Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/LeonaLewisObsessive

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

LeonaLewisObsessive



 * Code letter: E '''


 * Supporting evidence: The IP address has reverted twice on Leona Lewis today while attempting to add information to the article that is not notable, at this time. After reverting twice, the named account described here showed up, reverting a third time in regard to the same information.  Said revert is the named account's only contribution to Wikipedia, at the time of this RFCU.  Diffs are 1, 2, 3, and 4.  If not a sock puppet, by definition, it is a dishonest way to go about adding content to the encyclopedia and an attempt to get around 3RR.  --Winger84 (talk) 20:56, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Further evidence may be found here. Specifically, the named account in question is admitting that they are the IP, which makes this case pretty much "cut and dry." --Winger84 (talk) 21:05, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I was shocked and upset to find that User:Winger84 has accused me of this. I didn't create this account to get around the "3RR" rule (I'd never even heard of it until I was accused of creating an account to get around a rule!). I created it after the said user mentioned that I can create an account! He said this on the edit history of my IP's talk page(81.96.131.189). I added content to the Leona Lewis page, which I thought (And in all honestly do still feel) was relevant information. He didn't agree, and reverted it. I reverted it back, adding sources. I feel that this has made him dislike me, and now I feel like I am being victimised. I hope that the administrator sees that I am being honest, and am here to contribute to wikipedia! LeonaLewisObsessive (talk) 22:10, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * (ec) If I may, as the editor that opened this case, I would like to withdraw it under the terms of AGF. While I am not entirely convinced of this user's innocence in this matter - at least when it comes to their stated "ignorance" (for lack of a better word, at the moment) in regard to 3RR - I do not feel that the user's actions were not in good faith, but with a need for better understanding of Wikipedia policy. The user did not violate 3RR, although their actions - as admitted on my talk page - did place them right at the limit of the policy. I will engage this editor in further conversation in an attempt to educate, rather than see them Wiki-disciplined. --Winger84 (talk) 22:15, 16 September 2008 (UTC)


 * for a number of reasons - A l is o n  ❤ 00:54, 17 September 2008 (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.''