Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Middim13/Archive

Report date August 5 2009, 05:36 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets

Middim13 was community banned (archived discussion) in October 2008 after a long history of POV pushing in martime history articles in attempt to have the established history rewritten to portray one of his ancestors in a more positive light. He previously used ip addresses to circumvent blocks placed upon his account, which resulted in a SSP report which resulted in blocks. More recently I have discovered that he has continued his mission of POV pushing, and on 25 July 2009 I blocked M454454M indefinitely as a sock based upon behavioral similarities of the two accounts. I have also discovered that he is back to using ips to circumvent his ban as well, most recently on the talk page of an unsuspecting user: (see postings ). Since he seems to not want to give up, I am requesting a CheckUser to determine if there are any additional sleepers out there and to also properly impose a rangeblock to stop this disruptive and unwelcome user. -MBK004 05:36, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Evidence submitted by MBK004
 * After further looking, I have added another IP after discovering edits to Fore River Shipyard see the edit summaries -MBK004 05:53, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users


 * For my part, I've been involved in editing the Fore River Shipyard article for some time, and have been reverting Middim13's disruptive edits (which, as I've discussed, violate WP:UNDUE) for over a year now, and which I discuss at more length on the article's talk page. As MBK states, he barged onto my talk page to harangue me over my most recent reversion, reposting a rambling conversation he posted to User talk:Sswonk's talk page, an editor who's also put in a good bit of work on the Fore River article .  That he's edit warred in other articles over this is no great surprise, and certainly explains his vehemence in smearing his ancestor's "enemy" as corrupt, without actually going into any explanation as to what form that corruption took.   RGTraynor  08:11, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Requested by -MBK004 05:36, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * CheckUser requests

behavioral evidence clearly indicates that these accounts are the same person (see WP:DUCK). The two IP ranges are small enough (both /27) and within the same government ISP for two small rangeblocks. MuZemike 17:12, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Additional information needed: Please provide a code letter. SPCUClerkbot (talk) 05:36, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

IPs have not been used in a few days; they appear dynamic. — Jake   Wartenberg  03:26, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Conclusions