Misplaced Pages

:Requests for checkuser/Case/Samiharris - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser | Case

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Alison (talk | contribs) at 05:07, 6 February 2008 (Samiharris: proxies blocked). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 05:07, 6 February 2008 by Alison (talk | contribs) (Samiharris: proxies blocked)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Samiharris

Template:Checkuser requests to be listed

request links: mainedit • links • history • watch • talk
Filed: 17:01, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

In case it's not clear, here's how that conversation unfolded:

I started paying attention to Mantanmoreland and Samiharris a while ago because they're both active on the kinds of finance articles that interest me. Soon I noticed that they have nearly identical writing styles and always seem to be arguing about the same points, one picking up where the other left off, on articles such as:

(NOTE: before they were merged with Microcap stock fraud Samiharris and Mantanmoreland constantly backed each other up on Pump and dump and Chop stock as well)

And then there are plenty of other examples I found in about 5 minutes of looking, including:

Based on their shared style, constant proximity and singular mindset I suspect Mantanmoreland and Samiharris are being deceitfully used by the same person or people working together and wish to have CheckUser carried out to confirm it or rule it out. Palabrazo (talk) 17:01, 5 February 2008 (UTC)


    • I don't for a minute think that Palabrazo is a curious bystander who just happened across this request. However, based on the standards I usually use, and pretending I don't know the history here, the evidence is sufficient to run a check. The answer is  Inconclusive because one of these editors has only edited via open proxies. Thatcher 01:57, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Not that it probably matters now, but I want to make it clear that I didn't just happen across this request. I created it, but moved it here a few hours later because I aparently missed that step the first time. Is that what your concern is about? Palabrazo (talk) 03:38, 6 February 2008 (UTC)