Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hassaan19/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets

 * - IP admittedly used by Hassaan19, which WBL denies being
 * - IP admittedly used by Hassaan19, which WBL denies being

Evidence submitted by SarekOfVulcan
Whitebrightlight about "feeling harassed" by Nancy and Pedro. In the course of the ensuing discussion, it turned out that at the time he, she had never left him a message! She had left messages on the topic for Hassaan19, though. Despite that, he continues to deny being Hassaan19, so it would be beneficial for a Checkuser to clear this up. Thanks.

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Hi there. I'm a completely innocent party but would actually welcome my IP history checked to clear my name, because the comments made about me being a sock-puppet have became harassment. I would also welcome an apology from my false-accusers, once I'm found to be completely innocent. Whitebrightlight (talk) 23:01, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Comments by other users
Please note my comment at ANI here where I specifically note that  managed to complain about "bullying" by  some 12 hours before they had ever interacted with each other. Pedro : Chat  23:04, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Please also note my comment at ANI here where I explained my concern over the editing pattern of Whitebrightlight - concern which led indirectly to their complaint. I42 (talk) 23:22, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I added 82.36.17.10 to the pot since Hassan has already said that's his IP. The user WBL claims a checkuser whill show he does not use that IP. It would be good to find out the truth of the matter. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:36, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

CheckUser requests
Requested by SarekOfVulcan (talk) 22:50, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

MuZemike 23:44, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 * It is true that Whitebrightlight has not used 82.36.17.10, and the two accounts do not share the same IPs. Whitebrightlight and Hassaan19 edit from different ISPs in a similar geographical location. They could be strangers living in the same city, two people associated in some way, or a single person editing from two different places or connections. Dominic·t 00:10, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Conclusions
Closing per CU findings and that I don't think the behavioral evidence is convincing, either. MuZemike 00:56, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm going to let this one sit, as further AN/I discussion could yield clarifying information, as it seems mighty suspicious to me that they're in the same geographical area and are talking about being warned (one about the other).  ceran  thor 03:23, 10 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm going to place this back in the above queue if any other admin thinks otherwise as well. MuZemike 03:45, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * WBL is claiming that the CU is mistaken when stating "similar geographical location", so it might be good to let it ride for a bit. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 05:23, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I figured this would go back - so as I said above, it seems right to sit out the AN/I discussion and see what happens.  ceran  thor 04:08, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Looks like the AN/I thread has been archived. Tiptoety talk 08:15, 12 December 2009 (UTC)