Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/RPH

If you are creating a new request about this user, don't forget to edit this section and add
{{Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/RPH}}
The previous request (shown below), and this box, will be automatically hidden on Requests for checkuser (it will still appear here).

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a Request for checkuser. Please do not modify it.

RPH

RPH (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
67.183.194.61 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
4.243.62.28 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
4.243.60.135 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
24.19.96.143 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))

Wikistalking. This appears to be User:RPH, who left a message on my talkpge objecting to my removal of spoiler tags [1]. I haven't ceased, so said user has decended to using a sockpuppet to anonymously revert and describe my edits as "vandalism" [2] What troubles me is if this user is really being constructive or is wikistalking and reverting me for he sole intent of trolling. I've also filed a request for investigation on this matter.

I could be incorrect, but I'm seeing some useful responses here, and the feedback has been incredibly civil save for this case. I've seen some suggestions that what my removals may have been damaging, but no evidence to suggest that it has been.

A lot of people have very strong opinions on this subject, but what makes the project work is our ability to arrive at agreements such as the one we have today. That's how Wikipedia works. Intervention is needed; it is extremely irritating to have my constructive edits reverted day upon day. -Zero^Talk 07:34, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk note: This is not the right room for an argument. Please discuss your issues with each other elsewhere. Thatcher131 01:08, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but the edividence and findings of fact provided were very relevant to the case. I've moved said discussion to the project's talkpage. -Zero^Talk 01:13, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Declined. Mackensen (talk) 02:53, 24 June 2006 (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.