Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/65.96.186.48/Archive

Evidence submitted by Johnanth
The article that gave it away for me.

I tagged this article for being something of an advertisement, and multiple issues in general (would have tagged it for deletion due to advertising if the advertising wasn't so great), and manually removed my tags for multiple issues.

Particularly, his or hers first edit (as clearly visible from the history of the article) only removed "hoax" from the tag as even with that pitch, I thought it was a hoax. Then he or she went on to remove the entire tag after he/she realised the rest of the tag was not gone and that the article (obvious ad) would be removed if any attention was given to it.

I can only conclude this IP is a sockpuppet. He or she is very unlikely to be a vandal due to the reasons mentioned above. Γιάννης Α. ✆&#124;☑ 20:49, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users

 * In my opinion, this is clearly a new editor that simply forgot to log in after his/her initial edits. A better course of action would have been to place a level one warning explaining to the editor that removal of maintenance templates is inappropriate. A few kind words could also have been offered, reminding the editor to log in before making any edits so that we know to whom we may attribute the work. Cindamuse (talk) 13:37, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
I'm going to mark this for close. As Cindamuse says, this appears to be a case of forgetting to log in rather than anything nefarious. TN X Man 13:50, 28 September 2010 (UTC)