Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sgtbsampson/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Similar vandalism on Peru, Indiana.  Yinta n  21:14, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

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

I'm not an administrator, so I don't have any power here, but I think that these user(s) are siblings, not sockpuppets. While they are still vandals and are still under the criteria for a block, they don't seem to be puppets. The edits made by have a different style than the edits made by. If they were puppeting each other, they would seem to have a similar style. I think it's a psychological thing. UNSC Luke 1021 (talk) 18:46, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Example: If you look at the vandalizing edit on Peru, Indiana by Sgt., you can see he/she uses good grammar, abbreviates the B. in B. Sampson, spells correctly, etc.,. If you look at Shan's edits, however, he/she uses bad grammar, writes Brandon Sampson instead of B. Sampson, misspells words, etc.,. This is a big difference between edits. I move to believe they are simply siblings or possibly spouses that vandalize the same article. They probably coordinated offline. I'm not trying to present conspiracy theories or anything, I'm just presenting a possible explanation. They are still warranting a ban, but non-permanently. UNSC Luke 1021 (talk) 19:01, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
❌.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:01, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:59, 5 December 2016 (UTC)