Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Bailrigg

[edit] Bailrigg

• Bailrigg (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)
• Wenslet (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)
• Cantuarum (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)
• Arrievaulx (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)
• Fogscan (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)
• Southbourne (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser) (possible?)
• Lancsalot (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser) (possible puppeteer?)

This doesn't fit any of the code letters (or other options) well, but I shall say 'C'.

These users have been engaged in a campaign to use Wikipedia as a tool to spread their unusual views of British geography. I am deeply sceptical as to how many real people there are here. The last user, listed User:Lancsalot was the first to be made and has recently disrupted Lancashire with edits like this, a violation of WP:POINT and [1] which removed 15 citations.

The other users have engaged in various similar activities. Bailrigg was created in July 2006, and engaged in some useful edits before going a bizarre edit spree on the 17th/18th, including reinserting a copyvio, and remove several paragraphs of well-cited information without a reason. He mainly focused on north west of England articles. I placed a note at WP:AN/I about Bailrigg and he stopped editing on the 18th (edits at around 1am and then about 2300). Instead, several new users started editing. Southbourne started at 22:19 on the 18th, targetting Dorset-based articles, and then was followed by Cantuaraum at 22:42, targetting Kent and south-east London. Arrievaulx started at 00:52 on the 19th, doing similar edits. Fogscan started at 00:36 on that same 19th, targeting Tyne and Wear. Wenslet took up where Bailrigg left on September 19th at 21:23, targetting north west england articles - his second edit was to Template:Lancashire which demonstrates familiarity. Several of these accounts were activated today in this campaign - mainly changing wording of places, but in some cases reinserting false information that was removed, and also removing cited statements because they wish them not to be true.

We (myself, User:Mrsteviec and User:Jhamez84) feel that it is extremely unlikely all these users are different, especially given the timings of first edits! If it's not socks, it some very well coordinated meatpuppets. There may be other sockpuppets as well. It may seem strange to people from other parts of the world, but the best of these edits are in violation of the long-standing naming convention on this issue, are extremely provocative, and a violation of WP:SOAP - I've given some more details about more flagrant violations above and could continue. Intent of sockpuppets appears to be to stop us catching these edits, and also to try to make up a false consensus. Morwen - Talk 18:43, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Right. He's 'fessed up, all of a sudden. Funny, that! Userpage tags claim that Wenslet = Bailrigg and that Cantuarum = Arrievaulx = Fogscan. I still request checkuser to establish whether these two groups of users are the same or not, and also whether any of them are User:Lancsalot. Morwen - Talk 19:06, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Wenslet, Cantuarum, Arrievaulx, Fogscan, Southbourne, Grimsbyfish, Riveravon, and Cheesemania are all the same. Lancsalot is not linked to that group (he uses a single IP, and is the only one to use it). Raul654 13:29, 1 October 2006 (UTC)