Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Psikxas/Archive

Report date May 2 2009, 00:54 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * Evidence submitted by Scheinwerfermann (talk)

Quack, quack, quack. See all three users' contribs — note all three are brand-newly created today — then take a look at revision history of Karheim. All three(?) editors delete CSD notifications and insert commercial links to this Karheim company they appear to be advertising. See also Talk:Karheim and note identicality of tone, style, and format of comments from Oxzal and Psikxas. [—Scheinwerfermann T&middot;C 00:54, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Update: Karheim is speedy deleted. Psikxas asks deleting admin to restore article, deleting admin userfies the article as User:Psikxas/Karheim, and now Oxzal is editing the article on its user subpage. H'mmm… —Scheinwerfermann T&middot;C 06:32, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.

Scheinwerfermann has anything personal with me??? He told that HID Lamps are illegal WORLWIDE and thats why he asked for deleting the page. I provided evidence to him in his talk page from OSRAM, that he is wrong, and guess what, he deleted my comments! ! ! However, page violated other policy and Admin Jayron32 deleted the page for the right reason of course and i respect it!

About Oxzal: if its illegal for 2 friends talking in MSN and editing pages here, if we are the first who did it, okay delete both of us. Whats the point of "community" then?

Really cant understand why ONLY Scheinwerfermann tries to find anything bad about me, does he have any benefit of it? Really, let other admins do their job, i think there isnt only one smart on the whole wikipedia —Preceding unsigned comment added by Psikxas (talk • contribs) 09:45, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Psikxas, this is not an appropriate forum to debate the accuracy of your contributions. However, I ask that you please not misrepresent what I said to you. It's best to let everybody's actual comments stand on their merit without distortion. Thanks. —Scheinwerfermann T&middot;C 02:06, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps Oxzal is a meatpuppet (rather than a sockpuppet), but what is Naleka? And why should advertising of non-notable Karheim be allowed, even in userspace? — Jeff G. (talk&#124;contribs) 02:47, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments by other users


 * I thought it prudent to allow for development of the article in the userspace to give him the time to find the references to establish notability for the product, and to work on crafting an article of an appropriate tone. Its a pretty standard practice in these cases, see WP:USERFY.  If you feel that, in this case, userfication was inappropriate, feel free to nominate the userfied article for WP:MFD.  However, that action is not prudent to this case.  The deal is whether or not Psikxas has been operating multiple accounts abusively.  I have no idea one way or another in this case; but from my point of view, all I did was to act on what I judged to be a good-faith request to userfy an article I had deleted.  If it turns out that Psikxas is violating policy in operating sockpuppet accounts, I still would not have done this differently, as I would have at the time I userfied this article, had no way to know or suspect that that was the case.  --Jayron32. talk . contribs  04:50, 3 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments


 * Conclusions
 * Please tag/archive. Two socks were blocked, master warned. ——  nix eagle email me 14:57, 3 May 2009 (UTC)