Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/RAkanaan/Archive

Evidence submitted by PaulWicks
This is a continuation of an ongoing revert war with a gentleman called Simon Overton, who previously used the account name "Alpinist" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Alpinist. He has a series of beliefs about Conversion Disorder that he explains in a book that he promotes from time to time on the web

The issue with this account is frequent addition of original research or unsourced material to the Conversion disorder page, making repeated references to having been on "a panel" or being in practice in Edinburgh. He is trying to impersonate Dr Richard Kanaan, who actually already has an account on Wikipedia user:snargett and has attempted to revert these changes himself. Because he has limited time (because he really *is* a psychiatrist) he has not pursed the impersonation issue further but as this account continues to be abusive I have done so (I used to work with the real Dr Kanaan at the IOP).

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

I did my best at a rory bremner style impersonation and it worked. Neuropsychiatry at Edinburgh are the group who have worked on the exclusion of conversion disorder from the next DSM. The intention was that when we suspected Snargett of being Richard Kanaan to get him to reveal himself. Paul did this for us. We can now use this fact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.105.104.195 (talk) 19:09, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Comments by other users
1. I think you meant. 2. If User:Alpinist is the suspected master account you want to file the case under that name. 3. You want to adduce some evidence that these are the same person. 4. Usernames that impersonate another real person can be reported at WP:UAA. 5. Please do not speculate about the real life identity of a user: this is WP:OUTING. Rhomb (talk) 22:36, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I am concerned by this edit summary where RAkanann claims to also be . assuming they are indeed diferent, this looks like a deliberate attempt to harass him.  Rhomb (talk) 22:38, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the advice, it's been a while since I dealt with a troll (spent far too much of my life on General Tojo... I have added the account to WP:UAA as suggested. I wasn't outing the user, he has done that dozens of times himself all over the web including WP. --PaulWicks (talk) 16:29, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Could be wrong but suspect User:MReuber is a potential. Account created 20:13, 13 January 2010, only edit is re-inserting User:RAkannann's last edit with similar style of edit summary to RAkannan. As a total newbie on SPI apologies if I'm not following prescribed etiquette. If I have broken any rules please set me straight. I have no other interest in the subject matter, this case or its protagonists.Finereach (talk) 20:31, 13 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I think you're right, which makes it block evasion.  seems likely as well.  Rhomb (talk) 22:25, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
 * And judging by this.  Rhomb (talk) 07:35, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * ... and  Rhomb (talk) 07:40, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * and . Perhaps a checkuser to flush out any socks still in the drawer?  Rhomb (talk) 22:29, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * and - does the whole range have to be blocked?Finereach (talk) 22:28, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Not sure what Alpinist had to do with anything, but no matter as the other name and the IPs are clearly socks and are being disruptive. Blocks (on name and recently used IP) and tags as appropriate. NJA (t/ c)  11:08, 15 January 2010 (UTC)