Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Cleanemupnowboys

Cleanemupnowboys



 * Code letter: E
 * Supporting evidence:
 * Code letter: E
 * Supporting evidence:

The user was first reported as suspected meatpuppet, here Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/Bksimonb, for making identical revisions to a member of the organization in question's Internet PR Team.


 * The BKWSU page has been subjected to persistent edit-warring and was protected until 31 December 2007, here;


 * Suspected puppet master requested an early unprotection on 25 December, here;


 * appeared immediately and reverted the page in a continuation of the edit-war, here


 * This revision edit was identical to an previous one carried out by Reneeholle, here


 * It was also identical to a previous revisions made by members of the organization as above and, see, here.

Previous revisions;


 * 5th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Brahma_Kumaris_World_Spiritual_University&diff=178258775&oldid=178255713
 * 4th revert:
 * 3rd revert:
 * 2nd revert:
 * 1st revert:

76.79.146.8 and Cleanemupnowboys appears on talk page continuing edit-warring, here.

Thanks. -- Lucyintheskywithdada (talk) 17:05, 31 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Can we say fishing expedition?


 * Lucyintheskywithdad is almost certainly a sockpuppet, see this and this, who refuses to engage in content discussions, and instead files numerous reports about how unfair, inexperienced, or stupid everyone else is but him/her (when he/she is not edit warring]. He asks numerous questions like what do you know, what have you read, instead of engaging on the topics at hand, like here and here.  Yet, he fails to respond to similar questioning.


 * The "evidence" he provides that I and Reneeholle are the same is this. How is this a piece of evidence that supports Lucy's claim?  This is preposterous! There is no similarity in his/her postings or mine and it's clear he/she and I are different.


 * This checkuser violates Wiki policy (i.e., fishing expedition) and is a waste of all of our time. I've already said that the IP 76.79.146.8 is me and given full disclosure of that, so it seems that Lucy's continuing his/her strategy of filing complaints to divert attention from substance issues.  Also, there is no 3RR violation to even prompt a checkuser!


 * I’ve made a single reversion to the article here to return it to a consensus version by multiple editors, followed by edits here and here; one would be hard-pressed to count this as edit warring. Almost all of the "evidence" Lucy lists above is not mine. Lwachowski/Egreen/Ugesum/Lucyintheskywithdad's edits are all the same, reverting it to a completely different and undiscussed page.


 * Please note that I am not averse to working with Lucy and his/her socks in this incarnation, but he/she refuses to focus on content and instead wants to put the focus on others instead of substance. For example, see these attempts at content questions or consensus building:
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ABrahma_Kumaris_World_Spiritual_University&diff=181226055&oldid=181216412 (see end of post for blatant personal attack by Lucy)
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ABrahma_Kumaris_World_Spiritual_University&diff=181182001&oldid=180969453


 * This is Lucyintheskywithdada's strategy, to get the focus on people and personalities and not the article content. Please check his/her contribs and you'll see she/he spends the majority of his/her time on complaints, questioning people about their credentials, or attacking people, as opposed to engaging in good-faith discussions on substance and content.  Cleanemupnowboys (talk) 01:21, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

This appears to be the latest salvo in a content dispute over an article Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University which is under article probation from ArbCom and currently also under full protection after edit warring a few days ago - the last attempt at use of process in this dispute came in the other direction from an unrelated party (see Suspected sock puppets/Lwachowski_%282nd%29). I'm trying my best to encourage the parties to utilise more constructive forms of dialogue, and seem to be getting somewhere (slowly) - there are probably a few violations going on here or there but per WP:IAR if everyone sticks to the rules as far as content editing, I don't think it matters much if it means avoiding another ArbCom and resolving some of the core issues. I suggest CU decline this one for now. Orderinchaos 10:32, 1 January 2008 (UTC)


 * - nothing for checkuser to do here - A l is o n  ❤ 20:07, 1 January 2008 (UTC)