Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Shine a lite

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

Shine a lite



 * Code letter: F, G


 * Supporting evidence: There is quite an issue with meatpuppetry at Lyme disease; an advocacy group has been coordinating efforts to advance their agenda in the article (see this AN/I thread, for example). The above are accounts which have been used in the last month or so to solely to advance this agenda. Some are blocked (e.g. Shine a lite). I suspect these are mostly meatpuppets, based on the off-wiki recruiting, but would like to ask a checkuser to see if any of the accounts are technically matched as out-and-out socks - for example, the new account Roohub echoes the blocked user Foundinkualalumpur fairly closely. MastCell Talk 01:26, 6 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Foundinkualalumpur, Roohub and Wanaqueling. The rest are ❌. Thatcher 01:59, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
 * These are now all blocked. Perhaps the activities of the others should be scrutinized at WP:SSP for possible teamwork editing. Jehochman Talk 04:20, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

One more!

This single purpose account has been edit warring and misrepresenting what a source says. Jehochman Talk 03:07, 7 July 2008 (UTC) Another:
 * ❌ Thatcher 11:07, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
 * , first post was to vote in an AfD on Lyme disease controversy. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 05:09, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Tiptoety talk 14:16, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Another:
 * , long dormant account, misrepresents source to continue bioweapons fringe theory. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 06:18, 10 July 2008 (UTC)


 * ❌ -- neither account appears related to any others. Sam Korn (smoddy) 14:28, 10 July 2008 (UTC)


 * , same agenda (removing cited info about "chronic" Lyme). Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 23:37, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * ❌ to anyone else. I have to say, I really don't think CU is useful here.  This is clearly an orchestrated meatpuppetry effort -- CU can't add anything to behavioural evidence.  For the same reason, preventative measures are not going to work.  Sam Korn (smoddy) 09:40, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I tend to agree; unfortunately it's been tough to get consistent oversight from uninvolved admins that can keep up with the pace of meatpuppet account creation. Given some of the documented consequences for people who have run afoul of pressure groups on this issue, it's not an appealing prospect. Would you like to be volunteered? :) MastCell Talk 16:42, 16 July 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.''