Az81964444 created the article Border War (1910-1918), and he and I had some conflict after I edited it, which included what I interpreted as an attack on me, after what was determined to be incivility on my part – all discussed on on AN/I – which resulted in the editor retiring. I've continued to watch the article, and editor $1LENCE D00600D did some edits to it today. I reverted one of them and left a message on their talk page. The editor's response on my talk page indicated that he was the author of the article. This picqued my curiosity, and I looked back into the history of these editors. What I found is a pattern of a user who edits for a number of months, almost always on articles related to battles – frequently including the Battle of Ambos Nogales, which was created by AZ8196 (other IDs have created other battle articles) – and then drops the ID and starts another. I have tracked the editors back to AZ8196, although they may go farther back than that.
The pattern seems deliberate: note that IDs are dropped near the end of a month, and are usually created at the beginning of a month. There's one gap, which I noted above, but otherwise the move from one ID to another is direct and almost immediate. There's only one ID (Robertp6165) which overlaps, and that ID only edited two articles, First Battle of Dragoon Springs (created by TJ13090) and Second Battle of Dragoon Springs, so it may have been created specifically for that purpose.
Wikistalk results for these six editors show considerable overlap, even considering their focus on military-related (actually, battle-related) articles:
This is in the context of the 6 IDs having edited 1753 unique pages in their editing careers. (2063 total "unique" pages less 310 overlaps). This means that these 6 IDs have overlapped on about 14% of all the articles they have edited, a high percentage, and unlikely to be the result of coincidence.
I have no evidence that the edits of this editor have been disruptive, but the pattern of starting IDs and then dropping them, without acknowledging the connection, is a concern, since it looks like avoiding scrutiny. If the editor has a legitimate explanation for doing so, that's fine, but if not they should probably be asked to pick one of the IDs to edit from and the rest should be indef blocked, and the user told not to continue to create new accounts. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 08:21, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Once again, we see this editor using a new account to continue working on the articles they created with a "retired" account. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 10:32, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
I'm requesting CheckUser, despite the clear behavioral evidence, because I may have missed an ID, and I'm not sure how far data goes back, so I don't know if staleness is an issue or not. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 18:22, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
But, even if this was "retaliatory" in some way (and it's not), the evidence shows what the evidence shows, it's pretty undeniable. The easiest thing would be for $1LENCE D00600D to make a statement admitting their behavior, giving a reasonable explanation for it, and pledging not to do it again. I'd be perfectly happy with that, as I'm sure most people in the community would be. I'm not seeking to have this editor blocked or sanctioned, just to put a stop to a rather disruptive, apparently scrutiny-avoiding pattern of behavior. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 19:02, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
See Defending yourself against claims.
Stale:
Possible – similar articles but different physical location:
– MuZemike 04:44, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Okay, it seems like this has been sitting around forever. I've looked over this and have come to a decision.
If anyone disagrees with this decision, let me know on my talk page. -- Atama 頭 17:27, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
Az81964444 created the article Border War (1910-1918), and he and I had some conflict after I edited it, which included what I interpreted as an attack on me, after what was determined to be incivility on my part – all discussed on on AN/I – which resulted in the editor retiring. I've continued to watch the article, and editor $1LENCE D00600D did some edits to it today. I reverted one of them and left a message on their talk page. The editor's response on my talk page indicated that he was the author of the article. This picqued my curiosity, and I looked back into the history of these editors. What I found is a pattern of a user who edits for a number of months, almost always on articles related to battles – frequently including the Battle of Ambos Nogales, which was created by AZ8196 (other IDs have created other battle articles) – and then drops the ID and starts another. I have tracked the editors back to AZ8196, although they may go farther back than that.
The pattern seems deliberate: note that IDs are dropped near the end of a month, and are usually created at the beginning of a month. There's one gap, which I noted above, but otherwise the move from one ID to another is direct and almost immediate. There's only one ID (Robertp6165) which overlaps, and that ID only edited two articles, First Battle of Dragoon Springs (created by TJ13090) and Second Battle of Dragoon Springs, so it may have been created specifically for that purpose.
Wikistalk results for these six editors show considerable overlap, even considering their focus on military-related (actually, battle-related) articles:
This is in the context of the 6 IDs having edited 1753 unique pages in their editing careers. (2063 total "unique" pages less 310 overlaps). This means that these 6 IDs have overlapped on about 14% of all the articles they have edited, a high percentage, and unlikely to be the result of coincidence.
I have no evidence that the edits of this editor have been disruptive, but the pattern of starting IDs and then dropping them, without acknowledging the connection, is a concern, since it looks like avoiding scrutiny. If the editor has a legitimate explanation for doing so, that's fine, but if not they should probably be asked to pick one of the IDs to edit from and the rest should be indef blocked, and the user told not to continue to create new accounts. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 08:21, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Once again, we see this editor using a new account to continue working on the articles they created with a "retired" account. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 10:32, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
I'm requesting CheckUser, despite the clear behavioral evidence, because I may have missed an ID, and I'm not sure how far data goes back, so I don't know if staleness is an issue or not. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 18:22, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
But, even if this was "retaliatory" in some way (and it's not), the evidence shows what the evidence shows, it's pretty undeniable. The easiest thing would be for $1LENCE D00600D to make a statement admitting their behavior, giving a reasonable explanation for it, and pledging not to do it again. I'd be perfectly happy with that, as I'm sure most people in the community would be. I'm not seeking to have this editor blocked or sanctioned, just to put a stop to a rather disruptive, apparently scrutiny-avoiding pattern of behavior. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 19:02, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
See Defending yourself against claims.
Stale:
Possible – similar articles but different physical location:
– MuZemike 04:44, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Okay, it seems like this has been sitting around forever. I've looked over this and have come to a decision.
If anyone disagrees with this decision, let me know on my talk page. -- Atama 頭 17:27, 22 September 2010 (UTC)