Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Thewolfstar

[edit] Thewolfstar/Rule by Secrecy

• Thewolfstar (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)
• Rule by Secrecy (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)

After some blatantly disruptive sockpuppetering [1], a new figure, Rule by Secrecy appeared on the Talk:Anarchism page appearing more like Disquietude, backing up old ally Hogeye[2], and then coming out with telling right-wing US nationalism [3]. Donnacha 21:49, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

The CheckUsers must be as tired of the never-ending parade of new wolfster socks at Anarchism as are the editors of the page. I propose we block each of them as it appears, without bloating this page with the specifics. Would it be acceptable from the CheckUsers' point of view that any admin familiar with the wolf opinions, habits, and tone of voice make the call, based on likelihood and common sense ? Bishonen | talk 00:42, 22 September 2006 (UTC).

Sounds like a combination of both is required. Checkuser is just technical weight to sock checking, it isn't the be all and end all, so obvious socks should be blocked as they always have been. In this case as the user is known to make use of open proxies, blocking and adding to the bottom section of the page so that they can be looked into and any open proxies blocked may be the best way to proceed. --pgk 12:59, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

OK, adding three to the bottom of the page. Thanks. Bishonen | talk 13:13, 22 September 2006 (UTC).

Declined I don't believe that you need our permission to conclude that these are socks. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 20:54, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

No, I've already blocked them (and MONGO blocked one). I'll do it that way from now on, I just needed a hand to hold for a moment there. Thanks for providing it. :-) Bishonen | talk 21:11, 22 September 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Thewolfstar/Disquietude

• Thewolfstar (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)
• Disquietude (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)

Disquietude, stepping into the shoes of the outed wolfster sock Whiskey Rebellion at Anarchism and attempting to mold the page in her image, is yet another likely sock of permanently banned Thewolfstar. Please see this ANI discussion for rationale. Bishonen | talk 15:00, 18 September 2006 (UTC).

• Inconclusive. There is no useful data available. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 18:07, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

I know Thewolfstar is too old; did you check the most recent confirmed sock, Whiskey Rebellion (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)? Thatcher131 18:41, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

• Likely. Strong IP evidence supporting this. The fact that Disquietude initially used open proxies is also a good indication. Jayjg ^(talk) 19:15, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

OK, I'll block this sock. I know Thewolfstar uses a unique stable IP (over a LAN network, probably used by two people in the same family). I don't want to know the IP, but I request that the CheckUsers give it a good long block, please. Or would there be any reason not to? Bishonen | talk 21:00, 18 September 2006 (UTC).

Clerk note: In one of the non-transcluded sections below it is stated she uses Roadrunner with a dynamic IP. Thatcher131 21:24, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

See Thatcher131's statement above. Jayjg ^(talk) 21:25, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

She also knows from open proxies by now, probably. But she has a stable IP; I was told that by a checkuser. I'm sure she doesn't always use it. Bishonen | talk 21:29, 18 September 2006 (UTC).

As I said above, Disquietude used open proxies at first. Jayjg ^(talk) 22:54, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thewolfstar/Whiskey Rebellion

• Thewolfstar (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)
• Whiskey Rebellion (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)
• Lingeron (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)

