User talk:Dppowell/PPP

Socks yet to be blocked

RangeTurn (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) --Palffy 00:23, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OtherBeing (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) --Palffy 00:23, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
EdgesSteps (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) --Palffy 00:23, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
DisposableAccount5 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) --Palffy 00:29, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Intro

Welcome! Questions and comments below. Dppowell 02:09, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked Jayjg, an administrator who has dealt extensively with Panairjdde, to stop by and make sure I'm not breaking any rules here. Dppowell 02:09, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Welcome aboard, Palffy. And thanks for sending out those other invites! It's been a while since I've had a major confrontation with him on Roman history articles, but I'm not surprised that he's made so many "friends" on football articles. Dppowell 06:26, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! Do you mind giving me a quick overview as to how I can revert specific edits using pop-ups? Do I need to edit my preferences to turn those on somehow? --Palffy 13:15, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's super-easy. Just follow the instructions in the second line at Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation popups. It takes five seconds. They seem to work really well with Firefox...not so well with Safari (I'm on a Mac). Don't know about IE. Dppowell 13:33, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jayjg nominally on board

Jayjg has expressed his support for our efforts here, so I'm pretty confident that our goals are consistent with WP policy.

Just reverted about 20 edits by the latest sock, User:BirdsCover, which Jayjg identified a few hours ago. Dppowell 03:55, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blocks caused by Panairjdde

He directly caused me to be blocked on October 31, 2006 and November 8, 2006. I think all the blocks he has caused should be automatically overturned. Kingjeff 17:37, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's a worthwhile argument, KJ, but there's probably not much this little group can do about it. Jayjg might have a more authoritative opinion. Dppowell 18:19, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did leave a message about it on his talk page. But I haven't received any kind of answer from him. I know he gamed the system on me and at least one other user. Kingjeff 20:23, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just another editor like you, KJ. This is a volunteer project to help enforce Panairjdde's ban. I think you have a valid point, but redressing any grievances incurred prior to his ban is outside of what we can realistically strive to achieve at this stage. Dppowell 20:36, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kingjeff, I would have to agree; it would be difficult at this point to get that kinds of thing "expunged" from your record, if it could be done at all. Jayjg ^(talk) 22:14, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is just an idea. But you might want to get a consensus with other administrators about this kind of thing. Kingjeff 00:22, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Newest known sock

User:GuideEggs. Updated the RFCU and notified Jayjg. Only edits were to this page and the sock's userspace, so he's probably making his invalid edits under another sock. Dppowell 02:11, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Quiet

Quiet over the last two days or so. I've been casually checking a number of his former Roman history haunts looking for suspicious new editors, but no luck. Anyone else? Maybe he's feeling the heat and letting things cool off for a couple of days. Whatever works! Dppowell 20:51, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe we should be checking his IP addresses. Maybe he's quietly doing other stuff? Kingjeff 20:52, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

His IPs are private unless he edits from them. We have to wait until we notice him somewhere. Dppowell 22:04, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's been pretty quiet about him. Where is he now? Kingjeff 04:42, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, I haven't been looking very hard for the last few days. As long as he's not edit-warring, I'm not going to worry about it too much, but if I see him, I'll report him. Dppowell 14:12, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Found him

User:Anriz. Report filed. Dppowell 16:34, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

81.211.198.6 is another one. Kingjeff 22:05, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I saw the amended RFCU. I'm very pleased about finding Anriz, since he's been using that one for a while. Dppowell 02:18, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

found him ........ Again. The IP Address is 121.44.226.60. He gave himself away here. Kingjeff 14:26, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Crum375

Panairjdde made a comment on Crum375's talk page. I don't want to do anything wih his talk page. Kingjeff 20:35, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possible new account

