Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Swe41/Archive

02 April 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

Edit-warring on Lucid dream through main account and IP proxy. Adding COI original research promoting his not notable theory on Lucid dream. Supplying unreliable sources and making misleading use of other sources. WP:DUCK is applicable here. Dr.K. λogosπraxis 11:14, 2 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Here he self-identifies with his real name under which he promotes his same-name theory on Lucid dreaming.
 * Here he pleads to allow him time to promote his theory on Wikipedia so that it can become notable. In the same diff he also admits that the references he used are not genuine. Dr.K. λogosπraxis 11:37, 2 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Now the main account is warning me that the article Lucid dream is his page and that I will lose if I go to war with him. He also signs as "Anon. x" instead of his real name or his user name. Dr.K. λogosπraxis 11:17, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
 * As far as his claims that he is not the IP, after I reverted the IP within 9 minutes of my reversion of his IP he came to warn me on my talkpage. Dr.K. λogosπraxis 11:46, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I also reverted a massive copyvio from http://traumring.info/tholey2.html which is so verbatim and indiscriminate that it quotes the claim of the owner of the copyvioed website: On this site I have tried to collect them all. in the last sentence. Dr.K. λogosπraxis 22:32, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

This is irrelevant, what is relevant is that what I have done is not an act of "sockpuppet", and I repeat, the reason to why my IP keeps on cropping up is because I am on a local network, which is shared by a whole range of people, 1100 in fact, and therefore, it could be any one of those people that tried to promote my theory AFTER I was warned, which makes it their problem, not mine.Swe41 (talk) 12:42, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Also, on the matter on the "threat", I was merely referring to this investigation as the "war" DR.K kindly brought up, and I was merely assuring him that I have done nothing wrong.Swe41 (talk) 12:42, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Let me rephrase, on the matter on the "threat", i was referring to an "edit war", which is the correct term, is it not?Swe41 (talk) 12:42, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Also, on the matter on the copy and paste issue on the lucid dreaming article, i admit that i did that, accidently, and i tried to correct it soon after, but it was actually Dr.K that prevented me from doing so, as he quickly reverted my correction, in a targeted act. In fact, i intend to report him for victimisation and abuse immediately.Swe41 (talk) 12:42, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Swe41 (talk) 11:28, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I just declined an unblock request from this user, I don't find their version of events at all believable. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:59, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Already blocked 24h (which has since expired). Don't see a need to take any additional action at present, though this is worth keeping an eye on. Closing as no further action taken on SPI's part. T. Canens (talk) 13:06, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

04 April 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

is an attack on an editor that Swe41 has been in dispute with, and it's very similar to previous attacks made by Swe41 -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:06, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I've indef-blocked Swe41 as the Duck characteristics seem unmistakable - but if I have erred, please do let me know -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:18, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * He's admitted it's his IP, but claims it must be someone else on his LAN - can I ask for Checkuser to see if there is more evidence than just the IP address? -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:46, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
The IP is blocked, so I don't know if there is much more to do here. I'll mark for close soon unless there is something else. TN X Man 17:23, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * See my additional comment above - he's denying the IP attack was him and is asking to be unblocked, so any further checkuser info would help - can you tell if it was the same computer, for example, making the Swe41 and IP edits to Dr.K.'s Talk page? -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:55, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll respond to the unblock request, since they have already claimed the IP. TN X Man  18:13, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * That's great, thanks -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:40, 4 April 2011 (UTC)