Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Manacpowers

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

Manacpowers

 * (indef.block)
 * (indef.block)
 * (indef.block)
 * (indef.block)
 * (indef.block)
 * (indef.block)
 * (indef.block)
 * (indef.block)
 * (indef.block)
 * (indef.block)
 * (indef.block)
 * (indef.block)
 * (indef.block)
 * (indef.block)
 * (indef.block)
 * (indef.block)


 * Code letter:C, D, F (SEE WP:RFCU)

--Propastop (talk) 13:54, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Supporting evidence:Some or all of these accounts may be linked.These accounts the editing of certain Korean POV. And these accounts　take over Their editing(For example,->, ->, ->).New account appears suddenly and does editing same as them .Some of the edits have been disruptive and may turn out to have been avoidance of 3RR or the block.

This is a just hilarious report. I don't know why I should be listed on this by the obvious Japanese SPA who seems to be related to 2channel's on-going canvasssing/meatpuppeting. The user should provide exact diffs and evidences. who has been making the exact same edit warring over multiple articles as Bentecbye's socks did since his registration at here, states the accused one have a "Korean POV". In fact that does nothing but mean "He/she has a strong Japanese nationalistic POV". The newbie apparently too well know of Wikipedia policies and share same MO with .--Caspian blue (talk) 14:10, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * See this RFCU on Propastop Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Pabopa
 * Articles for deletion/South Korean cultural claims (2nd nomination)
 * http://society6.2ch.net/test/read.cgi/korea/1218372119/ translation for references.
 * Please dont obstruct.--Propastop (talk) 14:22, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * My concern and references are pertinent to the RFCU file on you. Besides, you're filing this right after you're accused as an indef.blocked sock.--Caspian blue (talk) 14:28, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Please dont obstruct.I wonder why are you impatient. --Propastop (talk) 14:29, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * This is a completely bad faith request. bogus.
 * even this reporter considered as a suspected sock puppet.
 * Everyone who opposes you, which is intended to make sock? Completely meaningless request. SUTHERLAND BROTHERS (talk) 15:57, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * , I'm warning you. Do not lie about the result. The checkuser confirmed the final result unrelated. Requests_for_checkuser/Case/AirFrance358. And how do you know it since you''re a newbie. --Caspian blue (talk) 18:05, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I examined your history. There is no reason to delete. You doubted our. When yourself is doubted, you delete? You are POV.--Wahtsay (talk) 18:14, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The result is unrelated and you fabricate it as if I have a sock. Besides, you must show diffs and evidences just like me. Do not lie about the RFCU. --Caspian blue (talk) 18:22, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

27 January 2008 possible Ecthelion83 .Now? Let's check Caspian blue--Wahtsay (talk) 18:25, 24 September 2008 (UTC) OK,ok. Cool your temper. now, september 2008. --Wahtsay (talk) 18:44, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, 28 January 2008 Unrelated is the final result. You're fabricating the result from malicious faith. I'm asking you, Who are you? Newbie I don't have any concern because I don't have any sock unlike your new identity. If I were him, why would I asked the checkuser to look into my account regardless of his initial decline for lack of evidences. However, your sock would be much concerned. Wahtsay.--Caspian blue (talk) 18:36, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Cool your temper is not correct English. It just reminds me of Propastop's "neurosis of you".--Caspian blue (talk) 19:11, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * User:Caspian blue is User:Appletrees . Possible that User:Appletrees and User:Ecthelion83 are related. added by Wahtsay.added--Wahtsay (talk) 17:56, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note This addition by is a deliberate fabrication of the final result Unrelated.--Caspian blue (talk) 18:36, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * ? Nothing evidence. Bad faith request. It is a personal attack. I have a nothing relation with them. It requested by Michael Friedrich, He is a suspected sock. Kao no Nai Tsuki (talk) 10:40, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * added--Wahtsay (talk) 13:00, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Mr. Wahtsay, Specifically, what's a sock? Do you have any proof? I was surprised. I do not know why me on the list. I've chekced your evidence, what the hells are relation with them? I still curious why adminstrator accept your request, all ediots who against you, are sock? This is fishing.

Anyway, Why you edited Propastop's request? Where is the Propastop? He's already expired a block period, but does not appear. You are a new account, but, why do you know rules well? You are not a new editor. You are familiar with the people mentioned on the list. Perhaps because editing war? Tell me the truth, YOU are sock of Propastop. Kao no Nai Tsuki (talk) 13:42, 25 September 2008 (UTC)


 * added.This accounts　take over Their editing--Daialone (talk) 12:39, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I am not a sock, so if you suspect it, it is ok to check me. But it's funny. reporter(Propastop) is a Sock. All the IDs who write this report(Propastop, Wahtsay, Daialone), are banned as a 'obvious sock' now. --Kao no Nai Tsuki (talk) 00:22, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Is this request rejected? If completed, what was the result? Bwrs (talk) 22:59, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I moved it incorrecty The lodger and a few of the guys agreeing with him are socks. This is a troll RFCU.  YellowMonkey   ( bananabucket ) 03:27, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
 * This request has not started yet. --Eichikiyama (talk) 11:03, 1 October 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.''