Thenabster126 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

• 12.50.8.8 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• 76.187.211.251 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))

• Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

User:Thenabster126 was recently blocked for 31 hours after a long-running edit war on Chechens. During the block, the IP address began making substantially similar contributions to several articles. On Chechens, one of 6 identical edits by Thenabster, identical edit by IP. On Marine life images and text initially added by Thenabster126, one image and text restored the next day by IP, other images restored today by IP. On Arabs, content added by Thenabster126, and restored by IP. Several of the IP edits occur while Thenabster126 is hardblocked. Thenabster126 was previously discussed without conclusion as a possible sock of Tarook97. Since the IP has a history of restoring Thenabster126's edits when reverted, and is currently doing so while Thenabster126 is blocked for edit warring, I suggest a long term block for User:Thenabster126 as a sockmaster, and a softblock of at least several months for User:12.50.8.8. However, I'd like another set of eyes instead of just implementing that myself. ST47 (talk) 20:20, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

If they sock puppet once, they are likely to sock puppet again. A one month sanction may see the same POV pushing and edit warring return back again.Resnjari (talk) 01:21, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

EdJohnston I don't think that's nearly long enough. The context here is the user disputing obviously true information. The boundaries of Europe are not in dispute. Chechnya is north of the Greater Caucasus and thus indisputably in Europe. Yet it is Muslim and someone has an obsession with removing this, starting to do so right after Christchurch. Productive? Helpful for community building? I think not. --Calthinus (talk) 11:16, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Its WP:TENDENTIOUS editing. Take for example the edits on the Chechens page: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]. @Thenabster126 edit warred displaying WP:BATTLEGROUND behavior by pushing their POV that Chechens are "West Asian" and that Chechnya is not within Europe. Scholarship does not state this, but @Thenabster126 continued basing their reason on personal views, as their edit summaries show, and they never bothered with the talkpage. @Thenabster126 has been called out for their editing by admins recently in other articles like with this example: [7]. The editing of @Thenabster126 has the hallmark of WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS and strays into WP:NATIONALIST. The cycle will just continue. @Thenabster126 is not here to build an encyclopedia.Resnjari (talk) 11:52, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am very much here to build an encyclopedia, which is why I tend to discuss things in the talk page. I have noticed a bit of bias that I try to clean up. I apologize for any misunderstanding. Also, for the school ID, I was not the one who triggered the bad words filter. The SPI investigation for Tarook97 pretty much concluded that I am not that user.Thenabster126 (talk) 19:54, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits on the Chechens page show otherwise. Not once did you use the talkpage and kept POV pushing fringe content.Resnjari (talk) 03:06, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn’t trying to push an agenda. I’ll admit, I made a mistake by not using the talk page. I wanted to clear things up on the region.Thenabster126 (talk) 05:26, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Clear up"? You were reverted multiple times (so the talkpage page should have followed) and also in your edits (or edit summaries) you provided no reliable source for the claims. Clear POV pushing of fringe material. Its bad enough that articles on the Chechens have to deal with POV pushers about the 19th century Russian conquest, the expulsion of Chechens in WW2 and the recent Russo-Chechen wars, this kind of fringe material in no way assists in decreasing the crazy from editors who have an axe to grind regarding Chechen related articles. Its silly and petty.Resnjari (talk) 06:05, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I kept asking for sources about the region’s continent, yet no one bothered to look for a reliable source, with some saying it is “obvious” (when it kind of isn’t).Thenabster126 (talk) 13:26, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Caucasus mountains are Europe's geographical boundaries and Chechnya is on the northern side considered as Europe. There is no need to place a citation on something that is not contested (see: WP:BLUESKY). Also i don't see anywhere in your edit summaries on the Chechens article edit history or talkpage of you calling for sources. It looks like your backtracking by saying you did. Instead you POV pushed fringe edits and engaged in petty edit warring.Resnjari (talk) 14:25, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Given [this] there must be no doubt about socking -- the duck is quacking into the loudspeaker. Now, the question is, when presented with a clear case of violation of community standards by a user who is denying obvious facts (demanding sourcing for strawmen or obvious statements indeed is WP:TE) to try to deny that an overwhelmingly Muslim region is an integral part of Europe starting right after the Christchurch massacre, how can only a month be enough, when socking typically results in indefinite bans unless the user is considered irreplaceable by at least some in the community? But I repeat, in this case, we have a sockmaster who socked for what can be called tendentious at best purposes.--Calthinus (talk) 14:44, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I asked for a source. This affects Russia and the Caucasus region. Thenabster126 (talk) 18:12, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Okay. You both are to stop arguing about this content dispute here. If you have new evidence related to the use of sock puppets, you may bring it here. Otherwise, your discussion belongs on the article's talk page, or at one of our dispute resolution forums. ST47 (talk) 18:23, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Chechens (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Marine life (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Thenabster126 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• I note that 12.50.8.8 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is a school IP from Texas, that was previously blocked for a week back in December. The IP has engaged in bad-words vandalism in 2018 as noted in the filter log. This IP has made some edits at Marine life as well as a second IP from Texas, 76.187.211.251 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) that is currently blocked by User:ST47 for evasion, and has had many warnings and blocks both in 2018 and 2019. 12.50.8.8 re-made one of Thenabster126's typical changes at Chechens during Thenabster126's 31-hour block which began at 01:49 on 4 April. My inclination would be to block both of these IPs for three months and block User:Thenabster126 for sockpuppetry for a month. EdJohnston (talk) 20:02, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, I don't think we're going to get a checkuser ruling on this, since it's User <-> IP. The IPs haven't been active since this case was filed. However, some other IPs have been up to the same nonsense at Austrian Americans as what got the 76.187 IP blocked. I'm not sure that's related, though this certainly helps convince me, taken alongside what you mentioned. ST47 (talk) 13:35, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    I think it's getting time to do something about this.

