Misplaced Pages

:Sockpuppet investigations/Klocek - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Callanecc (talk | contribs) at 03:00, 29 June 2014 (Endorsing for checkuser attention). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 03:00, 29 June 2014 by Callanecc (talk | contribs) (Endorsing for checkuser attention)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Klocek

Klocek (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Populated account categories: confirmed · suspected

For archived investigations, see Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Klocek/Archive.


28 June 2014

– An SPI clerk has endorsed a request for CheckUser. A checkuser will shortly review the case.

Suspected sockpuppets

I think the indef-blocked editor has returned. The behavioural evidence against this new single purpose account account is strong. Milliongoldcoinpoint is making a lot of poor edits and continues to edit war. He is well aware of the sanctions and was informed about 3RR and disruptive editing.

I believe the IP who made this edit is User:Klocek The IP 99.35.189.129 edited the comment made by User:Klocek. I discussed this on the talk page about the edit. See Talk:Acupuncture#Sceptic source.

Milliongoldcoinpoint thinks ignoring me is a good idea. The word "some" is OR. The specific number 58 is OR and not a proper summary for the lede. The edit is extreme low level details to the lede when the lede should be a summary. The part "may be" is OR.

He repeatedly deleted sourced material but there was a compromise to use in-text attribution.

This edit claimed "rewording to better reflect on conclusions in citation" but the edit replaced sourced text with original research. See Talk:Acupuncture#Original research.3F.

This edit and this edit added outdated information. The editing by Milliongoldcoinpoint is encouraging the editor User:Jayaguru-Shishya to restore the outdated information. There is a warning in red from the source. See Talk:Acupuncture#This statement is more than five years old and is provided solely for historical purposes.

He added duplication but on the talk page he thinks it is okay to have duplication in the article. See Talk:Acupuncture#Duplication.

He is adding poor sources and other editors are cleaning up after him.

This edit added misleading text that was not specifically about acupuncture in general but it was about sham acupuncture only in Germany. See Talk:Acupuncture#Sham acupuncture in Germany but not acupuncture in general.

He made a silly mistake in mainspace. When the editor did restore the text with sources one was not a systematic review and the other source was a low impact factor. The low impact factor Medical Acupuncture was previously discussed. See Talk:Acupuncture#Questioning of Sources for current discussion. Again, other editors are cleaning up after him. This is a huge waste of time dealing with Milliongoldcoinpoint.

I think per WP:DUCK the IP 99.35.189.129 and Milliongoldcoinpoint are sock/meat accounts. IMO Milliongoldcoinpoint should be topic banned regardless of the results of checkuser. QuackGuru (talk) 23:30, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Comments by other users
Yes User:Milliongoldcoinpoint only started June 22nd and appears to have a much greater grasp of policies than his short time and low number of edits would make one think should be the case.
They have become a single purpose account that is selectively picking sources from low impact journals that support a specific POV while not using the much higher impact factor sources available. This edit is an example when there was a Cochrane review available.
Not sure if they are a sock of Klocek as they are using another referencing style but agree that their is still a good chance. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 23:47, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Klocek is back, revealed by their IP. -- Brangifer (talk) 01:35, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

The interleaved edit by that familiar IP took me off the fence. I've gone ahead and blocked Milliongoldcoinpoint. I wouldn't mind a checkuser to sweep for any more socks, so I'll leave this open with the CU request.—Kww(talk) 01:48, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Categories:
Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Klocek Add topic