Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Fact check

[edit] Fact check

• Fact check (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)

Fact check is a new user who immediately began removing any text with a {{fact}} attached. I find it remarkable that a new user would know to create a purpose specific name and from the get-go be enforcing a tiny part of policy without having a history here first. On the assumption that this was just a purpose specific account created by another user, I requested on his/her talk page that the user mention who they used to be/what their other ID is. The user has been cagey, asking why I need to know. Perhaps it's a completely innocent purpose driven account, but I'm beginning to wonder if it's possible that this user might be someone coming back as a new ID to sharpen a WP:POINT about verifiability. If a casual CU is possible, it would be nice to verify that this is not someone who is currently under censure. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 23:39, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I've indentified the operator of the account, but as he's a user in good standing I'm not going to take any action. Mackensen (talk) 23:56, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Mackensen! That's all I wanted to know. Regards, CHAIRBOY (☎) 01:18, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

This sounds like fishing. --zero faults ^{|sockpuppets|} 01:06, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

I'll be the judge of that, thank you very much. Mackensen (talk) 14:05, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Your welcome. --User:Zer0faults 01:10, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

How did you, in your decision come away with a conclusion that the user was not failing "Avoiding scrutiny from other editors" from WP:SOCK. If they were doing this to avoid comments to their main user about the WP:V policy as interpreted by those who placed the tags then they may be violating legitimate uses of sock puppets. Ansell 05:38, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, my bad. Did not realise the user had already been blocked for an inappropriate user name. Ansell 05:44, 12 September 2006 (UTC)