Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Jvolkblum (16th)

User:Jvolkblum (16th)
(16th)
 * Suspected sockpuppeteer


 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * Report submission by

Orlady (talk) 15:50, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Starting new report with just one suspected sock, although I expect others to appear. Jvolkblum is a banned user with an extensive record of sockpuppetry.
 * Evidence

User name User:StAuNcH ChArAcTeR displays alternation of upper and lower case, which is similar to some past Jvolkblum sockpuppets. User's edit pattern is consistent with the behavior of numerous past Jvolkblum puppets. User joined on 6 June and created a complex user page a few minutes later (something that many Jvolkblum puppets have done). Has made a few miscellaneous minor edits, created an article (currently PROD-ed for lack of notability) for a street in Manhattan (Jvolkblum puppets have sometimes shown interest in Manhattan streets), and uploaded and inserted new logo images for two of Jvolkblum's pet institutions: Sarah Lawrence College and Sound Shore Medical Center of Westchester.‎ (Jvolkblum is fond of logos.)

I am now adding User:207.218.231.214. Less than an hour after I posted this case for User:StAuNcH ChArAcTeR, this anonymous user showed up to remove the PROD template (which had been added 5 days ago; "funny" that no action was taken until it appeared on the sockpuppetry case) from Bank Street (Manhattan)‎ and went to Sarah Lawrence College campus and restored changes made earlier by now-blocked Jvolkblum sock User:Marcello Khattar (this was a very complex edit that rearranged the text and added a bunch of images that appear to me to be images removed earlier for copyvio issues). The IP is from ThePlanet.com, which is one of several ISPs that Jvolkblum uses to edit logged out. It would be very nice if it would be possible to block the IP ranges that Jvolkblum uses, but there are many... --Orlady (talk) 18:30, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Orlady has gone after me before ( Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Jvolkblum ), and she did this after I was a registered user for the shortest period of time. I looked to see the character traits of Orlady when this happened to me before because I wanted to figure out what had happened. Now she is doing this one more time and it looks as if to be the same reasoning as before. She is working against a banned user and feels that is justification to control SO many topics and to be so rude. I do not think I joined in January as claimed above but I see it as showing my membership started in June (((((* only upon my explanation did orlady go back and change the date from her initial claim of January to June, her reason being "corrected error in my posting -- June is correct; I don't know how I typed January".))))) Is there a minimum number of edits that a users gotta maintain or they are in trouble? b/c Im not sure what relevance those type comments have other than to make me appear guilty of this junk. I dont believe the 'convenient' additional connections are fair or credible either. My adding of a logo,seal to SLC is done according to the rules to add a logo. I fixed sound shore medical center because the picture was not very good. . but that was only after orlady had made random edits to the hospital page (one of her 'pet' pages, along with Sarah Lawrence, New York, Westchester, Port Chester, Chappaqua, New Rochelle for example) that are what caught my attention for SSMC. Doubtful anyones gonna listen tho - auf wiedersehen. --75.125.163.147 (talk) 18:45, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comments


 * In response to the above statement, which apparently is by User:StAuNcH ChArAcTeR editing logged out, I corrected my original statement to change the erroneous "January" to "June." Believe it or not, that was a typo. I infer from the user's comments that he/she acknowledges being the same person as one or more of the accounts blocked earlier. --Orlady (talk) 04:05, 28 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Conclusions
 * IP noted above & the one who made the above comment are similar (for example: see WHOIS for 207.218.231.214 and 75.125.163.147. Consequently, both are blocked for a period of 1 month. Rud  get  13:00, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm near convinced that the registered user noted for the review above is Jvolkblum. I've blocked 24-25 socks of his and I recognise editing patterns, activity periods, articles and topics of interest and these are all present here. Consequently, blocked indefinitely. Orlady, in case of any more suspected socks give me a note on my talk page and I'll review; it'll save having to make countless SSP cases. Rud  get  13:08, 28 July 2008 (UTC)