Back in May, Thewolfstar was blocked indefinitely for constant incivility. As can be seen on this page, she has been blocked for using sockpuppets, including Lingeron at the end of July. Well, according to an ANI post, Maggie is back as Whiskey Rebellion. If you look at Whiskey's edits, they are in the exact same style as Lingeron. And they are from the same viewpoint and to the same articles (especially Anarchism and related articles). And as was stated on AN/I, Whiskey has a suspiciously high level of Wikipedia knowledge and experience. And Whiskey didn't really deny being Thewolfstar. --Woohookitty^(meow) 08:38, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Inputting some circumstances in support of performing the check. The name User:Whiskey Rebellion is of interest here, as having political implications which align Whiskey Rebellion with the rare or even (on wiki) unique political profile of Maggie the wolfstar. The Whiskey Rebellion (please click on article name) is a favorite topic for libertarians and pseudo-anarchists in the US. They believe that it showed the native assertion of rights against the oppression of government and that its putting down by the government was where it All Went Wrong, where the US showed its hypocrisy. The lunatic fringe of the lunatic fringe of the radical right invoke it as a rallying cry. Maggie's interests are political, and extremely fringe. She has insisted that the Democratic Party is socialist, that anarchism has to be her brand, etc. If Whiskey Rebellion isn't her, it's that Patriotfist guy. It's my opinion, though, since Whiskey Rebellion picked up exactly where the last Maggie sock left off (Anarchism) that the name, along with theediting pattern and interests, is enough evidence to presume identification. If not, then it's certainly enough to warrant investigation. Bishonen | talk 08:02, 12 September 2006 (UTC).

I'm a regular editor on the anarchism articles (one of the only veterans left I think, unless you count socks of banned users) and I can say that Whiskey Reb is the spitting image of Lingeron (who spent a lot of time on the Anarchism page). Agreed about the significance of the name (that was the first thing that made me suspect it was thewolfstar actually). Whiskey's insistence that the American frontier was a perfect example of anarchy is something straight out of Lingeron's old comments as well. Ungovernable Force^{The Wiki Kitchen!} 18:58, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Note: Deferred pending consultation with other checkusers. Mackensen (talk) 11:18, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Confirmed Mackensen (talk) 01:57, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] TheWolfstar

• Thewolfstar (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)
• OceanDepths (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)
• KingWen (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)

These two users were indefinitely blocked recently as possible sockpuppets of TheWolfstar, a user who was indefinitely blocked for exhausting the community's patience. I think the evidence on KingWen is reasonable, but I think the evidence on OceanDepths is weak, and is perhaps an innocent editor that unknowingly became involved. I'm bringing this request because OceanDepths requested unblocking and says he/she doesn't know what this all means. Mangojuice^talk 04:02, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I was the blocking admin for OceanDepths. She has very similiar contribution patterns to Thewolfstar, namely, focusing on articles relating to Anarchism, Thomas Jefferson (and other early American leaders), and Liberalism. An edit concerning Henry David Thoreau is telling, as Thewolfstar has had a frequent interest in Thoreau quotes. The creation of an uncapitalized user subpage for no apparent purpose is also a sign of a Wolfstar sock. Keep in mind that, according to Thewolfstar's website, she "won't be done poking until [her] mission is accomplished". Tijuana Brass^¡Épa! 04:23, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Confirmed Mackensen (talk) 17:55, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thewolfstar and Lingeron

• Thewolfstar (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)
• Lingeron (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)

Clerk note: A discussion on Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents produced a discussion on Lingeron and Thewolfstar being the same person. A relevant portion of the discussion is below, and the entire discussion is available here: Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&oldid=66757933#Lingeron_.28talk_.E2.80.A2_contribs.29 The checkuser is User:Essjay -- Kevin_b_er 00:36, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:Thewolfstar and its meatpuppet User:Lamb of god

• Thewolfstar (talk • contribs) and Lamb_of_god (talk • contribs)
• Dot_Bitch (talk • contribs)

Another suspected sock of Thewolfstar (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log), permabanned by the community for extreme disruptiveness: new user Dot_Bitch (talk • contribs). Check please? Note, please check also if Dot Bitch is related to Lamb_of_god (talk • contribs), permanently blocked as meatpuppet of Thewolfstar. Dot Bitch has similar interests and same stylistic tics as previous identities (such as beginning messages with "Hey" not followed by any punctuation — fairly distinctive). Dot Bitch's very few edits include a sympathetic one on User talk:Lamb of god and one to User:CorbinSimpson, an encourager of Thewolfstar. Bishonen | talk 11:59, 21 May 2006 (UTC).

