Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/RJII

RJII

RJII (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
64.12.116.135 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
64.12.116.65 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
205.188.117.14 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
205.188.116.65 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
66.32.109.4 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
66.32.156.175 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))

Anyone who has been following the guy's activities for the past 2 years, especially the past few days, should realise the need in this. If not, see

The sockpuppets must be found and banned. -- infinity0 10:32, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possible IPs (please CU these also)

RJII's "harassers"

RJII's IPs

66.32.109.4: contribs [8]
66.32.156.175: contribs [9] [10] cf. RJII's contribs

Update: RJII was blocked indefinitely for being a shared account two days ago, by Admin Jeffery O. Gustafon. However all accounts by the RJII "team" will likely be undectable and un-check-user-verifiable, due to "home" computers, etc. We need some sort of "Wikipedia Abuse Policy Team" to look after any of these "advanced techniques of psychological warfare, including intimidation, and game theory" and hunt down any incidents of "manipulation of administrators and arbitrators". This may go deeper than we think... Sincerely, Logical2u (Wikibreak) 16:10, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, there's a discussion ongoing at WP:AN/Iover not only his block but also his "grandiose claims". I'm a bit harried to check his contributions, but if this checkuser turns up positive, seems like it might be a little bit closer to unraveling his comments. I enjoy Sidaway's comment as a good summary: Take this with a bushel of salt. Logical2u (Wikibreak) 16:34, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]