Should we check User:Melbournewiki? There wasn't enough activity so far for me to make a firm judgement. Kingjeff 02:18, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep an eye on it, but my first instinct is that it's not him. Dppowell 02:20, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed that he has blanked his talk page once. This is typical of you know who. We should definitely look further into this account. Kingjeff 02:23, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It bears watching, for sure. Of course, he monitors this page, so if he knows we're watching that account he's less likely to use it. Dppowell 02:25, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if it is him, he's doing a good job hiding hiding his identity on this one. Kingjeff 02:28, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What he's doing is a form of electronic trespassing, so he's technically breaking the law. This process requires patience. It took the better part of a year for the community to ban him, and it will probably take at least that long to build the case for Wikimedia to report abuse to his ISP. Perhaps sooner, if he maintains his current pace. I can wait. :) Dppowell 02:41, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Aziz1005 name looks very similar to his last user name. None of his edits are none of his interest. Kingjeff 16:10, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

would this user be him: 72.71.217.89 the person seems to be having an edit war with someone on the Italy national football team article.

User:Itham might be the new account. Kingjeff 16:27, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The newest account

User:Boat-proof is the newest account. Kingjeff 16:24, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems widely clear it's him, so how about blocking it? --Angelo 23:24, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jayjg already knows--I'll drop a note on WP:AIV. Dppowell 23:30, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know Jayjg knows, it was me who advised him :) Good. --Angelo 23:48, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that, thank you. Nicely done. For all his bluster, I think he really is editing less than he used to. Dppowell 23:59, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:EndlessReturns is the newest one. Seemed to pick out the perfect name for him. Kingjeff 00:23, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The next one

User:Fantocci; I'm sure is the next one. Kingjeff 14:03, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Highly likely to be him. --Angelo 14:12, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Gethomas3 might be another one. I have personally expected him for a while. Kingjeff 00:38, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's curious, coz Fantocci left a message into Gethomas3's talk page. Are you sure? --Angelo 00:53, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the editing records of both, you will see that both accounts have edited a lot of the same national teams. Kingjeff 01:02, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but it apparently makes no sense, since Fantocci reverted Gethomas3's modifications to World Cup record sections. Anyway, Fantocci was blocked right now. --Angelo 02:52, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I had it checked just to make sure. It's unrelated. Kingjeff 03:20, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've reported User:Tozzi Fan. Looks like a good possibility. Kingjeff 20:30, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Same edits than Fantocci, and a very similar username (Tozzi Fan -> Fan Tozzi)... Very likely to be him again. --Angelo 20:32, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We can't forget to mention the new found ego to go with the stubborness. Kingjeff 20:35, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tozzi - Fan!

Time for a change of action?

If a documented pattern of ban evasion goes on long enough, Wikimedia may pursue other remedies with his ISP. Efforts such as these are instrumental in creating a trail of documentation. You guys think its about time we try this? I think we could all be spending more time making productive edits rather than reverting this 10-year-olds posts? --Palffy 22:58, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It went on definitely long enough. Who could help us in this attempt? --Angelo 23:13, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It went on definitely long enough. Let's get rid of him once and for all. Kingjeff 03:01, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think we need Dppowell's help on this (although, its appears that he's been inactive for several weeks), but from what I found, we need to refer to the guidelines set about here and make our case here. I think we need to work together on this to make this as detailed, strong and complete as possible for it to be most effective.... --Palffy 04:00, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What might be a good way to start is to have our own individual page of incidents with him and one of us organize one big report. Kingjeff 04:07, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That seems reasonable. I think we should keep track of all of his socks, warnings, blocks, etc. (with links to those instances) and tabulate those for the admins, so they are easily able to see what kind of a menace he's been. --Palffy 04:21, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've written a draft. Have a look at it and improve it. --Angelo 21:53, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Got kind of lazy with my addition to the report...its that I've done so much research on him as it is, I feel bad wasting anymore time on him. However, I still feel that we need to improve that and make it a strong presentation so that the next admin to look at this won't be "patient" with our friend and would want to jump on the bandwagon right away. --Palffy 05:21, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you absolutely sure about all that information? You're dealing with real people with real names now. --Angelo 05:34, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yea, do you need to see evidence or something ;) I've done my research hehe --Palffy 05:37, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It would be way better to show the proofs of your claims. By the way I am not completely convinced it is a great idea: he seems not to have a static IP, so it might be pretty hard to forbid him to put his hands here. In my opinion, the only effective way to stop this old song is to persuade him to do so. --Angelo 05:41, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there are instances of this (click on the Go link), this, this along with this and this, as well as many other instances. As for dealing with him, I think there is a chance an ISP can prohibit a certain account (whether based on their mac address, login info, w/e) from accessing certain domains and I think this is an option worth exploring. I think if you had a closer look at the scok pages, you would have noticed many admins and users trying to deal with him reasonably with no avail. What you guys are doing right now is nice, but I'm hoping WP has bigger weapons up its sleeves to punish such malicious users. --Palffy 05:53, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can I call you Sherlock Holmes? :) Anyway, I still have a few doubts about an ISP chance (probably coz I'm Italian too and I know how Italians are sometimes lazy in doing things). We'll see. --Angelo 05:55, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you can tell I've spent way too much time dealing with this dude ;) I can certainly tell you that Pan is not lazy to say the least--he's quite possibly the most persistent mother------ I've met to date hehe. I still don't understand his character though--the guy attends a university, apparently is knowledge in a lot of fields, and is quite possibly the biggest tool on WP. He obviously wants to contribute to the project, but EVERYTHING has to be his way, it's ridiculous..I hope the kid isn't like this in real life, or I'd feel really bad for his friends and parents.. --Palffy 06:11, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

