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/Cute 1 4 u))
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.

Cute 1 4 u, take nine[edit]

view edit history watch
Filed: 20:55, December 14 2006 (UTC)

Code: F. Cute 1 4 u banned by community consensus, very many sockpuppets created.

Account created very soon after the block of the prior sockpuppet, Jibbs fan. Editing many of the same articles (Jibbs, The Wendy Williams Experience, Chris Brown (singer), Bow Wow, etc.) Similar short temper and grammar problems (see here).

If this user is shown to be a sockpuppet, I intend to file a complaint with the user's ISP or to work with a checkuser clerk to file such a complaint, if at all possible. The user clearly has no intention to stop abusing Wikipedia. --Yamla 20:55, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Further edits have shown more evidence that this is an abusive sockpuppet. Recreation of templates twice deleted as having been created by previous abusive sockpuppets, linking to copy-vio sites, etc. etc. Any news on whether we'll get a checkuser performed? --Yamla 17:16, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: You may want to file an abuse report if the checkuser comes back affirmative Geo. 17:30, 18 December 2006 (UTC) Also it may be in our best interest to rangeblock Chicago, since legit users can always ask us to unblock.[reply]

Thanks, good idea. --Yamla 17:59, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

 Likely Mackensen (talk) 18:52, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cute 1 4 u, take eight[edit]

I don't know which code to pick, but it is most likely Code F. Cute 1 4 u has been confirmed a sockpuppeteer of many accounts (see other requests for checkuser). Tennislover, on his talk page has denied being a sockpuppet, even after a checkuser request which I can't seem to find. A second checkuser would definitely remove all of the doubts or suspicions about this user.--Ed ¿Cómo estás? 03:49, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I support the request for the checkuser. Here, we are actually looking for reasonable doubt, grounds to unblock Tennislover. It is clear that the blocking admin was acting in good faith and was reasonably convinced, but I would really appreciate someone else taking the opportunity to perform a second check. Tennislover's contributions have been of a generally different character to that of the Cute 1 4 u sockpuppets and the editor has sworn not to be a sockpuppet. If another checkuser shows the two accounts to be sockpuppets, I'll be satisfied (though of course, Wikipedia does not exist to satisfy me). However, I feel we should err on the side of unblocking Tennislover if there's any doubt. In any case, remember that both Cute 1 4 u and Tennislover edit from dynamic IP addresses, though I understand these should be from separate towns. --Yamla 04:26, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

information Note: Referred to Mackensen; I was only marginally involved in the original request (double checking the technical evidence), but I believe Mackensen did a subsequent check that was more in depth. He's probably the best to comment on this. Essjay (Talk) 04:49, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If I may ask: Where is the previous CheckUser Request? I can't seem to find it anywhere.--Ed ¿Cómo estás? 04:57, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You can see all the previous CheckUser requests on this user at the case page for Cute 1 4 u. DarthVader 06:33, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

 Inconclusive. Tennis lover probably isn't a sockpuppet of Cute 1 4 u unless s/he's moved (always possible). That being said, Twister Twist (talk) is his (Tennis lover's) sockpuppet, and I would welcome an explanation of this doppelgänger account. Mackensen (talk) 13:15, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Cute 1 4 u (7th request)[edit]

Yet another potential sockpuppet of Cute 1 4 u, a user banned by community consensus and caught multiple times over many months creating sockpuppets to get around the ban. This account was created very shortly after the block on the last confirmed sockpuppet, Pumpkin Pie (talk · contribs). The account has edited many of the same articles. This edit shows the user removing banned user, Pumpkin Pie, from a list of WikiProject Musicians and inserting self. Jibbs fan has had no direct contact with Pumpkin Pie or with sockpuppeteer, Cute 1 4 u, so had no obvious reason to remove known sockpuppet. As an aside, if this account is confirmed as another sockpuppet, I'm really not sure how to approach matters. This would be at least the eleventh sockpuppet. What additional actions are available against a person like this? --Yamla 03:48, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note that user is known to use dynamic IPs. See for a list. 75.31.x.x, 75.33.x.x, and 75.34.x.x are known for sure but addresses outside of this range are only suspected if I remember correctly. --Yamla 03:53, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You can narrow your IP serach to those in the Chicago area.--Ed ¿Cómo estás? 03:55, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Confirmed. Dmcdevit·t 09:12, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Cute 1 4 u (6th request)[edit]

Yet another potential sockpuppet of Cute 1 4 u. The usernames are almost identical, the account was created at a suspicious time, the edits are similar (though not at all conclusive), and the editor admits to editing the Cute 1 4 u discussion page while no such edit shows up in the editor's contribution list. Note that Cute 1 4 u is now a bannned user, not just a blocked user. --Yamla 02:00, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please add this one (Sweet Pinkette) as well, I just found it this morning. the contribs and editing style match. Æon Insanity Now!EA! 13:30, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cutie 4 life has admitted to using Cutie fo eva as a sockpuppet, though so far not in an abusive manner (unless Cutie 4 life is a sockpuppet of Cute 1 4 u, of course). --Yamla 22:47, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have serious doubts that Sweet Pinkette is a sock but I've been disappointed before. --Yamla 23:12, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm starting to get more and more convinced on that one. She has even gone as fair as accused me of being a sockpuppet of her. Æon Insanity Now!EA! 13:31, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If anything, Sweet Pinkette is edging towards a block for incivility. Ryūlóng 20:42, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(sigh)This situation is a lesson of a lifetime. Maybe I should write an essay for this.--Edtalk c E 02:58, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe it should go with this one. We're sorry, Ed, but she's broken every rule Wikipedia has. She's now disrupting Wikipedia to make a point. Ryūlóng 03:03, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What are you sorry about??? I've decided to try and remain unbiased on this situation, as every good person should do. Anyway, I see that the essay has been made. Well I guess I could still write one...(gets pen and paper)--Edtalk c E 03:07, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, SweetPinkette is unrelated to these other accounts, as is Cute 1 4 u. That being said, Cutie fo eva is indeed a sockpuppet of Cutie 4 life. Mackensen (talk) 20:35, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is this an official response? Is Cutie 4 life really unrelated to Cute 1 4 u? --Yamla 20:55, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Wow two swings and a miss. Thought we had those. Oh well, I will make amends to Sweet Pinket. Æon Insanity Now!EA! 21:16, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Query Would the IP evidence be consistent with Cute 1 4 u and her socks editing from home, and Cutie fo eva and Cutie 4 life with the same person editing from a school in the same geographic area? Thatcher131 04:43, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cute 1 4 u (5th request)[edit]

