Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Squeezdot/Archive

Squeezdot

Squeezdot (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

21 August 2010

Suspected sockpuppets

Squeezedot (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
AmyGray1226 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Evidence submitted by Cameron Scott

Repeated attempts to recreate deleted article, all accounts edit the same sub-set of articles to add 'Michael "Mic" Neumann' to articles or to create articles about 'Michael "Mic" Neumann' (recented deleted at AFD). Recent An/I report about this editor at: second entry, sorry I don't know how to do the specific link within the archive Cameron Scott (talk) 18:09, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties

See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

Administrator note Two newer accounts blocked as pretty obvious socks - same focus on the same articles and talk pages. Oldest account, Squeezdot, blocked for two weeks. TN X Man 21:45, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

17 December 2013

Suspected sockpuppets

50.14.3.215 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
Editor interaction utility

Editing history mostly relates to Michael Mic Neumann and related projects. This edit is also an admission of identity. Rob Sinden (talk) 13:06, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

And at Talk:Kung Faux, another Neumann related article, Squeezdot identified himself as Neumann.[1]. I've raised the IP at WP:COIN. I blocked Squeezdot indefinitely in August 2010 for "Abusing multiple accounts: clearly doesn't intend to respect block, continues to create sockpuppets". Dougweller (talk) 13:38, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also see this old ANI report.[2] Dougweller (talk) 14:30, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I support an escalating block to protect from COI and PROMO, because it's a fixed IP (no collateral damage), long-term single purpose account, continuously pushing promo at Helena Christensen(inserting self as co-founder), Kung Faux (massive COI buildup, though RS), overwriting Mess John with promo without disambiguation, COI, PROMO, primary source insertion into The Sucklord. Also http://www.popdetail.com [3] is COI cited as a source for insertion[4] into articles such as Yuko Shimizu (illustrator) (since removed). I didn't know about the 2010 indefinite blocks of Squeezdot et al. It may be possible to train Neumann to stop COI editing, and comply with WP:COI procedures, but I have a doubt. --Lexein (talk) 03:11, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This can be closed, I've blocked the IP as a long term block evader. The original account always made it clear he would sock. Dougweller (talk) 11:51, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

Note: IP blocked one year. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:22, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]