According to a few sparse tracks in the web, he seems to be a PhD engineering student at the largest university in Italy (University of Rome La Sapienza). And I don't think he's a "kid", he's likely to be even older than me. --Angelo 06:20, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was implying that he certainly acts like one =p --Palffy 06:22, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When can this be finished? I hate that asshole. Kingjeff 23:53, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not in a short time I guess. He seems to find all this funny. --Angelo 23:56, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The newest of the long list

User:Kiff2 and User:Bert Patenaude looks to be the additions to this long list of socks. Kingjeff 22:48, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Add User:Kiff3 to this list. Kingjeff 22:56, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kiff2 is unlikely to be him. User:Kiff4 is definitely him instead. --Angelo 23:53, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do we know if Kiff3 is him? Kingjeff 23:55, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tozzi Fan, Kiff3, Kiff4 all blocked. See Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Kwame Nkrumah for details. --Angelo 00:01, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:MandatoryAccount is the newest. Kingjeff 00:07, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh goodness, five sockpuppets in 24 hours... --Angelo 00:11, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy that I'm able to match him. Kingjeff 00:13, 2 June 2007 (UTC) It's up to 6. User:PossibleAccount is the newest. Kingjeff 00:16, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

With the mouse, maybe, but not in smartness... you did not notice that Kiff2 is not a sockpuppet!--PossibleAccount 00:15, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Panairjdde, I know you're reading here, why don't you please stop doing things this way? This is not funny for any of us, and this is not an elegant manner to act. --Angelo 00:17, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Angelo, you all started this.--PossibleAccount 00:18, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I never encouraged you to become a sockpuppetteer, so don't say nonsense please. --Angelo 00:21, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You did, with this page, for example.--Adbeldeda 00:22, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First, you were already a sockpuppetteer well before this page was created. Secondly, this page wasn't created by mine, in fact it's not in my userpage space; I'm just one of the guys who agreed to say "no" to your bad behaviour. --Angelo 00:24, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Either you are dumb, or you are playing with me. In any case, this conversation is useless.--Adbeldeda 00:27, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know it's useless, but not because of mine. Fai come vuoi. --Angelo 00:28, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"this page wasn't created by mine"; "but not because of mine": 'mine' means "mio", 'me' is the English for "me".--Noosbllaa 00:30, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know my English is far from perfection, however this is not the place for giving me English lessons, boy. --Angelo 00:33, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In that case it will be even more worthless.--Noosbllaa 00:35, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Save your breath Angelo, countless users have spent countless hours dealing with him to no avail. Our only resort is to deal with him through authorities. Btw, Kiff2 is very likely a sock as well, judging from the timestamps of his contributions. --Palffy 01:33, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The funny thing is that he is also active in the Italian wiki. He also had a few troubles and blocks in there, but absolutely nothing comparable to here. I wonder why. P.S. Kingjeff was blocked because of 3RR. He was reverting Panairjdde's edits. --Angelo 01:38, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was unblocked last night. I'm assuming and hoping that this was nothing more then an oversight by thr blocking admin. Kingjeff 15:03, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Guess who's back

