Contents

Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/The dépeceur of Bergen

• The dépeceur of Bergen (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

• Code letter:G
• Supporting evidence: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ABradipus&diff=177566301&oldid=173777205.

I do not know if any of you speaks french, but this text is a death threat directed to me and my family. This is most probably linked to fr:WP:MS, a long term vandalism on WP:fr. Besides vandalising, the vandal steals identities (I had some difficulty getting back the "Bradipus" identity, also here), and posts defamation on WP:fr admins all over internet (here in the serbian WP, a text accusing various admins of serious crimes such as pedophilia!!).

But what brings me here is this text of which I will translate the beginning: "I will cut you into pieces. I was unfairly blocked (not by me, as far as I know), I will do justice myself. I will cut you into pieces and eat your brain and your willie. I will kill all french speaking bourgeois (...). I will take care myself of your two little pieces of trash (that refers to my two children who are mentionned on my user page) that I will drown after crushing them against a wall. We will have your wife raped by hobos. No flemish would want to have that latin bitch (...)".

Death treats againts me and againt my family, this is getting quite serious. And according to what I know, this guy may well live a couple of kilometers away. I would like to get the IP of that guy if possible. Bradipus (talk) 21:59, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: I am sorry for your difficulty but you will not be able to gain the ip of the accounts. Such is considered private and cannot be divulged through checkuser. Please post your concern at WP:ANI. -JodyB _talk 23:08, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: I have posted it at ANI for the user. I am not sure if I am supposed to post it here or in the declined section. Are checkusers supposed to make that decision? -JodyB _talk 23:14, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: I have blocked the user after gaining an independent translation which confirms the translation above. -JodyB _talk 23:28, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Declined. No checkuser action needed. --Deskana (talk) 23:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: Note that this is m:Vandalism reports/BogaertB, huge vandalism from a Belgacom IP range. -- lucasbfr ^talk 00:51, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would appreciate very much that a check user be accepted on this account. I am aware of the extreme badwill showed by the english community to defend our editors to stalkers and cyber-criminals, but I think there is a limit to what is acceptable. It is not okay to answer to one of our most precious editors that no checkuser action is needed, when he is threatened to be cut in pieces and eaten, his wife raped and his kids crushed on a wall. I am absolutely amazed that you routinely agree to do checks of potential sockpuppets merely criticizing another editor, whilst rejecting requests to help an editor threatened with high degree of violence. I think common sense should be guiding your actions. Merely blocking a user is not a sufficient action in face of such violence. Answering that cu action is not needed is uselessly offending. I think that checkusers should also provide help good community members to protect their lives. If you can not provide the IP information directly to the user, a good idea would be possibly to discuss the issue with the other checkusers or to contact Mike Godwin for further help. I also think, Bradipus, that you should go to the police and have a request being delivered to provide the ip address to the police team. This type of discourse is not something we should accept on internet, and certainly not a discourse we should accept on Wikipedia. Ever. Anthere (talk) 01:01, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Relisted -- lucasbfr ^talk 01:10, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Note: - I've looked into this case and can state the following; the above account and one other (User:The dépéceur of Mons) have now been blocked indefinitely. The underlying IP will also be blocked. I have taken advice from Mike Godwin, our legal counsel and can state that although I am forbidden by policy to reveal the IP address, I can state that there is no geo-locating information to be obtained from it. Further information, unfortunately, will have to be via a court order. I'm really sorry - wish I could do more here - but I checked and that is our stated legal position and I cannot do more. On a personal note, I'm really sorry that this had to happen to you - what that person said was disgusting and inexcusable and I wish there was more I could do here but my hands are tied. I am so sorry - Alison ^❤ 04:07, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the support Anthere. I may indeed finally consider doing that although I can tell you what stops me for the moment: if I go to the police and if they do something about it and if at some point that guy comes in front of a judge, this will mean that at that point he will have my name. If there is one thing that is positive right now, it is that he does not have that information.

Alison, one information, if you may give it: you say hereabove that "there is no geo-locating information to be obtained from [the IP]". Do you mean by that it does not point to an ISP and that it would be, at the end of the day, useless for anybody who would try to infer the actual identity (or that it points to some anonymizer somewhere in the middle of nowhere that would not give an answer to anybody)? Bradipus (talk) 07:26, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bradipus, It's not a domestic ISP, no. I suspect that the IP owner, if petitioned by the police, might divulge information ok, but geolocating info for that address is largely useless - Alison ^❤ 08:09, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I commented more in length in my talk page, but let me summarize here that I am sorry if my tone hurted some people. I apology as well if my comments were unclear and confusing; The issue was not "to give the data to Bradipus". The issue was that I felt what he was reporting was dismissed. I am aware there are increasingly threats of violence here and there, and I would like so much that we do not stand and let it become somehow... the norm that people can issue threats at others. But again, my apologies. I hope I was clearer. Anthere (talk) 13:49, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"one of our most precious editors", "good community member"....gosh, I'm blushing.

Thank you again Anthere, and thank you everybody for considering, thinking and pondering, and at the end of the day, give me some negative information that are handy. I also appreciate the general way people have expressed their concerns.

As I said somewhere else, whether I am scared or not, I do not know, but I am not the only person involved here: my wife and kids are part of it. I feel like I do not have the right to dismiss as Standard Internet Bullshit a threat upon them. It is up to me to decide to do something now. Bradipus (talk) 21:45, 19 December 2007 (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.