Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cissypope/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

The Hammond School (South Carolina) has experienced persistent whitewashing regarding its history of racial discrimination.

Same text inserted

Many of these users have attempted to insert the text that is now on. Many of the edits have occured within a close temporal range.

edits:
 * 
 * 

edits:
 * 

edits:
 * 
 * 
 * 

edits:
 * 

Other Evidence

is an SPI created to edit the article. The usernname is the same as the schools mascot and the temporal correlation suggest that Skyhawk99 may be a sock.

appears to be an IP assigned to the school based on the editing history. This IP has an account creation block.

claims to be the school's director of communications. See User talk:Cissypope

This account was previously blocked as a sock puppet. See this rev of the talk page. Purleau1 has declared COI on the account talk page,claiming to be the school's headmaster. Billhpike (talk) 21:08, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Edit: Followup

Some accounts may be meatpuppets. In this edit, stated "We have rallied our alumni, student, and parent base to continue this fray until it is rectified"

Edit2: Check user scope

The checkuser request is only relevant for. The other users are either IP addresses (CU not allowed) or strongly linked by behavioral evidence.

Edit3: Related ANI

There is a related ANI regarding forged talkpage signatures: Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents Billhpike (talk) 22:32, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

Unless this institution has been thoroughly researched, as some aspects of it have, we are respectfully asking that no one have rights to edit/modify this page. The information contained herein is considered malicious and will be construed as vandalism. Research and reporting should not occur unless it is fair, balanced, and accurate. We are a well-respected independent school that has worked hard to dispel any negative connotations and have positively impacted the lives of thousands of young people ... who are now successful, contributing members of this society. If segregation in the South is to be researched and reported, then likewise the many positive factors that outweigh any negativity should also be included.

This is disparaging at best, and many of the sources are inaccurate and/or taken out of context.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Purleau1 (talk • contribs) 21:21, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Cissypope is and older than Purleau1. SouthernSeg is ❌. Purleau1 and Skyhawk99 are .--Bbb23 (talk) 23:48, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * - Given that Pureau1 was registered the day Cissypope stopped editing these two are clearly the same person. As for the other two, meatpuppetry seems more likely, but given that both have also exclusively edited in the same purpose as Cissypope/Purleau they're clearly linked. Please block the two unblocked named accounts indefinitely. Sir Sputnik (talk) 23:16, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Sir Sputnik - ✅.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   23:17, 18 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Tagging and closing. Sir Sputnik (talk) 23:18, 18 December 2017 (UTC)