Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jeff dean/Archive

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.


Jeff dean

Jeff dean (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Report date April 5 2010, 02:13 (UTC)
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by Tedder

This user is very interested in old BMW motorcycles, guns, (Nikon?) cameras, properties in Wisconsin and Arizona, and also uploads images to Wikipedia but has a distaste for Commons.

While some of these accounts are old, they are still sockpuppets. It would certainly help identify

does not apply
in this case.

Ultimately, the evidence is to examine the modus operandi of the accounts, but "see the contribs" is trite and overused, so I'll present some of the clear diffs below.

Signed, tedder (talk) 02:13, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence submitted by Biker Biker

Another sock account, Pro Fotographer (talk · contribs) active from July 2009 to September 2009 has also added links to Jeff Dean's websites e.g. [13], [14], [15]

Also worth looking at this discussion in which Motorrad-67 refers to Jeff Dean in the third person. When confronted about this the conversation stopped - other than this being added to his user page, which seems to be a clear dig at those who question his intentions and COI practices. --Biker Biker (talk) 08:56, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties

See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users

Congratulations. You have ferreted out another SP.

Can't you administrators delete these four SPs from Wikipedia? Just get rid of all of them!

Look at this unwarranted insertion: click here. It is full of profanity and rife with factual errors and has numerous links embedded in it to a personal web site. It provides no expanded information for the Wikipedia site (BMW R60/2) in which it was improperly inserted. No wonder Biker Biker (over 5,800 edits - whew!) moved swiftly to cut it out.

Time for you two to get busy, not that you don't already spend enough of your lives on Wikipedia. Remove these four disgusting SPs.

67.142.130.30 (talk) 15:01, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE - this IP editor just got blocked for blanking a load of Motorrad-67's templates. It is probably safe to assume that these actions, as well as the post above is nothing but a simple flounce. --Biker Biker (talk) 15:36, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Um, can you define 'flounce'? After the block, Motorrad-67 logged in and blanked more pages.
WP:DUCK. tedder (talk) 15:38, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply
]
You will find a very good definition of it at encyclopediadramatica, which unfortunately is blacklisted on Wikipedia. Another here. --Biker Biker (talk) 15:45, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also worth noting that pages blanked by Motorrad-67 include user pages/subpages owned by other sock accounts listed above, perhaps proving the point of all this. --Biker Biker (talk) 15:50, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You are amazingly brilliant! Because you are so wise, perhaps you can tell me how to delete my SP users from Wikipedia. If you won't do it for me, being the wise administrator you are, perhaps you can tell me how to do it. Once done, you can go back to spending your entire life on Wikipedia (| The life of Biker BIker) and won't have to worry about me. Motorrad-67 (talk) 16:45, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
O.k., Tedder (whomever you are), I tried to do a speedy delete of the SPs, and you stopped me. Why? Wouldn't you like the SPs to go away? I thought you would be in favor of that! What gives? Can you make the SPs vanish? If not, why not? Motorrad-67 (talk) 18:35, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Are all the other accounts yours? In any case, the pages can be blanked but should not be deleted; the
right to vanish does not apply. Blank the accounts, a sockpuppet clerk will probably come along and place templates to link them to the primary account. Again, note that "right to vanish" doesn't mean "right to return under a new identity". tedder (talk) 18:41, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply
]
Thank you. However, the "primary account" to which you refer does not exist. Like you and "Biker Biker," I wanted to become anonymous and I was not knowledgeable enough at the beginning to do that. So I deleted the "primary account" and made a new anonymous one -- like you. Unbeknownst to me I became what you call an SP. So perhaps you can help. If I am to stay on Wikipedia (a question for me at this point because I apparently cannot get rid of the "primary account" that doesn't exist), how would I have a "primary account" that is anonymous -- like you -- without being an SP? Am I permanently cursed by my initial error? Have I doomed myself by my initial error to be either (a) a permanent SP or (b) unable to participate on Wikipedia? If you know how to deal with this, let me know. Motorrad-67 (talk) 18:51, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The initial account (Jeff dean) does exist- you can
conflict of interest
is still fairly apparent, even without linking it back to the initially-named account.
The problem comes in with using multiple accounts. As long as you stick with one, such as Motorrad-67, that's fine. Just don't use the other ones any more, okay?
My account isn't as anonymous as you might initially think- it only takes a google search or two to connect it to my real-life identity, as a stalker or two have shown. I somewhat regret not using my full name, like other editors (such as
User:PeteForsyth) do. tedder (talk) 18:59, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply
]
This is just about sockpuppetry. The other issues can be handled on their own. tedder (talk) 19:08, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hrm. Fair enough. --
talk) 19:26, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply
]
  • You "sleuths" are really quite entertaining. I hope you are enjoying yourselves as much as your audience is! Perhaps one day you will all decide to do something more productive with your lives. But for now, your entertainment is quite excellent. Keep it up! 67.142.130.37 (talk) 00:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

