Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/INkubusse

[edit] INkubusse

• INkubusse (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)
• 62.162.210.237 (talk • contribs • WHOIS • RDNS • RBLs • block user • block log • checkip)
• Revizionist (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)
• Amacos (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)
• 62.162.186.153 (talk • contribs • WHOIS • RDNS • RBLs • block user • block log • checkip)
• 62.162.185.55 (talk • contribs • WHOIS • RDNS • RBLs • block user • block log • checkip)
• 62.162.180.56 (talk • contribs • WHOIS • RDNS • RBLs • block user • block log • checkip)
• 62.162.190.149 (talk • contribs • WHOIS • RDNS • RBLs • block user • block log • checkip)

• Code letter: E

Possible 3RR evasion on Minorities in Greece:

• 21:01, 2 September 2007
• 20:37, 2 September 2007
• 18:03, 2 September 2007
• 14:16, 2 September 2007

Mr. Neutron 21:19, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Comment/Addition: According to [1], the 62.162.* IP is not INkubusse, but Revizionist (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser), who was tag-team revert warring together with INkubusse on the same article. Thus, it would be Revizionist who broke the 3RR and used IPs to evade it (also with two edits signed in and two anonymous ones), not INkubusse. Incidentally, their opponent Kapnisma (talk · contribs) broke 3RR too. Of course, it might be worth doing a check on INkubusse=Revizionist anyway. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:57, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Declined. Not serious enough to out any IPs, unless this happens too much. Voice-of-All 20:11, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Request: I'd like to renew this request to sort out a serious allegation, with a long block possibly at stake. Amacos (talk · contribs) was blocked for 3RR on 3 Sept, 20:17; Revizionist (talk · contribs) almost simultaneously but on an unrelated matter on 3 Sept, 20:19. Both users have previously been linked to the 62.162.176.0/20 IP range, a large public ISP in Macedonia with dynamic addresses ( Revizionist: [2], Amacos: [3]). Immediately after the block, starting from 20:21, a wave of IPs from the same range started reverting wildly on topics previously in the focus of either user (resembling Revizionist: [4], resembling Amacos: [5]). While Revizionist had not been active immediately prior to the block, Amacos had. Not being aware of the Amacos case, I imputed everything to Revizionist and blocked him for ten days. Today, Revizionist is back with a relatively calm and polite request to have his block reconsidered. I'd be glad if checkuser could help tell apart which user this reversion spree actually came from. Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:34, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Relisted. GrooveDog (talk) (Review) 21:23, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually, after following those editors for a few more days, I think this has now become unnecessary after all. Revizionist has been editing constructively and turns out to be a good-faith contributor; the disruption evidently came from the other guy. Case seems resolved, thanks everybody. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:26, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Which of the two "other guys" though? Mr. Neutron 19:45, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Amacos, pretty clear based on the editing pattern, wasn't it? INkubusse is problematic in other ways, but seems unrelated. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:00, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm not completely convinced about that, given his comments encouraging sockpuppetry, and numerous attacks. Plus there is more vandalism as we speak. Mr. Neutron 20:04, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Likely bordering on confirmed that the IPs are Amacos. Possible that Revizionist is the same, and INkubusse is Unrelated. Dmcdevit·t 10:14, 15 September 2007 (UTC)