Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/117.213.208.13/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets
Consistent Vandalism in List of highest-grossing South Indian films and few other pages with abusive language in edit summary, have give more than 4 warnings. Panda619 (talk) 06:59, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.'' This user Panda619 listed me here without any consensus. The edits that are made by me are purely based on reliable sources and also the main article. I have also mentioned the reason for my edit. I haven't used any abusive language in edit summary in any form. In fact, he is making unconstructive edits. Check his contributions history--[]. Making such kind of allegations against me is like personal attacking. Also, I have no relation with other listed IP's....Jayanthkumar123 (talk) 17:20, 28 June 2022 (UTC) Jayanthkumar123 has always tried to settle any content dispute is a civil manner, atleast in my experience. As a long-standing editor, I'm sure Jayanthkumar123 is well aware of the consequences of editing while logged out and using such foul language.
 * Intimated by Jayanthkumar123 on my talk page

Not a single diff has been provided by the nominator to assess behavioural pattern, and there is no reason to believe why Jayanthkumar123 would have indulged in such a behaviour. Accusing of being a sock without any evidence to begin with is entirely unwarranted.

has my sympathies for the kind of personal attacks they've faced while editing the page. However, this SPI seems unjustified. Since the page has already been protected, it's better if they graciously withdraw this nomination and settle any content disputes at the article talk page. Regards -- Ab207 (talk) 18:11, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I don't see anything that would connect Jayanthkumar123 to the disruptive IP editor besides editing the same popular page. . If this SPI is to be kept, it should be moved under the named account, but considering the (lack of) evidence presented, the archiving clerk may prefer to G6. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 22:56, 30 June 2022 (UTC)