Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nvpatentlawyer/Archive

Evidence submitted by Cptnono
Nvpatentlawyer and 75.173.116.202‎ have been editing the same articles and made the exact same edits. Both have not used the MoS and failed to provide RS. DUCK comes into play since NV is the postal abbreviation for New Mexico and the IP is based in New Mexico. DUCK also comes into play since the editor made a similar edit within minutes of a level 4 warning as the IP who had also made the edit. DUCK also comes into play since the editor and IP are making the same general edits. 1)Ecorazzi as a source Editor/IP 2)Discovery Channel/Animal Planet as a source Editor vIP And just to clarify, the only content dispute was over if a secondary source was available. The rest was MoS. Regardless of any of that, this is an obvious infraction of WP:SCRUTINY since we are hitting revert too much. I am requesting a checkuser to make no doubt that there are shenanigans and then from there I want to see the IP/new editor use the talk page. I will do the same.Cptnono (talk) 04:54, 26 October 2010 (UTC) Cptnono (talk) 04:54, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users
Well, I can tell you that CheckUsers usually will not link an IP address with an account per the privacy policy -- wiooiw (talk) 05:10, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Forgot about that. A warning that DUCK is clear will be just as good. Scratch the check user request and warn on the violation of 3/rr would be great.Cptnono (talk) 05:13, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * A warning is something any user can do, not specifically a checkuser. I'm going to mark this for close, per Cptnono above. TN X Man  11:44, 26 October 2010 (UTC)