Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Moroccan Spaniard

• Moroccan Spaniard (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Celtmist (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• DW Celt (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Ragusan (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

• Code letter: F

A while ago, I blocked Moroccan Spaniard for vandalism. After noticing Spaniard de Morocco's obvious similarities, I blocked him as well, and asked Dmcdevit via IRC to run a CheckUser. He provided the results on my Talk page, and I blocked the accounts.

PaxEquilibrium questioned my blocking of the other accounts, and lodged a CheckUser request. Although declined, some comments on the page prove interesting.

Celtmist then reappeared a few days ago and requested an unblock. He claims to be editing under a shared IP from an office. I really should have grabbed a CheckUser then, but I was sort of busy with finals, and other admins seemed to be engaging him, asking for more information.

The latest development is this message on my Talk page from DW Celt, who claims to be Celtmist.

Basically, I wish to know if this shared IP claim is possibly true, and how to proceed. I'm all for assuming good faith. --Slowking Man 21:42, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

 Note: If the claim is that they both work at the same company and are using the same IP within the company, the only thing we could do here is call up the IT department at the company and ask. I have the IP address, the company name, address, and telephone numbers, so it should be no problem to ring them up and ask. If they confirm that it is a shared IP and there are a number of users on that IP, we can reblock it with no account creation. Of course, two things need to be considered first, one by us, and one by the users: 1) Does the editing pattern support the claim of two separate individuals, and 2) Is the user prepared to accept whatever consequences come from having his on-wiki activities reported to management? While we prefer to avoid having the latter occur, it's really inevitible if we have to call up and say "Hey, we're from Wikipedia, and one of your employees is trying to edit from work and is blocked. Can you confirm whether there are multiple individuals on this IP that should have access to edit Wikipedia?" Essjay (Talk) 00:02, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk assistance requested: Having heard nothing more in four days, I think it's time to consider this one completed and archive it. If the parties want to bring it back, they know how. Essjay (Talk) 01:18, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

 Declined per Essjay. If the parties wish to re-open this issue (regarding contacting etc.), then ask me on my talk and I'll de-archive it. Daniel.Bryant ^{[ T · C ]} 03:23, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've run a thorough CheckUser, as you requested, and found some nteresting results. Moroccan Spaniard (talk · contribs) is also Spaniard de Morocco (talk · contribs), Ragusan (talk · contribs), Celtmist (talk · contribs), AlfredG (talk · contribs), Harvatov (talk · contribs), PANONNIAN (talk · contribs) (the impostor), Votavra (talk · contribs), and JeremyQ (talk · contribs), all of which clearly fit the editing pattern, and a couple of other Coon-related username-blocked accounts. Since it's a static IP, I've blocked it for a month. Dmcdevit·t 22:52, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: This came from this diff: [1]. DarthVader 22:00, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Moroccan Spaniard (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

• Code letter: C

This user created a very stupid entry on the Portugal article (see [2]) Jcnventura 12:03, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: One edit is not "Serious pattern vandalism" and checkuser is only for determining whether two or more users are sockpuppets of each other. Do you have specific allegations of sockpuppetery? Thatcher131 12:09, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, I just reverted vandalism by Jcnventura to User:Moroccan Spaniard page. Regards, Asterion^talk 17:52, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

 Declined. Dmcdevit·t 19:27, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]