Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/The Viper

If you are creating a new request about this user, please add it to the top of the page, above this notice. Don't forget to add
{{Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/The Viper}}
to the checkuser page here. Previous requests (shown below), and this box, will be automatically hidden on Requests for checkuser (but will still appear here).

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

The Viper

The_Viper (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

WorldsCollide (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Don banan (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
209.216.93.104 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))

Regarding user:The_Viper, user:WorldsCollide, user:Don banan and IP address 209.216.93.104- each share a singular editing habit of an extremely few edits focused on a single topic generating from the Nintendo DS talk page. That is, the DS "precessessor discussion" [1]. They share the same writing style and mirror their same argument text as well, and oddly enough, despite the fact that they all have an extremely low number of edits, they all seem to have enough knowledge of how wikipedia works. I'm calling shenanigans. Ex-Nintendo Employee 21:00, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk note: Assuming they are the same person, has (he) committed any policy violations or disruptive behavior, like edit warring, avoiding 3RR through multiple accounts, etc (other than the obvious allegation of sockpuppetry)? Thatcher131 (talk) 21:09, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just an attempt to create an appearance of consensus using alternate accounts. :( Ex-Nintendo Employee 21:13, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is there active opposition? Has there been edit-warring? Mackensen (talk) 15:07, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unless I am mistaken, is it not a violation of Wikipedia guidelines to use sockpuppets in an attempt to give the appearance of consensus? Ex-Nintendo Employee 02:08, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I repeat my question: is there edit-warring on the article? Is there opposition to the text inserted? Are votes being manipulated? Mackensen (talk) 20:47, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there is edit warring going on here... Ex-Nintendo Employee 03:40, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Inconclusive From the pattern of editing I'd say there's cause for suspicion, but there's nothing in the logs that clinches it. On the other hand, the latter two accounts are one-off jobs no longer contributing and thus carry no weight. Mackensen (talk) 19:59, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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.