Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Zeumic

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

Zeumic (second request)



 * Code letter: F


 * Supporting evidence: While it is clearly obvious that all of the new single-purpose accounts which have shown up on Talk:Geoffrey Edelsten are either sock or meatpuppets, the purpose of this request is so that we can take effective action on it. Wikifactsright was identified in March 2008 as related to the PR company hired by the subject of the article, who had also written the website that these accounts appear to be promoting. (See earlier completed request here) (See below) Orderinchaos 02:33, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I have moved Requests for checkuser/Case/Wikifactsright to this case as per the archive template which states If you are adding a new request for this user please add it above this notice at the top of the page. ...  Please don't create a separate page with a different name.--Matilda talk 01:07, 16 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Supporting evidence: as per case below I believe the sock puppeting is to evade blocks already issued.--Matilda talk 01:51, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Note also that Wikifactsright and Zeumic were blocked because of legal threats made. The subject of the article, Geoffrey Edelsten, has also made legal threats aginst several wikipeda editors  - see http://www.geoffreyedelsten.com/The-Life-and-Times-of-Prof-Dr-Geoffrey-Edelsten.pdf (page 18) (also mentioned in discussion at AWNB where other opinions have been sought as to whether the article complies with WP:BLP - the focus of the edits on the talk page of the editors mentioned in this checkuser request.) --Matilda talk 04:25, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Janusreverted has stopped barely short of legal threats themselves but has echoed off-wiki ones. As far as I know this isn't a violation of WP:LEGAL but is skating on rather thin ice. Orderinchaos 07:02, 16 June 2008 (UTC)


 * ✅ the following accounts are the same person
 * Laurenraz is . Thatcher 21:20, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Laurenraz is . Thatcher 21:20, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Laurenraz is . Thatcher 21:20, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Laurenraz is . Thatcher 21:20, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Laurenraz is . Thatcher 21:20, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Laurenraz is . Thatcher 21:20, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Laurenraz is . Thatcher 21:20, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Many thanks tagged and, in the case of the confirmed users, blocked --Matilda talk 22:27, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Zeumic



 * Code letter: G
 * Supporting evidence:
 * Supporting evidence:

A particularly disruptive and accusative user has surfaced on the Geoffrey Edelsten article, as well as on Talk:Geoffrey Edelsten and other venues in an attempt to have any negative content of the page removed. He has been blocked today for 3RR and had engaged in considerable forum shopping, and is wasting a considerable amount of community time. Based on the very similar content being introduced to the article by Zeumic on the same article late last year (I would link diffs but they're deleted ones - see Special:DeletedContributions/Zeumic, there's under 15), and the fact both seem to be exclusively dedicated to this article, I believe there is a reasonable possibility that these users are the same and think this check is warranted. Orderinchaos 20:11, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

As Zeumic is not currently editing, I am inclined to decline. Assuming it is true, how would this change your approach to the editor? What would you/could you do if it was confirmed that you can't do otherwise? Thatcher 20:52, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Zeumic (Edelsten's web development and promotions company ) had a confirmed conflict of interest with regards to the article. If the two users are in fact the same person, it would be possible to deal with the new user's contributions using the conflict of interest guideline. Orderinchaos 22:31, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅. Thatcher 04:13, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Both blocked per OTRS Ticket # 2008032810002283 for the length of that ticket (if it successfully resolves, I will lift the block). I think we all know what that implies. &rArr;   SWAT Jester    Son of the Defender  13:24, 28 March 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.''