Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Pdeitiker/Archive

Report date July 16 2009, 23:22 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets

See contributions on many pages including mine and remember this quote. ''My opinion, get the article in shape and then we can nit-pick about the references used. And BTW you can avoid this argument in the future by using a nick PB666 yap(quote from Andrew Lancasters talk page). '' "The Count of Monte Cristo (talk) 23:22, 16 July 2009 (UTC)"
 * Evidence submitted by SOPHIAN


 * Could you provide diffs please? Thank you, Tiptoety  talk 00:33, 17 July 2009 (UTC)


 * The Count of Monte Cristo (talk) 02:42, 17 July 2009 (UTC)


 * There is no question, I am encouraging Andy not to use his whole real name, it is bad form, and it is a reason for people to engage in highly personal attack, for instance attacking a persons personal work. As I stated further down the page I am thinking of abandoning my current account for a new account, this is the only named account I have and if I change accounts I will completely abandon the old account. As for SOPHIAN he has been caught and blocked for edit warring in the E1b1b page. Andy called me in because there was a claim of COI. I have no professional or personal interest in the Y chromosome. I work with the HLA however what I observed was a page E1b1b that was a train wreck. I could not even address the COI question because the page was a mess with incessant edit warring between cousteau, SOPHIAN and others, and particularly the insertion WP:OR, card stacking of qoutes, and almost habitual name dropping. Andrew warned me about the Sub-Saharan DNA admixture in Europe and I did glance at the page, but it was not until it was pointed to from other sources that I decided to examine the page and input into the AfD, at which point SOPHIAN made these claims. Is this the way you guys want wikipedia to work? A child making these types of claims against experts in an effort to drive them off?PB666 yap 03:34, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments by accused parties   See Defending yourself against claims.
 * I think the person who needs to be investigated in the person User:SOPHIAN who is making these false accusations. I posted a comment about why I think an AfD should be merged with another page and all of a sudden this CRAP shows up. Andrew Lancaster has published in his area of expertise. I have published in my area of expertise (HLA), so if this is a ruse, its a real good one.PB666 yap 01:20, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * LOL. What an elaborate case of sock puppetry this would be: years of independent edits with very little cross over, not only on Wikipedia but also under our real names all over the internet and beyond, then when we work on one article together we have even gone to the extent of disagreeing regularly. I do think this is surely such a tendentious accusation that the position of this accuser should be considered. I think his conduct has gone on long enough without any sign of potential to improve, and you can't excuse someone as a newbie forever.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 06:06, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments by other users
 * speedy close. Not liking the outcome of a content dispute is no reason to file such a report. User also has a tendency to file frivolous reports. See Requests for adminship/SOPHIAN. Wapondaponda (talk) 04:55, 17 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
 * Conclusions
 * Concur with Wapondaponda above. This seems to be a bad faith attempt to attempt to get the outcome of a content dispute to sway a certain way. Also, there has yet to be any evidence to support a claim of sockpuppetry. As such, I am closing this case as . Tiptoety  talk 16:57, 17 July 2009 (UTC)