Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rlevse (talk | contribs) at 01:52, 18 February 2008 (→User:Deanrules: archiving). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Deanrules

Suspected sockpuppeteer

Deanrules (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Deanhowell (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

- ✰ALLSTAR✰ 11:11, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

• Per history of Sovereign Harbour
  • Vandalism by User:Deanhowell: here, here, here, here and here
  • Vandalism by User:Deanrules: here

Comments

• User:Deanrules created the article on October 28, 2007 initially as a serious article but has since taken to vandalizing the article under both names.

Both users have similar names. Both users have vandalism edits in the same article. However, a conclusion of sockpuppetry is not a complete certainty. One of the users could conceivably be trying to pretend that he/she was a sock in order to block the other user. In view of lack of conclusive evidence that the two users are definitely socks but clear demonstration of vandalism, any prevention of disruption should cite vandalism, not sockpuppetry. Archtransit (talk) 16:50, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions

Case closed. Consider filing complaint about vandalism and/or warn editors using vandalism templates. Archtransit (talk) 16:50, 14 February 2008 (UTC)