The suspected sockpuppeter in question is User:Freestylefrappe (FSF), who was the subject of a lenghty request for arbitration earlier (see here [1]). This is provided for reference only as I'm unfamiliar with it. For a list of his previous socks, see here [2]. FSF was blocked the 12th of September, made his last edit the 17th, while the first suspected sock was created the 18th. What I know is that he has an history of editing articles related to Islam, one of which was recently linked to on the talk page of Discover_the_Networks. I followed it and examined the history. I'm not sure just what and how many diffs to give here, I know more is good but I'm not very familiar with checkuser. A controversial section was added by sock User:EFG (see [3]) which has been since staunchly defended first by three IP's in the same general range, then by DRK which was created 3 day after FSF last edit.
All users follow the same, clear patterns (I assume I'm not supposed to give too much detail here as to not to help sockpuppeters "improve", let me know if I'm wrong) and are in all respect obviously linked together (just take a look at this edit [4]). As the suspected sockpuppeter has been recently engaging in distruptive, wholesale reverts of questionably sourced material, and as this particular edit show a willingness to further coordinate his socks together [5] to influence a vote he himself created concerning at least one of those revert, I suggest a look be given to this matter. Note also that FSF probably created other socks, I'm just listing what I got which begs for immediate attention. Jean-Philippe 00:58, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
Valarauka(
T/
C)
17:39, 3 October 2006 (UTC)This is quite interesting. All of the registered users display a unusually high level of familiarity with Wikipedia policies for new users. BhaiSaab talk 18:01, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
Valarauka(
T/
C)
23:35, 3 October 2006 (UTC) Confirmed all.
The Uninvited Co.,
Inc. 18:29, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
Note: The socks are indef blocked.
Thatcher131 18:52, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Vicente_Fox&curid=32836&action=history WP:3RR, WP:OWN, WP:CIV, WP:AGF - please see Talk:Vicente Fox#NPOV 3. Basically, Ya ya ya ya ya ya, who's awfully new but seems to know his way around very well, has gotten into an NPOV dispute and unilaterally blanked much of the Vicente Fox article. When bits of that were reverted, by myself as well as others, he kept reverting them until he hit three reverts - then the IP came along and removed exactly the same text - what are the chances? This is a gross violation of most importantly WP:OWN. – Ch acor 01:40, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Clerk note: If you're asking to identify another user, that's fishing and will be declined unless you have a real good reason. If you're asking about 3RR on Ya ya and the IP, that's obvious and can be treated as such.
Thatcher131 (talk) 01:47, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Confirmed that this fellow is the latest reincarnation of Freestylefrappe.
Mackensen
(talk) 15:38, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
To clarify, whatever the user claims, I have direct irrefutable IP confirmation of the fact, as does the Arbitration Committee, which has moved to restrict him to one account. Regarding the IP address, we don't check against those in these cases as it says at the top of the page. Mackensen (talk) 14:01, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
The suspected sockpuppeter in question is User:Freestylefrappe (FSF), who was the subject of a lenghty request for arbitration earlier (see here [1]). This is provided for reference only as I'm unfamiliar with it. For a list of his previous socks, see here [2]. FSF was blocked the 12th of September, made his last edit the 17th, while the first suspected sock was created the 18th. What I know is that he has an history of editing articles related to Islam, one of which was recently linked to on the talk page of Discover_the_Networks. I followed it and examined the history. I'm not sure just what and how many diffs to give here, I know more is good but I'm not very familiar with checkuser. A controversial section was added by sock User:EFG (see [3]) which has been since staunchly defended first by three IP's in the same general range, then by DRK which was created 3 day after FSF last edit.
All users follow the same, clear patterns (I assume I'm not supposed to give too much detail here as to not to help sockpuppeters "improve", let me know if I'm wrong) and are in all respect obviously linked together (just take a look at this edit [4]). As the suspected sockpuppeter has been recently engaging in distruptive, wholesale reverts of questionably sourced material, and as this particular edit show a willingness to further coordinate his socks together [5] to influence a vote he himself created concerning at least one of those revert, I suggest a look be given to this matter. Note also that FSF probably created other socks, I'm just listing what I got which begs for immediate attention. Jean-Philippe 00:58, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
Valarauka(
T/
C)
17:39, 3 October 2006 (UTC)This is quite interesting. All of the registered users display a unusually high level of familiarity with Wikipedia policies for new users. BhaiSaab talk 18:01, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
Valarauka(
T/
C)
23:35, 3 October 2006 (UTC) Confirmed all.
The Uninvited Co.,
Inc. 18:29, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
Note: The socks are indef blocked.
Thatcher131 18:52, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Vicente_Fox&curid=32836&action=history WP:3RR, WP:OWN, WP:CIV, WP:AGF - please see Talk:Vicente Fox#NPOV 3. Basically, Ya ya ya ya ya ya, who's awfully new but seems to know his way around very well, has gotten into an NPOV dispute and unilaterally blanked much of the Vicente Fox article. When bits of that were reverted, by myself as well as others, he kept reverting them until he hit three reverts - then the IP came along and removed exactly the same text - what are the chances? This is a gross violation of most importantly WP:OWN. – Ch acor 01:40, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Clerk note: If you're asking to identify another user, that's fishing and will be declined unless you have a real good reason. If you're asking about 3RR on Ya ya and the IP, that's obvious and can be treated as such.
Thatcher131 (talk) 01:47, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Confirmed that this fellow is the latest reincarnation of Freestylefrappe.
Mackensen
(talk) 15:38, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
To clarify, whatever the user claims, I have direct irrefutable IP confirmation of the fact, as does the Arbitration Committee, which has moved to restrict him to one account. Regarding the IP address, we don't check against those in these cases as it says at the top of the page. Mackensen (talk) 14:01, 10 September 2006 (UTC)