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/L.L.King))
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.

L.L.King[edit]

request links: main • edit • links • history • watch
Filed: 04:04, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
 Clerk note: moved :) -- lucasbfr talk 06:53, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest that checkuser and clerks should look at the entire discussion at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/L.L.King (2nd) before accepting that the recent contributions of MichaelQSchmidt are in any way abusive. Of course, if L.L.King and MichaelQSchmidt are found to be the same person, that would be bad news. In that case those of use who have spoken up in support of MichaelQSchmidt would have to revise our thinking. EdJohnston (talk) 18:40, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • So you're saying the checkuser shouldn't be run unless it proves that you're right? Cumulus Clouds (talk) 18:51, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not opposing a checkuser run. I'm suggesting that your above statement, if you were intending to provide a neutral summary of the the SSP report, left out some of the views presented. If you were intending it only as a personal statement, I believe it was a success. EdJohnston (talk) 19:42, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disregarding the above, checkuser is necessary here to assist in determining what course of action to take regarding the MQS account. LaraLove|Talk 06:47, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Michael Schmidt sent me an email relevant to this issue. I'm waiting for his permission before sharing the contents more generally. EdJohnston (talk) 13:48, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Many involved received the same email. The information contained therein is irrelevant. The checkuser report will identify such information. LaraLove|Talk 14:08, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • L.L.King's IP address is listed in the request below. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 03:52, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


L.L.King[edit]

request links: main • edit • links • history • watch
Filed: 20:36, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

This user created this account 2 days after a request for article creation was declined. He then registered his first account and began making extensive edits to existing articles to promote this music video. When trivia tags were placed on the popular culture section of Paris Hilton, this user began making attacks against me using his main account and each of his socks to give the illusion of greater consensus. Each of the remarks left on my talk page are nearly identical and present with the same writing style and POV for Wikipedia guidelines. This user then began canvassing for support from User:SchuminWeb, User:Wanderer57 and User:JohnBiancato, among others. He left messages on all three talk pages claiming that a request for checkuser would fail since all users originate in his apartment complex, where he has previously said those accounts belong to "associates around his city," and left the following explanation on the outstanding sock puppet case against him:

"I have never denied speaking to friends and associates about the heavy-handed and biased edits of a person on Wiki who calls himself "Cumulus Clouds". Over a few day period, these conversations have taken place in a grocery stores, local diners, in the laundry room, outside a union hall, at a gas station... lots of places. It rankles that someone so abuses Wiki for his own ends. ANd I voiced my concerns to many people outside of Wiki. And here on Wiki I wrote to friend user SchuminWeb to thank him more recently thanked for advice and apolgize for involving him in my disagreement with this Cloud person. I also wrote similarly to friend user Wanderer57. I voiced a my recent suspicion that some of my own neighbors might well be among those trying to undo Clouds vandalisms. HOWEVER.... that some of these new editors may know me... that they may have come on board Wiki within a short period of time due to my discussions outseide in the world... that they apparently agree that user Cumulus Clouds is abusing the Wiki process... that they have come forward to patch the holes he has made... that they are likely sitting back and watching this discussion... that some of them could even be my neighbors, does not in any way mean that they are puppets. It does mean they are constructive and not destructive. It does mean that they came forward to take action against an abuser." L.L.King (talk) 21:52, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I apologize for this exhaustive list, but I feel that all the evidence should be presented so that this request is not taken as a reaction to an isolated incident, but rather to prolonged demonstration of sockpuppet activity. Thank you. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 20:36, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Confirmed - L.L.King (talk · contribs) = Moonkissed9999 (talk · contribs), Cinemapress (talk · contribs), Anypose (talk · contribs), ManicAttack (talk · contribs), ZeeToAaa (talk · contribs), SomeSlasher (talk · contribs), ExtraordinaryActor (talk · contribs), AnotherSearcher (talk · contribs), CelebPress (talk · contribs), SynnManagement (talk · contribs), MikeTheModel (talk · contribs)
- Alison ❤ 15:58, 7 January 2008 (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.


More