Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kernow/Archive

Report date March 13 2009, 15:28 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * Evidence submitted by —Mr. E. Sánchez (that's me!)What I Do / What I Say
 * Addition of blacklisted "losethegame.com" —Mr. E. Sánchez (that's me!)What I Do / What I Say 15:28, 13 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.

This is the third time I've been accused of sockpuppetry without there being any evidence of it. A long time ago an admin used an online tool to find out my name and show that I owned that website, and made this information public on Wikipedia. Now that my website has become more popular (it has been featured in several mainstream newspapers), from time to time a user will happen to mention it on Wikipedia. Usually this is in relation to the The Game (mind game) article, which is the subject my site documents, but in this case it just looks like some new account mentioning it in his sandbox. It seems that every time the site is mentioned anywhere by anyone, some user instantly posts an SSP against me, despite the fact that I have never engaged in sockpuppetry nor attempted to promote my website on Wikipedia. (It really is starting to get tiresome.) If you require verification please talk to admin User:Jehochman who is familiar with my situation as he dealt with the last SSP. Thanks, Kernow (talk) 16:43, 16 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by other users
 * This does not appear to have any merit. Adding a blacklisted link to a sandbox? That's pretty flimsy and shows no causal connection between the two accounts. Previous checkuser did not turn up anything, I doubt it would this time either. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:45, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Can we get another diff of the user in question making a similar edit? In otherwords, what does this diff have to do with Kernow?  Syn  ergy 23:44, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments


 * Conclusions

This is not enough evidence. Losingthegame is a somewhat popular site. The fact that different people might try to add it is no big deal. Jehochman Talk 20:30, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Agree with Jehochman that evidence against Kernow is weak, blocking Mitchbing as a vandal account and closing.  MBisanz  talk 07:30, 17 March 2009 (UTC)