligerAnt nature. I want to pinpoint the mistake (letter "E" instead of letter "A" in the word belligerant) done by the admin accusing me and ask him if that mistake proves that he is User:Kubura". I am sure he will tell me that this is not an evidence and that all of us make mistakes writing fast on the computer. So, why accuse me with "strange" superficial evidences, that have been solved by a formner check up? Please, do another check up.

Finally:I am ready to collaborate with every examination or test about me in order to fully demonstrate that I am not Giovanni Giove Sincerely--Cherso (talk) 21:48, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Quick reply, prior to formal response: According to my dictionary, my spelling of belligerent is indeed correct. User:Cherso seems to be saying that User:Kubura and I are one and the same person due to our satisfactory ability to spell...AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 00:19, 6 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Response to Cherso

Giovanni/Cherso, if only that were true. Upon the opening of your account, you took immediately to edit warring. Unfortunately, comments such as "Kubura, you should moderate yourself with your offenses. You are not the only one with knowledge, while those who don't agree with your POV are all ignorants. Many Italians have surnames from other languages, as you know. Oberdan, Cavour, and many others have roots outside Italy and the same happens with France, Germany, England, etc" are hardly the work of new users. That, your 5th edit, is a giveaway. New users don't insult, revert, or get involved in talk pages, or edit wars. Where were you during Giovanni's unbanned periods? and how come you become active precisely when Giovanni gets banned? How dumb do you think we are? And, lastly, "wake up", is an old Giovannism, whether followed by "boy", or not. So your "wake up!" here was a bit of a slip, Giovanni, was it not? AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 22:42, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Checkuser results are in. The IPs listed above by Direktor are unrelated to Giovanni Giove. Which makes sense, because User:84.221.67.196 is him (or at least, he has been on it at some point) and it's on an entirely different ISP to the rest. – Steel 21:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * He's probaly just modulating his IP, like LEO, can nothing be done!? I mean I followed my restriction, he did as he pleased and now he continues to edit exactly as before, while I have to mind the restriction for another 10 months. -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 22:29, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Uh, what CU results? — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 02:51, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Alison ran a check after I pinged her on IRC last night. – Steel 20:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * What, there are no CU results?! -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 17:30, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The RFCU was not filed correctly, that's why no action was taken. I've fixed it. — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 16:30, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Cherso probably isn't G.G., but the others are much more simmilar. Please CU the guy... -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 22:38, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, like I said, Cherso's OK, but these IPs are an entirely different matter. -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 19:07, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The IPs do not appear to be directly related to GG, although the similarity of the edits suggests that they may be other individuals acting as proxies for him. Kirill 20:28, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * What do you propose? -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 22:07, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

This Suspected_sock_puppets/Giovanni_Giove_%283rd%29 shows Cherso is unrelated to Giove. — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 11:03, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * See conclusions. — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 22:48, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Conclusions
 * These IPs are, by WHOIS, assigned not dynamic, and all map to Italy (no surprise). Not likely they are one person in my opinion, but as Kirill suggested, more likely meat puppets. While the IP range is too big to range block, in my view, the IP editors are disruptive and I would not be surprised if GG is involved. Therefore, I've semi-protected Seige of Zara, Birth Place of Marco Polo, and Fascist Italianization for 3 months from anon and new user editing. — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 22:48, 6 December 2007 (UTC)