[WikiEN-l] I have a problem with CheckUser as administered by JPGordon

[Samuel L Bronkowitz]

Hello,

I've been editing Wikipedia for quite a while, but decided to make an
account recently and signed up. I continued my normal editing (mostly typo
and fixes on random articles, which seems to be a way to find a lot of your
mistakes) but noticed a problem on the Administrators' Noticeboard and left
my opinion there.

A user included me in a CheckUser for speaking up on the issue. They accused
the user PSPMario, who seems to have edited only on the Playstation 3 and
Playstation Portable articles, of being a sockpuppet of someone after he
reported two users he suspected of being a sockpuppet.

I find it a very bad precedent to immediately accuse someone of being a
sockpuppet, for trying to report a potential problem themselves. I find this
equally problematic to say that "identical additions of info" happen when we
give users the tools in difference comparison to easily copy content from an
earlier edit to a later edit. PSPMario says he was replacing something he
saw that was missing when he returned to the page, and I believe him,
because there is no reason for me not to believe him.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#I_think_I_see_a_sockpuppet

The result of the Checkuser came back as "likely."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/RunedChozo

I am not sure what this means. I know I am no sockpuppet, and given the
writing style of PSPMario, I am reasonably certain he is not a sockpuppet
either.

I do not know when we started using weasel words for CheckUser, which ought
to be a yes or no answer, but this sets a very bad precedent for abuse of
the CheckUser system. Additionally, we have users trying to get everyone
they can blocked, no matter what their edits or edit history, based on the
results of weasel-worded RFCU postings.

This situation is a detriment to Wikipedia.

Thank you for your time.