Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Cardriver

[edit] Cardriver

• Cardriver (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)
• Editingoprah (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)
• Zorklift (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)
• Vexel (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)

These users have all made similar edits to Oprah Winfrey, adding copyvio material and reverting attempts to clean up the article. Here is a list of suspicious edits from each user, as they are all essentially the same (may not be all):

Cardriver [1] [2]

Editingoprah [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]

Zorklift [8] [9] [10] [11]

Vexel [12]

There is some discussion of this case on AN/I here and here. Thanks in advance for any assistance this check user provides. Harro5 01:08, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

• Kittykash (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)

KittyKash [13] [14]

Another sock. — getcrunk what?! 17:51, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Inconclusive. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 11:11, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you so much Essjay for offering a fair assessment. A bunch of are very elderly so we're new to this whole wikipedia thing. I really feel as though I'm being picked on by more experienced users of the technological age. When I first arrived at Wikipedia I loved it and found everyone welcoming, but once I incorrectly uploaded a photo people have been not at all helpful. I've really never felt so bullied in my life. Dear Getcrunk, I'm not sure why you are so frustrated with the inexpereinced newbies at the Oprah article for including relevant early-life images you consider unsourced, when you as an experienced editor endorsed the use of this Janet Jackson image http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Janetjacksonnew.jpg The only source info provided is speculation on where the photo came from and the link provided does not even work. It's very difficult for newbies to follow the correct standards and procedures of wikipedia when they are applied so inconsistently by the very people endorsing said standards. I understand that you are acting in good faith and do not mean to be creating double standards or confusion, and thus I offer this as the most constructive of criticism. Cardriver 19:01, 6 July 2006 (UTC)