Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Naj-GMU

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

Naj-GMU



 * code letter:G


 * Supporting evidence: A bizarre pattern of editing by apparent socks or meatpuppets in HIV-related articles. Beginning on 31 October, user/s (using a sequence of related names, different with each group of edits) began adding unsourced or poorly sourced information. On 21 November, user began using a 2001 Nature article by Gary Nabel as a source for additional edits, copying multiple lines from the article on 1 Dec. I attempted to explain the copyvio policy to user, but under a new name (or whatever, I'm at a loss here), the user introduced a four-paragraph copy-and-pastiche from another copyrighted source several hours later, as well as another copyright violation (from this website at Antiretroviral drug. Keepcalmandcarryon (talk) 20:45, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Behaviorally, all of these users are very similar; from a technical perspective, it looks like they all have a certain institution in common. All are along with, , and , but it's very difficult to sort wheat from chaff, in this check, and I'm not finding any direct overlap off of shared IPs; bear in mind the possibility that this is a class or club of some kind. This request might benefit from a more experienced eye, so I'd say  another CU for review. –  Luna Santin  (talk) 21:09, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Update I did some more digging, and found a syllabus for an honours biology course at the "certain institution"; in the interim, one of the users responded to my talkpage as well. Apparently, these are different users who are obliged to contribute to Wikipedia in return for a substantial portion (half, I believe) of their course grade. It's an interesting situation, and one that might require some discussion on a different board; one can only imagine the disruption that would occur if courses around the world began requiring all students to contribute to Wikipedia.... Keepcalmandcarryon (talk) 16:07, 2 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Hm... on further reflection, we can probably call this checkuser case resolved, unless there's some further concerns of the sort requiring CU attention. – Luna Santin  (talk) 22:55, 5 December 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.''