Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Amatulic/Archive

Evidence submitted by 129.133.127.244
Made same unique ad hominem comment three days apart, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:General_list_of_masonic_Grand_Lodges#Recognition_Network, my comment 03:00, 24 July 2010 (UTC) 129.133.127.244 (talk) 03:12, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I'll add more; this is what I put in the discussion page: "In case you didn't notice, this isn't Facebook." (User :Amatulic) 04:44, 21 July 2010 (UTC) "Once again, this isn't Facebook." (User :MSJapan) 14:34, 23 July 2010 (UTC) Now I call foul. This whole conversation is tainted. Are you Blueboar, too? None of this conversation for the past few weeks is trustworthy anymore.129.133.127.244 (talk) 03:00, 24 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.133.127.244 (talk)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users
Two editors disagreeing with you is not evidence enough to justify a sockpuppet accusation.—  Dæ dαlus Contribs 04:10, 24 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Not sure I am being included in the accusation or not... but feel free to check anyway. Blueboar (talk) 04:09, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
– There has no be more than just "two people said the same thing". –MuZemike 03:20, 24 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Especially since the IP at least twice called this "Facebook" instead of "Wikipedia". This is a bad-faith request. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 15:36, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

per the lack of evidence provided. Just because you have two people saying similar things does not mean they are the same person. –MuZemike 16:27, 24 July 2010 (UTC)