Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/LilianGreenwald

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

LilianGreenwald



 * E: 3RR violation using socks.
 * E: 3RR violation using socks.
 * E: 3RR violation using socks.
 * E: 3RR violation using socks.
 * E: 3RR violation using socks.
 * E: 3RR violation using socks.
 * E: 3RR violation using socks.

This is a result of a recent edit war in the Xavier Romeu article, which ended in a page protection. User included unreferenced and controversial information, and was edited by another IP  to adhere to NPOV. An IP (suspected) added the same info (word-for-word), again edited by the other IP, which resulted in an edit war with about 3 reverts and re-additions (all word-for-word). Another user started editing to try to control the situation, but was reverted by User:AntoinetteCosway, again adding the same information, word-for-word. This resulted in another edit war but using the original suspected IP address instead of user Antoinette, and subsequently with other suspected users adding the same exact information: User:Robinofoxford (diff), User:Desecheo00907 (diff and many others), User:Jacobbacker (diff and many others), User:Willemdrost (diff), and User:Barendfabritius (diff). I tried editing the article myself to adhere to policies, but was reverted as part of the edit war. I warned some, but not all of the suspected editors, which then prompted the creation of new editors to continue the war. I made some minor subsequent edits, and had to protect the page to put an end to it all. Please see my explanation at the article's talk page. I'm reporting here due to the extent of the edits and different users. There are other new accounts involved, but I could not determine their validity, so are not listed here (WP:AGF, see article history for more info). Since this is my first report here, I apologize for any mistakes in advance. Mtmelendez (Talk 01:11, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
 * . Some of the accounts were clearly linked to each other, but there were the odd ones that weren't linked to the two main groups. Basically, it's very confusing. The evidence here points towards them being sockpuppets, and it's clear that even if not all of them are, there was sockpuppeteering here. Block on behaviour link, I say. --Deskana (talk) 01:42, 1 November 2007 (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.''