Found another possible sock of Cute 1 4 u. Found this one this morning has a very similar edit history, edit summary usage and editing style as all the other socks and main account. Æon Insanity Now!EA! 14:42, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Admitted to it on my talk page. Æon Insanity Now!EA! 03:48, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And blocked for it. Checkuserers, there has to be something we can do. This is getting ridiculous. Ryūlóng 03:57, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: Assuming the IP addresses referenced previously are correct (and I don't know that they are) they are all the same DSL service, so you would have to block a large chunk of her hometown. Alternatively, if you could persuade Danny or Brad that this is a serious issue, they would have the authority to attempt to contact the ISP and perhaps her parents (if she really is a child) or other authorities (if she is not). Other than that, I'm drawing a blank. You may just have to add her to the list of pesky unblockable users and hope she gets bored. Thatcher131 04:29, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think I emailed Brad about a copyvio a few months ago, and didn't get much out of it. I do not know what sort of "action" can be taken against a girl who wants a myspace that she can change everything on. Ryūlóng 04:51, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
At least she's not on AOL. Thatcher131 05:02, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, but it's not that hard to get AOL. I don't know if they still mail those 1000 hour discs out, though. But, there needs to be some way to narrow this user down to one pattern. It can be that dynamic. Hell, a good portion of the AOL-based vandalism usually comes from certain subranges within the whole of the ranges. Ryūlóng 05:08, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

 Confirmed. I sympathize, but I can't find (yet) any range block that would work without wiping out a major city. Mackensen (talk) 16:51, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That figures. Thank you Mackensen, will of course post here again if we find another one. Æon Insanity Now!EA! 19:49, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cute 1 4 u (Again)[edit]

Admited to having another account on WP:AN/I (See possible sock puppet of Cute 1 4 u). Checking contribs of user edits the same articles with the same writing style as all other socks. And IP range of the Anon fits the other IP socks. Æon Insanity Now!EA! 02:34, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And this dif [1] shows word for word the unblock she used on her main acccount. Æon Insanity Now!EA! 03:49, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to point out that since the IP is blocked, it is autoblocking the account, which is proof enough for me. Ryūlóng 03:55, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User amitted to being a sock puppet of Cute 1 4 u on socks talk page. As said she will make another puppet. Æon Insanity Now!EA! 06:31, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

 Confirmed with respect to the named user(s). no No comment with respect to IP address(es). Mackensen (talk) 16:16, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cute 1 4 u[edit]

It is strongly suspected based on this dif [2] and writing style that this is Cute 1 4 u an indefenatly banned user. Cute 1 4 u has a history of sock abuse and block evasion. Æon Insanity Now!EA! 02:39, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: New York from Flavor of Love (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) is currently indef banned for her username. [3] PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 05:09, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

 Confirmed Mackensen (talk) 16:34, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cute 1 4 u[edit]

Based on this posting to WP:ANI and despite the admission to guilt, I feel that it may be necessary to bring this to checkuser again to find any other sleeper accounts Cute 1 4 u may have created and block her IP from creating any new accounts for some time, as had been done with Shakim67's case. Ryūlóng 03:48, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

 Confirmed. Dynamic IP. Mackensen (talk) 11:12, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So there isn't anything that can be done to prevent this user from editting under new accounts? Ryūlóng 22:11, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And I assume that it is an IP such as this that she is editting from 75.33.255.224 (talk+ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log)) (this IP has left messages on her user talk responding to mine and others edits)? Ryūlóng 22:14, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That IP is a dsl line; a knowledgable user can force a new IP any time he wants one. Generally if Mackensen says its a dynamic IP it means he's seen evidence of multiple IPs. Short of blocking all dsl users in the Chicago area, I'm afraid you'll have to find them the old fashioned way. Thatcher131 (talk) 22:53, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, then we may be in good luck. I don't think she knows how to reset her DSL line. Ryūlóng 23:53, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cute 1 4 u[edit]

Impersonation of Raven Symone. Purported to be actress [4], [5]. Added information regarding actress on user page while purporting to be her [6], [7], including spamming for Disney videos. Editing the Orlando Brown (actor) page as Raven Symone [8]. Egging other users on [9].

Based on these diffs: [10], [11], [12], it looks like it was a prank pulled by one of User:Cute 1 4 u or User:Lindsay1980.

I consider the above behaviour as egregious, but I defer to the better judgment of the CheckUsers as to whether they would like to look into this. -- Samir धर्म 05:59, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

 Confirmed. Cute 1 4 u = Raven Symone = Gemini531. Lindsay1980 appears to be a distinct editor. Essjay (Talk) 06:49, 4 August 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.


Category