User:Snoimaert is the newest one. Kingjeff 21:37, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Be careful with reverts, better contacting an admin. --Angelo 21:40, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Contacted Jayjg. Kingjeff 21:43, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Consider also to contact a different admin, Jayjg has been really slow in dispatching block request in recent times (he still hasn't blocked another sockpuppet I found out a few days ago). Who was the admin who semiprotected Guus Hiddink? --Angelo 21:47, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Contacted User:Alison. She was the admin who reverted his 2nd last edit on Guus Hiddink. Kingjeff 21:52, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you're having issues with 3RRs Kingjeff, post on this page and we'll help you revert. --Palffy 01:41, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it was an issue that the blocking admin didn't realize that I was dealing with a sock. At least I hope it's this. Kingjeff 01:48, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Esatrilhy is the new one. His only edit was reverted. Kingjeff 19:19, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An edit war is starting between me and him on Guus Hiddink and his user page. Can someone can and help. Kingjeff 22:41, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New socks, User:Getsdeny, User:LuserJeff, User:Agnolo.siciliano, User:Meanblue, User:Roomlovers, User:Esatrilhy. --Palffy 00:14, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All already reported for checkuser. --Angelo 00:20, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Noticed that, thanks =) --Palffy 00:36, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They've been all blocked by an admin, even if not because of the checkuser request. --Angelo 00:37, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's pretty obvious they're all Pan though. --Palffy 00:38, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely. --Angelo 00:40, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another instance in User:TufkaPanairjdde. Either of you mind forwarding the username to the appropriate admin for immediate ban? I think we've heard enough bs from him to hear much else out of him.. --Palffy 23:31, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now what?

After the "community ban", what happens now?--SmoothExit 10:35, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your editing privileges on all of Wikipedia are revoked... --Palffy 12:04, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How?--SmoothExit 19:23, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look here and here. --Palffy 22:23, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When?--SmoothExit 22:37, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When what? --Palffy 22:45, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When this "editing privileges on all of Wikipedia are revoked" will happen? --SmoothExit 22:58, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It already happened. Your case is closed and you can find your name here and this discussion is over. Your editing priveleges have been revoked. --Palffy 23:05, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have just opened this account: la:Usor:Panairjdde; does the ban issued by less than ten en.wiki users ban me from la.wiki too?--SmoothExit 23:10, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is where you get lost and don't come back. Kingjeff 23:44, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"This" what, exactly?--EdgesSteps 23:48, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Angelo/ISP reporting

I think I see the problem with filing him under abuse reports--the backlog on that is tremendous and there are no or few investigators who actually look into abuse. Do you want to personally try sending an email to infostrada to try to get his access to WP revoked? --Palffy 23:57, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe it might work. In any case, I cannot ask a national ISP to ban a user without some kind of formal authorization. The best thing we can do is to constantly involve an admin in this case. --Angelo 00:42, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, you technically can. If you glance at Wikipedia:Abuse reports, anyone can volunteer to be a contractor to handle the case. If you feel you might have a better chance at a response, you can 'volunteer' for one case, add yourself to the list (I'll make an official post on the abuse reports page), act as the contractor in your correspondence and see where it goes. You're right in that there's a slim chance that this will work, but then our last two other options aside from this are either to continue what we've been doing or to petition admins for range blocks.... --Palffy 00:50, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right now we need just an admin to block all these socks at sight, that is what we currently miss. Range blocks are technically possible, but there is a very high risk to block several other users because of the nature of Panairjdde's IPs. About the abuse report thing, I need first to read all the policy as I don't know it, and I need especially to have some kind of formal request by the Wikipedia community (e.g., the board, the arbitration committee or things like these), since I actually have no chance to succeed in it by requesting the block as a private user. --Angelo 00:57, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We should try anything and everything to get rid of him. Kingjeff 00:06, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]