Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rakkar/Archive

Evidence submitted by Minphie
Rakkar had a history of continually contesting my edits, no matter how ell cited or factual, on the Harm reduction page over a number of months, with him becoming very frustrated with the nature of my evidence by the 26th of April 2010. He then disappeared with his Talk page saying that he was taking a Wiki break. On the 29th of April a new user Figs Might Ply completely removed the section that Rakkar had kept disputing with the edit comment "Safe injection sites: Deleted a bit. This paragraph seemed to have a pretty warped version of the truth. Can we replace it with something better?" and with no discussion whatsoever on the Discussion page. Figs Might Ply has since continued to be involved, appearing like a more moderate mediator between myself and another WikiProject Drug Policy member Steinberger, to whom he had passed the baton on May 1 2010 subsection 'HARM Red'. There is a similarity of removing complete blocks my text for sloppy rationales by both Rakkar and Figs Might Ply. Both remove an entire section even if taking issue with one of twenty points in the section. The motivation would appear to be a harm reduction zealot who does not want any criticism to appear on the Harm Reduction and Safe Injection Site pages and will give any reason to keep the page criticism free. I am not keen to be contesting issues with what could be the same person playing two personalities. Minphie (talk) 07:25, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
Please see my user page, I'm on indefinite wikibreak. I haven't edited an article or participated in a discussion since declaring my wikibreak. I certainly haven't been teaming up with the pigs might fly account to sockpuppet any issues. Minphie, please see WP:Sock for a description of what Sockpuppetry acutally is: us(ing) multiple accounts to mislead, deceive, or disrupt; to create the illusion of greater support for a position; to stir up controversy; or to circumvent a block.

Additionally, I think you are a very uncivil, uncooperative editor who has refused to cooperate with editors who disagree with you, and I think it's a black mark against your name that you reported me here and did not tell me you had done so. How was I supposed to respond to your claims here if I did not know about it? If you are indeed from the Australian Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence it speaks poorly of the work you do.--rakkar (talk) 06:58, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Self-endorsing for CheckUser attention. I find it coincidental that both these users are from the same city and participate in the same WikiProject. However, it may be possible that it's just that. Technical evidence might be able to tell us more here. –MuZemike 23:38, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅, plus the sleeper account RichardBentley. Dominic·t 07:07, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * This is a bit complicated, since though Rakkar and Figs... did have a small amount of edit overlap, it's not very significant; nor did Rakkar deny that they are the same person. I'm blocking all three accounts indefinitely, autoblock disabled. The user may choose one account that they will use in the future, which will be unblocked. The other two will remain blocked and have their user pages redirected to the unblocked account. Tim Song (talk) 07:30, 2 June 2010 (UTC)