Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Artsandopinion/Archive

Report date September 1 2009, 18:01 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * Evidence submitted by Edgarde

User Artsandopinion was blocked (twice) on January 7, 2008 for spamming links to multiple articles to promote a website with which he/she has a self-acknowledged WP:COI. Since the last block, there has been at least one incidence of puppetry.

New account (created 2009-08-30) Rudi600 begins editing by adding artsandopinion·com to one article, then requesting on Talk:Pornography that artsandopinion·com be added to Pornography.

(Article talk page requests to add his site were Artsandopinion's practice after receiving increasingly lengthy warnings not to spam articles directly. This practice devolved into lengthy talk page pleas and canvassing, until eventually he resumed adding links directly.)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users

Requested by edg ☺ ☭ 18:01, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
 * CheckUser requests

Resumes campaign by indef blocked aggressive spammer with socking history. See for most recent account.


 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments


 * because the edits are . Otherwise, behaviorally this seems like a pretty clear case. If he's generally got the point on posting on the talkpage instead of the article, then a new block may not really be necessary. Nathan  T 18:39, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the quick response. He hasn't gotten the point&mdash;only asking on Talk pages was an agreement he did not honor for very long, and the first edit by this new sock added the link directly to an article. / edg ☺ ☭ 18:45, 1 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Conclusions

I did block him, if only for the reason that unblock requests should be made on the original account, not by evading with a new account. Peter Symonds ( talk ) 15:10, 2 September 2009 (UTC)