Cannabis Ruderalis



Paligun

Paligun (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log· investigate · cuwiki)
Report date January 26 2010, 15:11 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Evidence submitted by Ioeth (talk contribs twinkle friendly)

There appears to be a lot of sockpuppeting/meatpuppeting going on at Nagorno-Karabakh (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), which is to be expected somewhat in the Armenia-Azerbaijan arena. Some of these accounts have already been blocked by Moreschi, but I think a CU to find and block the source is warranted due to the ongoing edit-warring and disruption that is being caused. I could probably add more to this list, but I've only gone back about a month. These were the obvious single-purpose accounts that are clearly here to promote their agenda, usually showing up when a previous one gets blocked. Ioeth (talk contribs twinkle friendly) 15:11, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users

I have a reason to believe that Paligun is banned user Verjakette (talk · contribs) evading his ban. Editing habbits and topics are similar. Please see these previous CU requests for more info: [1] [2] [3] Recent suspected and proven socks:

Also see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Capasitor/Archive. Grandmaster 20:25, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

CheckUser requests
Checkuser request – code letter: A (Arbcom ban/sanction evasion )
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.    Requested by Ioeth (talk contribs twinkle friendly) 15:11, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
  •  Clerk endorsed not necessarily to check the specific accounts listed, but to confirm the blocks Moreschi has placed and identify related accounts in what appears to be an extensive sockfarm (in an area under ArbCom sanctions, which ArbCom has previously said grants checkusers wider leeway to perform checks). Nathan T 15:35, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Confirmed

 Likely

 Possible


These accounts appear to be Red X Unrelated

J.delanoygabsadds 16:14, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

Paligun (block log), 777od (block log) and Patrooyg (block log) indef-blocked for violating ArbCom remidies. All other users either already indef-blocked or unrelated. Ioeth (talk contribs twinkle friendly) 16:49, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Report date February 21 2010, 08:29 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
[edit]


Evidence submitted by Grandmaster
[edit]

I have no doubt that this is the same user who used a large army of socks to edit war on Armenia - Azerbaijan topics, which were a subject to a number of arbitration cases. These 2 edits [4] [5] show that Homered is the same person as User:Moonvise, an established sock of Paligun, who in turn is Verjakette (talk · contribs), indef banned user. Also note that the IP 69.143.181.246, which seems to belong to Homered, is almost identical to 69.143.185.164 and 69.143.131.204, which belonged to Verjakette, as described in this SPI request: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Capasitor/Archive. Also see the archive of this case for previous socks of this user. Grandmaster 08:29, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties
[edit]

See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users
[edit]
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
[edit]
Checkuser request – code letter: A (Arbcom ban/sanction evasion )
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.    Requested by Grandmaster 08:29, 21 February 2010 (UTC) [reply]


Accounts blocked/tagged, IP softblocked a month. J.delanoygabsadds 19:56, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically.

Report date April 14 2010, 19:48 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
[edit]


Evidence submitted by Grandmaster
[edit]

I have a reason to believe that Mcnabs is the banned user evading his ban. This account was registered soon after the previous sock of this user was blocked. He makes exactly the same POV edits to the same article Khojaly Massacre, favorite target of Paligun. Please see the archive of this case for more information about this banned user. Grandmaster 19:48, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Mcnabs registered one month after the previous bunch of socks was banned. Paligun is the same person as Verjakette (talk · contribs). Their IPs are almost identical. CU establsihed that the IPs 69.143.185.164 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and 69.143.131.204 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) belonged to Verjakette, and the IP 69.143.181.246 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) to Paligun. In this SPI request I made up a list of articles which Verjakette edited the most. Mcnabs edited the most the following articles:

Amaras Monastery

Tsitsernavank Monastery

Nagorno-Karabakh

Khojaly Massacre

All these articles have previously been edited and edit warred at by socks of Verjakette/Paligun. It is strange that a brand new user starts editing exactly the same set of articles (except for recently created 1994 Baku Metro bombings, which nonetheless is also Armenia-Azerbaijan related), making the same kind of POV edits. For instance, compare this edit [6] by Aptak (talk · contribs), sockof Verjakette, and this edit by Mcnabs: [7]. Both removed the fact that the region de-jure is a part of Azerbaijan. I think this gives enough grounds for suspicion. Grandmaster 06:03, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties
[edit]

See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users
[edit]
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
[edit]
Checkuser request – code letter: A  + E (Arbcom ban/sanction evasion and community ban/sanction evasion)
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.    Requested by Grandmaster 19:48, 14 April 2010 (UTC) [reply]

 Additional information needed You say that the account McNabs was registered soon after the block of the last sock. The account was registered 23 March, but the last sock I can see that was blocked was over a month previous on the 21 of February. Was there a more recent sock I'm overlooking? Also can you give me some diffs that show that this editor is a sock of Paligun? I see similarities, but no smoking gun. Auntie E. (talk) 01:27, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk endorsed I'm going to go ahead and endorse, perhaps a check can sort all this out. Auntie E. (talk) 16:55, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Confirmed that Homered == McNabs == Paligun.  Possible for Artsax. --jpgordon::==( o ) 04:48, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically.

Report date April 21 2010, 19:43 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
[edit]


Evidence submitted by Grandmaster
[edit]

The account of Zokolj (talk · contribs) was created the next day after Mcnabs (talk · contribs) (the last sock of Paligun) was banned. Since his edits on Stepanakert Air Base followed the edits of 69.88.160.3, it is likely that the IP also belongs to him. The edits by IP are mostly POV and vandalism (example of vandalism here: [8]) in the style of Paligun. It is necessary to check if Zokolj is another sock of the banned user. Grandmaster 19:43, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties
[edit]

See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users
[edit]
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
[edit]
Checkuser request – code letter: A  + E (Arbcom ban/sanction evasion and community ban/sanction evasion)
Current status – Unknown status – please fix!    Requested by Grandmaster 19:43, 21 April 2010 (UTC) [reply]
Already on this;  Confirmed that Zokolj == Paligun. Underlying IP blocked for three months. --jpgordon::==( o ) 19:55, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Clerk note: accounts have been blocked and tagged, and underlying IP has been blocked. SpitfireTally-ho! 20:41, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically.

Leave a Reply