Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Corevette/Archive

• Kornatice (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Kornatice has admitted to being the same person as Corevette. Corevette made this edit fixing a typo, which I then (erroneously) reverted. Then, Kornatice reverted me with the following edit summary admitting to being the one who made the original change:

― Tartan357 ^Talk 15:44, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

​​ I withdraw my nomination I find the below responses convincing. Sounds like it was just a misunderstanding. I'll be delivering a self-trouting and will first try {{uw-agf-sock}} for similar situations in the future. ― Tartan357 ^Talk 17:20, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

• corevette: I have no idea why the other user is talking in first person as though they made the edit. If I wanted to revert your revert, why wouldn't I just do it myself? I was planning to and then noticed they already did it. I don't see why I'd need a separate account to do that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Corevette (talk • contribs) 16:01, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there. It's me, the one accused of being a sockpuppet. I am here to prove, or at least state, my innocence. My edit summary did make it sound like I am Corevette, I admit, but this was an error of speaking on my part. When I said "the reason I did this" I was referring to reverting Tartan357's reversion, NOT making the original edit. I had never had any relation to Corevette until this.

Just for clarity, I am going to tell the story from my point of view. I made this account recently, in November of last year. In the spirit of complete transparency, I will say that I have had one or two accounts in the past. None of them made more than a few edits or did anything substantial. I have completely forgotten the usernames of these accounts, and they were long dormant before I made this one.

I consider myself a casual Wikipedia editor. I average around 3 edits per day since I made this account, with my level of activity fluctuating greatly over time. Because I edit few pages, I like to put them all on my watchlist. Such was the case for Myanmar. On December 8, 2020, I made this minor edit in which I added a link to an article with more information about a topic in the article (specifically, Myanmar's nuclear weapons program).

This is why the article was on my watchlist, and why when, on March 7, 2021, I noticed when Tartan357 reverted Corevette's edit. the edit in question fixed a typo in the article, but Tartan357 did not notice the typo, only seeing a violation of WP:NOTBROKEN. Because of this, he reverted the edit, arguably rightfully. However, I did notice the typo, and felt that I should act. I changed the text back to the way Corevette had had it, leaving a detailed edit summary in the hope that Tartan357 would notice the typo, which he did. However, my summary seemed to imply that I had made the original edit, which was not the case. In retrospect I regret the misleading way that I worded my statement.

After this, Tartan357 reverted my edit, but he did fix the typo, which was the important thing. Both Tartan357 and Corevette thanked me for my edit as well. I was glad that I was able to help resolve the situation, and thought little of it until this. I had never interacted with Corevette until this, and I do not know him. We are two different people. I am sorry to have tainted his reputation with my poor word choice. I would be glad to answer any more questions anyone may have. Kornatice (talk) 17:07, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing without action per Tartan357's withdrawal above. Mz7 (talk) 01:11, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]