Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Mikegooderson

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

Mikegooderson





 * Code letter: G


 * Supporting evidence: See WP:COIN thread. In addition, see edit histories of, . Above user names and IPs tend to be or become active periodically around the same time, making edits of a broadly promotional nature to articles related to Tahir Shah (a notable author known to reside in Casablanca, Morocco). The IPs appear to be Casablancan.


 * Edits to alternating between one of the above IPs and  within minutes of each other on 19 September 2008.
 * Edits to alternating between one of the above IPs and  within minutes of each other on 14 December 2006.
 * Edits to alternating between one of the above IPs and  within minutes of each other on 30 May 2006.
 * Edits to alternating between  and  within minutes of each other (and within minutes of article creation).
 * Also similar alternations between and two Kuwaiti IPs in, e.g. on 12 December 2006.
 * , and  tend to create articles with info boxes present in the first version; not a bad thing to do, but relatively unusual for novice editors and/or editors with limited editing experience.
 * Recurrent copyright problems with texts and images uploaded by and.
 * Suspected sockpuppet (or meatpuppet) activity. Something is not quite right. Jayen 466 00:33, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

✅ that Mikegooderson and Coldwinterday are the same user.

Olivespread is.

Sam Korn (smoddy) 16:42, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Blocked Coldwinterday (confirmed) and Olivespread (suspected/probable based on behavior) indefinitely and blocked Mikegooderson for 48 hours. —Wknight94 (talk) 17:00, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Olivespread has protested his/her innocence and, taken with the "possible" checkuser result, I have unblocked. Please advise if the technical evidence was stronger than implied here.  —Wknight94 (talk) 20:24, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * There are factors that prevent me from ruling it out. The technical evidence is certainly not enough to base a block on.  In retrospect, a better answer would have been .  Apologies for the infelicitous phrasing.  Sam Korn (smoddy) 20:45, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Coincidences can and do happen. But I confess that accidentally becoming aware of The Sufis – a then-orphaned new article – within 7 minutes of its being created by a first-time editor somehow strikes me as a long shot. Still, in dubio pro reo and all that. Thanks,  Jayen 466 21:02, 20 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.''