User:Lexigator

This account has been blocked indefinitely because its owner is suspected of abusively using multiple accounts. (Account information: block log · CentralAuth · suspected sockpuppets · confirmed sockpuppets · sockpuppet investigations casepage)

The matter was explained and resolved in April 2012:-

On the Investigation Case Open page Qexigator asked whether it was being claimed that the information which he had disclosed was against Wikipedia requirements for some good reason of which he was unaware, and continued: "If what has happened is correctly deemed to be what is called 'block evasion', that has not been the intention. I have never opened a Wikipedia log-on account before this one (i.e. Qexigator). My understanding was that since the Lexigator log name and password had been made inoperable by the block, it was in order to originate an account in another name and password, and with no intention of practising sockpuppetry. Admin. can be in no doubt about the use of the IP, which, as it happens, has been constant. All my edits have been bona fide. Before opening the Qexigator account my understanding of the rule was that if a person opens an account another person should not use it, and a second account should not be opened by the same person. And, of course I have not done that and have no such intention. (I have never knowingly practised 'sockpuppetry' as puppet or puppeteer.) Going forward, I would prefer not to use the log name Lexigator (of an account which had been opened and used by another person as has been previously explained). But, if the requirement is that I must first start from there in order to change the name to Qexigator, then please advise. Or would it be necessary to go on using Lexigator instead? Qexigator (talk) 16:19, 23 April 2012 (UTC)*

Admin asked: "If I understand you rightly, you are saying that both you and one or more other users used the Lexigator account (which is why that account was blocked) but that only you will use this account. If that is correct, then it seems to deal with the problem, and I see no obvious reason not to unblock this account. However, it is not entirely clear to me whether that is what you are saying, so can you please confirm or deny that that is it? JamesBWatson (talk) 11:56, 24 April 2012 (UTC) "

Qexigator's reply: "Broadly, you have summarised what happened. Before the Lexigator account was opened, I had prepared a factually informative piece with the intention that it be used for a new Wp article. Someone I had known for many years and who I knew to have already been using a Wp account, agreed to do it for me. He is a quick learner for this kind of thing and had already got used to making edits. My skills were limited to making use of Wp for looking for information on a wide range of topics, and copious use of the internal and external links and references which Wp makes available. [ I concur with you: 'Wikipedia gets an enormous amount of use. This is not only because there is a lot of stuff here, but also because on the whole most of it is of a fairly good quality. Wikipedia would not have the amount of success it has unless most of its material was of a reasonably high quality.'] We agreed that if I would email the text to him he would do the necessary for converting it into the Wp article. But his name is widely known in the profession, and it would have been wrong to let it be supposed that he originated the article (and we were sensitive to appearing to be in some way 'passing off'). The understanding was that the log-in name was to be used exclusively for material from me (in that and later articles) of which he was amanuensis, and he would use his own name for edits of his own; and so it went. By 2010, the Lexigator material for articles on the topic was considered complete (in that the topic was adequately covered in various aspects, for the information of those likely to need it), and the other party's friendly service as amanuensis had come to an end. But in October 2010 I became aware of the Create a book function which Wp by then had introduced, and, after I had proposed that the Lexigator articles, with some others of its category, could readily be converted to book form, it was agreed that I would proceed with using the bookmaking function (which has been expertly designed for amateurs with no more than low level skills such as I was able to use). It was then that we seem to have inadvertently exposed the Lexigator account to sockpuppet accusations, by reason of my use of it for creating books, but the other party ceased to use it and his service as amanuensis had come to an end. After the block on the Lexigator account, it remained possible to use the bookmaking function like anyone else, and there was no further need for it. Qexigator (talk) 15:16, 24 April 2012 (UTC) " (Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Qexigator&oldid=489038001#Qexigator.27s_reasons" Qexigator (talk) 20:53, 25 June 2012 (UTC)