Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Agavtouch

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

<noinclude>

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/Agavtouch}}
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.

[edit] Agavtouch

main edit links history watch
Filed: 15:14, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

All three of the users in question have focused on the two AfDs and other related articles, but all have made a number of other edits, which in most cases relate to Israel.

All three users seem to be primarily involved with a pair of active AfDs: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ronn Torossian and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/5W Public Relations. All three have also made a handful of other edits, mostly related to Israel. Alansohn (talk) 15:14, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

  • and the answer is ... ? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 00:18, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
    • Declined. This is not enough evidence to perform a checkuser. You've established they have common interests, not that they may be the same person. Checkuser is not for speculation. --Deskana (talk) 18:18, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
      • Let's see: We have three editors who have all started editing within days of each other, all three of whom have devoted almost their entire edit history to two related AfDs and all three of whom have demonstrated that their only apparent other interest is related to the same subject. Wikipedia is so utterly determined to facilitate and encourage vandalism and abuse and this is just one more admin who refuses to deal with the problem. If I could prove beyond a shadow of a doubt -- the apparent burden of proof placed on those dealing with malicious users -- I wouldn't need a checkuser. If anyone needs any more proof that the Wikipedia administrative process is completely and utterly screwed up, you've got it right here. What a god-damned waste of time. Alansohn (talk) 18:29, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
        • I do not refuse to resolve problems. I refuse to violate Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy because someone asked me to without giving my sufficient evidence to perform a check. If you have a complaint about how and when checkusers are performed, try to change the checkuser policy. If someone came to me and said "Oh, someone edits the same article as Alansohn, can you check if they're the same" and I did it, I severely doubt you'd like it. Most users would not. I would not. Checkuser is not something we can do just because people ask without providing evidence. And as you can see, my declination has encouraged the filer to give more evidence below. So please think twice before blaming the checkusers for following policy. --Deskana (talk) 23:34, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Checkuser is not for speculation. If its already established that they are the same person, or working at the same company, then why would we need to use Checkuser? Both users are disrupting a vote, and deleting articles associated with 5W Public Relations. There appears to be a concerted effort to purge Wikipedia of articles related to Ronn Torossian. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 18:39, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
Articles
Evidence
  • Batright and Agavtouchboth use the word "nobility" instead of "notability".
  • All three accounts were created just to vote on the above issues.
  • All three accounts are disrupting a vote, and nominating articles in tandem.


Inconclusive. --Deskana (talk) 14:10, 23 November 2007 (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.


</noinclude>