Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SeminarianJohn/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

There are several pieces of evidence (of varying strength): (i) After a two-year hiatus, the first edit of Sarah Dinner was to the userpage of SeminarianJohn. It's beyond my understanding why an editor with approx. a dozen edits would return after a two-year hiatus to update the userpage of another editor. However, what we've seen multiple times with sockpuppets is that those who control them sometimes mix them up and accidentally edit with one instead of the other. (ii) Both accounts add content in US politics that exclusively focuses on how bipartisan and centrist various politicians are (which is a pretty niche focus). The entirety of Sarah Dinner's contributions is to copy-paste "bipartisanship" scores from the "Lugar Center" to various pages. SeminarianJohn likewise adds lots of "ratings" that purport to demonstrate that someone is centrist, ctrl+F "rating", incl. specifically ratings by the Lugar Center (iii) There is some overlap in editing, (iv) Sarah Dinner re-appeared from a two-year hiatus shortly after SeminarianJohn was involved in content disputes over Susan Collins's bipartisanship and centrism, and the editor proceeded to add content related to her centrism (see June-July 2018). Snooganssnoogans (talk) 14:09, 23 July 2020 (UTC) Snooganssnoogans (talk) 14:09, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

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

Hello, this is SeminarianJohn. First of all, I am confident that this process will conclude with the truth, that mine is my only account. I registered this account in February, 2016 and it has been my only account since that time. It is my contention that Snoogansnoogans is doing this out of personal animus because we had a legitimate disagreement over BLP. The evidence presented by the editor is not only scant and unsubstantiated, but an administrator should take action to address the misuse by this editor in order to retaliate over a legitimate disagreement. 1) SusanDinner, the user the editor claims is my other account, has not been an active user since 2018. In 2018, and not after a two-year hiatus in 2020 as snooganssnoogans is falsely implying (this is proof that the editor is also slandering and using false claims here), the user edited a date on my userpage without my permission. They changed the date in my "about me" from 2017 to 2018. I assume they believed this was polite and helpful. Again, they seem to have stopped editing in about 2018. I had my account for two years at that time already. As far as I can see, that user has not even been active since 2018. I do not exactly know what snooganssnoogans is accusing me of in that case. a) it is not my account and b) the user has not even been editing for two years. Is snoogansnoogans upset about a two-year long absence from SusanDinner? Furthermore, snooganssnoogans claims I was involved in a dispute in 2018. I cannot find any dispute on Susan Collins' page involving me in 2018. The only disagreement in which I was involved in a conversation was in 2020 with snoogansnoogans. In October 2018, there was a lot of vandalism but other editors noted that too and protected the page during and in the wake of contentious Supreme Court hearings. I went through my 2018 edits and did not find any dispute that I had with an editor. 2) In my four years of being an editor, I have also edited in Spanish and Romanian, including the biserica unitariană din Transylvania page. In addition to having a writing style clearly distinct in tone, word choice, and syntax indicative of a unique user, I have a documented history of writing in English, Spanish, and Romanian. 3) I have a degree in Political Science and Master's degree in Sociology. Political figures who diverge from their party 'orthodoxy' and who appear as anomalous among their peers is an interest of mine and one that I have researched in both undergraduate and graduate school. The claim that I must be a sockpuppet because I have an interest shared by hundreds of other unique users, including snooganssnoogans themself I may add, is a logical fallacy. Snooganssnoogans is using that logical fallacy, circular reasoning, to be vindictive. 4) I do not focus exclusively on centrist politicians. That is blatantly false. Any review of my edits will show that I have edited the pages of both major parties in the US and I have edited information on conservative Republican Rand Paul, and others. Are editors like snooganssnoogans allowed to make such false claims? 5) I would be surprised if a chart, selectively chosen by the accuser themself, is admissible as 'evidence.' What snooganssnoogans does not show are the myriad of differences. Even in snooganssnoogans chart, it shows that I have been much more active on editing a few pages while the other user was not very active at all. Finally, I ask that at the conclusion of this process that snooganssnoogans apologize for their rude behavior to me including this inappropriate misuse of this process. I look forward to answering any questions I need to answer and to resolving this. Thank you.SeminarianJohn (talk) 18:56, 23 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Here https://sigma.toolforge.org/editorinteract.py?users=SeminarianJohn&users=Snooganssnoogans&users=&startdate=&enddate=&ns=&server=enwiki is an analysis comparing the areas of interest that both snooganssnoogans and I have made. One will see that I have far more in common with snooganssnoogans. This 1) shows that we both have edited respectfully on most pages and backs up my claim that this is a retaliatory action by snooganssnoogans after disagreeing on Susan Collins' page and 2) it shows that the chart provided by snoogansnoogans actually shows I DON'T have much overlap with the other account. I have more overalapping interest with snoogansnoogans.SeminarianJohn (talk) 19:19, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I agree that both accounts are interested in "bipartisanship," particularly in the area of the Lugar Center. However, I've reviewed their their behavior, and I do not see convincing evidence that these are the same person - in particular, they have fairly different styles of talk page comments and edit summaries. I am unable to explain why one edited the other's userpage, but I can't see why the suspected master would have reactivated a sock and then, before using it to edit in support of himself, gotten distracted and felt the need to update his userpage (seven months after the change of year). Regardless, I don't see clear evidence that these are either the same person or working together, and Sarah Dinner is two years stale so CU is not available. Closing without action. GeneralNotability (talk) 23:57, 23 July 2020 (UTC)