Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Robsteadman

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

Robertsteadman
This account was created May 1, 2006, Robsteadman was indefblocked on April 24, 2006. When Deskana enquired if this was the same Robsteadman on the talkpage of Robertsteadman, the answer was indicative that it was. I have them under a usernameblock currently, but would like confirmation whether it is Robsteadman or an impostor. Thanks. Syrthiss 21:36, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Confirmed. Same person. Essjay (  Talk  •  Connect  )  12:17, 19 May 2006 (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.''

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

There is some question that this user may be related to Robsteadman. Please run a check. Thanks.Gator (talk) 21:05, 2 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I resent the above - I have no idea whjo robeaston99 is and I do not operate a sockpuppet. Now kindly retract your accusations and insinuations. After deskana's vandalism and the quorum/cabal calls and strangers turning up to supprt the unebncyclopedic version on the vote this is outrageous. And all a bit familiar from the way you all tried to get rid of SOPHIA. Robsteadman 22:36, 2 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, at least we know he denies it, that evidence in his favor as far as I am concerned. And I had nothing to do with SOPHIA....you're copying your edit over and over again adn it doesn't make sense here.Gator (talk) 22:41, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

CheckUser confirms that User:Robsteadman was using the sockpuppets User:Robeaston99 and User:Vhjh. I've blocked Robsteadman for 24 hours for using sockpuppets to stack votes, and I've blocked both sockpuppets indefinitely. Jayjg (talk) 22:44, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

This thread has turned into an entire discussion about justice and fairness, which in my view clogs up this page. Since there's a backlog on this page, and the admins with checkuser privileges have enough to wade through in order to find the actual requests, I've decided to be bold and move the entire thread to the Jesus talk page, which is where this issue originated. If I'm reverted, I won't revert back. I will just add that I'm perfectly happy that Jayjg carried out the check properly, and that he is correct in refusing to share the details with ordinary users. AnnH ♫ 21:09, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

, ,
User:Robsteadman has asked that I release the evidence of his sockpuppeting, using the accounts User:Robeaston99 and User:Vhjh. It is not Wikipedia practice to release private information like this, nor to release this kind of evidence to individuals. However, I have passed the evidence along to the other Wikipedia editors with CheckUser access, and asked that they review my work and provide their own analysis. Jayjg (talk) 21:57, 3 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Having seen the evidence, I concur with Jayjg's analysis. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 23:03, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Seconded. Mackensen (talk) 23:17, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I have reviewed the evidence in this matter and concur without reservation in the conclusions reached by JayJG. Kelly Martin (talk) 23:52, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * As do I. Sam Korn (smoddy) 23:59, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Ditto the above. There is simply no other way to read it. Essjay  Talk •  Contact 01:12, 4 April 2006 (UTC)


 * User:Vhjh is still disputing this finding and has e-mailed Jayjg and Morven for clarification of the evidence against him/her. Gilraen of Dorthonion AKA SophiaTalk TCF 10:06, 10 April 2006 (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.''