Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Count Of The Saxon Shore

''The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a Request for checkuser. Please do not modify it .''

User:Crusading composer User:Count Of The Saxon Shore and User:Bakewell Tart
These one, two or three users have been accused of sockpuppetry and using different accounts to stalk, vandalise harass etc. Could you please determine if all or any of these are related to each other? Thanks.Gator (talk) 21:55, 31 March 2006 (UTC)


 * No need to check if Crusading composer is Count Of The Saxon Shore. We know he is; there's no mystery about it. . However, it would be nice to have it established once and for all whether or not there is a link between the two, as User:Robsteadman keeps insisting that they are, and keeps insisting that there's a cabal. AnnH ♫ 23:52, 31 March 2006 (UTC)


 * If it speeds up the process - check the requests to change usernmae logs. Crusading composer became Count.... last week.  So I should imagine that these 'two' editors might share the same ISPs - one a home ISP, and a few work ISPs.  However, unless I am a schizophrenic with a memory disorder, I doubt that any of these ISPs will match Bakewll Tart's ISPs.  Good luck!Count Of The Saxon Shore 00:32, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Mind you, reading the box above, what reason is there for the request? It doesn't specifically mention harrassment or stalking.  Shouldn't there have been a request for these to be investigated first?  I'm pretty sure that there is no genuine reason for this request to be logged = other than to end the complaints of Mr Steadman, but since he seems to have retracted his accusation, this request is a bit moot.  But don't mind me, look it up, I don't mind.Count Of The Saxon Shore 00:38, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree that it's not a usual request. There's no voting going on, and there's no suspicion of 3RR violation. It's really because User:Robsteadman has been going on and on and on about the cabal and calling for other editors to be banned, and making generally unfounded accusations. It would be great if we could put a stop to it, and Count Of The Saxon Shore says he doesn't mind being checked. AnnH ♫ 07:33, 1 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Rather than running a checkuser, just block the disruptive editor. I don't see a case for a checkuser, and without the permission of both parties, I'm not inclined to run one. Essjay  Talk •  Contact 16:47, 1 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I didn't ask for a checkuser, I was aware of the name change and I am tired of the stalking that Count Of The Saxon Shore in his previous incarnation on here and as other names on a different internet forum has been using to stalk and harass me. What I said is that there is a "link" with User: Bakewell Tart - I didn't say they were the same person.... both the Bakewell Tart account and the Crusading COmposer account were set up for the sole purpose of stalking me - hence their names 9 I work in Bakewell and I am a composer who often uses music for campaigning purposes. Both accounts should be removed if there is any justice - although Crusading Composer has attempteed to disguise the fact he is a single issue editor it is clear, from a look at his edit hostory, that this is the primary purpose. Bakewell Tart's edit history is even clearer. Surely WP should get rid of stalkers and abusers? I would be interested to know if there is any link with User:Njd123 and User:Kotuku   - boith similarly single issue editors. Robsteadman 17:52, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

''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.''