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

• Code letter: G

• Supporting evidence: Two disruptive single purpose accounts editing Michael Atiyah. Within their first few days on Wikipedia they commence Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Fowler&fowler. Are these two accounts controlled by the same person, or is either one controlled by any other editor involved in the Michael Atiyah dispute? Jehochman ^Talk 11:57, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Possible - they share a common shared IP so they likely are aware of each other - Alison ^❤ 13:05, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I conclude that this is at minimum, meat puppetry. They are editing towards exactly the same goals, and tag teaming Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Fowler&fowler. I am not going to block them, but I will explain that they are to be treated as a single editor, especially for the purposes of that RFC. Jehochman ^Talk 16:44, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is strange. I asked Thatcher to run a CheckUser on Perusnarpk, Abhimars and one of the other new SPAs. I believe all he said was that they were in the same geographic region. He mentioned something else (possibly that they weren't close?) that's escaping my mind at the moment; I'll ask him to reconfirm. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 17:11, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any shared IPs. Perusnarpk and Abhimars are on different ISPs but apparently in the same city. Additionally, there are a couple of other users on the same IP as Abhimars, but it seems to be dynamically assigned, so it is not clear if they are the same or different people. Thatcher 17:26, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure these distinctions matter. The two users are acting in tandem, and have very little experience, in fact no experience, with Wikipedia other than to prosecute this content dispute (and now user conduct RFC). This is textbook disruption and meat puppetry. Jehochman ^Talk 18:45, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No arguments here. I asked for the CU because of the obvious meatpuppetry. I would recommend that these accounts be blocked, as they continue to seek the addition of BLP-sensitive libelous material to the article, despite opposition from almost ten editors. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 19:38, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

<-- Feel free to block them if you think they are violating WP:BLP and have received sufficient warnings. I have not studied that issue in detail. These do appear to be disruption only accounts. Jehochman ^Talk 19:45, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since I'm involved, I'll contact another admin to look into the matter. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 20:09, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: Perusnarpk (talk · contribs), Abhimars (talk · contribs), Rahulsharma242000 (talk · contribs) and Tksinghal23 (talk · contribs) have all been blocked by Tiptoety (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) indefinitely for "meatpuppetry, arguing to add BLP-sensitive/libelous material to Michael Atiyah, disruption". Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 20:19, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]