After looking at the case for a bit, let me note the following:

  • No, one cannot "delete" an account. The MediaWiki software prohibits that, and it breaks our
    CC-BY-SA licensing agreement
    to do so.
  • With regards to the point I made above, one cannot
    WP:RTV
    permits the deletion of subpages, and this is normal practice.
  • I'd be willing to delete all the userpages involved above IAW
    WP:RTV
    provided the latest incarnation of Dean (Motorrad-67) understands this; this is what I think he's looking for. If that settles it, then I think it would be a good alternative to straight blocking of everyone and irritating the "vanished" even more.

–MuZemike 18:29, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Marking as closed. Please contact me if the person wishes to take up that offer. –MuZemike 17:49, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically.
27 October 2010
Suspected sockpuppets


Evidence submitted by Tedder

Same topic areas: old BMW motorcycles (with COI), Nikon cameras, guns as other socks. Compare contribs to

personal attacks. tedder (talk) 02:08, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

Comments by accused parties   

See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

This has clearly crossed the point from making clean starts to deceiving the community, which is clear sock puppetry. All accounts indefinitely blocked and tagged. –MuZemike 04:24, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

28 June 2011
Suspected sockpuppets


His user page even mentions his previous inappropriate behaviour. He has changed a project entry from a previous known sock to a new user name with the identical details of interests as one of the other sock names per this edit. He essentially confirmed he is the same person with these talk page edits. ww2censor (talk) 01:53, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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


AN thread

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Jeff Dean returning to edit: editing restrictions" (see below).Thank you. tedder (talk) 03:28, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]


The text below is from the "Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard" (26 June 2011) — "Jeff Dean returning to edit: editing restrictions"

There's been enough consensus for Jeff Dean to return to editing. He's chosen the following username:

Based on the discussion above (which got archived a little faster than I hoped it would), I'll be acting as what I call the "coordinating administrator". In other words, I'll be watching his contributions regularly and

watching his talk page
to see if any problems arise. The following are very loose editing restrictions based on areas of concern:

  • Absolutely no additional accounts.
  • Avoid COI: no links or references to content or websites authored by Jeff Dean, no
    original research
    to circumvent this.
  • Follow the spirit of
    WP:CIVIL
    .
  • Avoid any
    ownership behavior over content and images. (past example
    )

I'd like the input of administrators and the rest of the community; my apologies for not getting to this before the thread was archived. tedder (talk) 03:27, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thumbs up icon --Dennis Bratland (talk) 05:22, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thumbs up icon ditto. --Biker Biker (talk) 07:29, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A definite Thumbs up icon. Island Monkey talk the talk 15:54, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse. However the user page full of links to his personal website might not be the best way to return to editing.   Will Beback  talk  03:23, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why is there no notice of this discussion on
    AGF but even a single transgression should mean another immediate indefinite block. ww2censor (talk) 02:19, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply
    ]


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Jeff_dean/Archive&oldid=1069904727"