Note: I'll check, in order to maintain current records, but that username is a clear {{usernameblock}}, regardless of the results. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 12:23, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Possible. Dot Bitch is editing from an IP registered to a hosting company; good traffic *rarely* comes from hosting companies. This is a common trick of sockpuppeteers to avoid detection. I can't confirm it outright, but it is certainly possible. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 12:40, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Also, note that Macai (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log) appears to be the same user as Thewolfstar. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 12:42, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the check. Macai claims to be her 18-year-old son, living with her, sharing a LAN network. I have spoken with him, and assume good faith. I believe he is who he says he is, for several reasons. Anyway, there's no abuse coming from the Macai account. Bishonen | talk 13:07, 21 May 2006 (UTC).

That's entirely likely. The two are definately coming from the same machine/personal network; the pattern is too distinct for it to be a dynamic IP or other similar situation. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 13:15, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

In good faith, I feel that I should note that Dot Bitch does not use the <big> tags that Thewolfstar and Lamb of god were fond of. Also, the user was unaware (to my knowledge) of how to sign comments and appeared to get my name from the Esperanza member list. I could be wrong, but I figure I might as well keep good faith in mind. - Corbin ^{Be excellent} 16:11, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

As I said, it's possible, but can't be confirmed. However, if the individual has grown savvy enough to make attempts at avoiding detection, it is not a very far stretch to desguising stylistic features and feigning ignorance. At about the 500th sockpuppet investigation, you begin to realize the great lengths people will go to in order to make just one more edit. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 16:20, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Thewolfstar has confirmed that Dot Bitch is her sock, see User talk:Dot Bitch. Both are now indefinitely blocked. Bishonen | talk 01:41, 22 May 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Thewolfstar

• Thewolfstar (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)
• 24.161.22.244 (talk • contribs • WHOIS • RDNS • RBLs • block user • block log) posted to my talk page unsigned, and when I went to look who it was, I saw it was one of three edits made by the account, the second of which was to an AN/I vandal from earlier this week, and in the third, the user identified themself as Metrocat, evading a ban. I blocked based on that, but I think indef is probably inappropriate for an IP. I don't know how to get much information from the WHOIS report, but could someone more IP savvy than I please reduce the block to whatever length is actually appropriate? -GTBacchus^(talk) 03:19, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Our 'friend' Metrocat, or Thewolfstar is playing some cute games. The last user whose talkpage the IP commented on (their 'cousin') is Twasmetrec. The name is an anagram of "Merecat TWS", or Merecat (who Thewolfstar considered a friend) and TWS, or Thewolfstar.

But I wouldn't advocate blocking that account - give them the opportunity to try to do something right, and maybe they will realize that Wikipedia is quite welcoming to people who want to work on the encyclopedia.

The IP in question appears to be a RoadRunner account in Herndon, Virginia. It doesn't appear to be a proxy of any sort. I don't see a compelling reason to block; it only plays into this person's apparent persecution complex. KWH 04:51, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Confirmed It was indeed Metrocat, who is indeed Thewolfstar, and it looks like he's only been on it the last few days (since the 5th); his IP appears to shift every three days or so. It's a dynamic RoadRunner IP, so I'd say a week will probably be sufficient, though he'll likely just force reconnect to get a new one.

On a related note, these are the same user:

• Metrocat (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log)
• Twasmetrec (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log)
• Buckyball-z (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log)
• Macai (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log)

No doubt; all the same user. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 04:48, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Jeez SJ, you stole my thunder... and you did it the easy way! KWH 04:54, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

If anyone wants to lift or reduce the block, I have no problem with that. -GTBacchus^(talk) 04:59, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thewolfstar

• Thewolfstar (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)
• JesterBuster (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)
• Communitybanned (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)

I'm told JesterBuster and Communitybanned, whom I just indef blocked, are socks of Thewolfstar. In any event, they're using misconfigured proxies, so it may be worth looking up the IP and blocking that as well. Ral315 (talk) 07:56, 12 June 2006 (UTC)