    • Regarding 12.50.8.8. On Chechens: [8] [9] On Arabs: [10] [11] On Marine Life: [12] [13] and also [14] [15] [16]
    • Regarding 76.187.211.251. On WP:AIV: [17] [18] On Marine Life: compare above to [19] On Chechens: compare above to [20] [21]

    Given that the socking from the 12.50 IP seems to be continuing after warnings and even during this case, I am going to go ahead and  Blocked without tags both IPs and the sockmaster for 3 months. ST47 (talk) 18:41, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• 98.6.21.229 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• 2600:387:1:803:0:0:0:87 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• 76.187.211.251 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))

• Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Thenabster126 was blocked for 31 hours in April due to edit warring over whether the North Caucusus are in Eastern Europe or not. During that block, they logged out and continued editing from Special:Contributions/12.50.8.8, which earned them a three month block. (See the SPI archive.) That block has now expired. I mention all that because today, I discovered that during the 3 month block, they logged out and continued editing from Special:Contributions/98.6.21.229. See for example the timing and content of this edit to Chechens - it's exactly the same dispute as led to the original edit warring block. This edit itself isn't a violation of WP:EW or WP:SOCK, however, the edit history of that IP address clearly shows that it has been in use by User:Thenabster126 as far back as June 26th. Yes, Thenabster126 was clearly using at least this one IP address to evade their block, and they are even now continuing the same edit wars that they were involved in prior to their block. This includes some stuff at Greeks and Albanians, as well as the one at Chechens, which they logged out for. ST47 (talk) 02:43, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The 2600:: range is linked to the 98. IP through some edits to 1977 and 2003. ST47 (talk) 02:58, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The 76. ip was previously reported under the same SPI, noting for the record that that IP was also used by this user recently, linked to the 98. IP through Robert Khuzami, Sacha Baron Cohen, and others. ST47 (talk) 02:58, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

For block evasion sockpuppetry, I have  Blocked without tags indef the master, 3 months the sock. (I'm also partly filing this just to get this IP address in the SPI archive, in case this user's activity ever comes up again, as I'm sure it will.) ST47 (talk) 02:43, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]