Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/علی ویکی/Archive

Evidence submitted by Cabolitae
Both accounts have been following the same position and reasoning in the discussions (here and here), and their responses in the discussions have always been complementary and in sequence in time (check the history and talk pages). What is disruptive is that both accounts have tried to move the page to exactly the same title (here and here), pushing the same ethno-centric POV (i.e. change the title from "Scholars of Khorasan" to "Persian scholars of Khorasan" and exclude non-Persian scholars from the template in order to "to represent the Persians to form a cultural uniformity between them"). In addition, I received an email from the latter (User:Khodabandeh14) with the same name as User:علی_ویکی, using the same expressions, arguments and point of views. User:Khodabandeh14 has officially declared to be an alternate account of User:Nepaheshgar, but has nothing mentioned about the other account. He/she has tried to influence the discussion and 'the decision to move the page' by using two different accounts, acting as if they are two different members, which is disruptive and a violation of Sock puppetry policy. Cabolitæ (talk) 07:57, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

The case is obviously Bad Faith of user Cabolitae unfortunately. I guess, mentioning that I am a user from Milan city, Italy will be enough to reveal the reality. (To be more specific, I am only using my universit--Khodabandeh14 (talk) 05:22, 14 October 2010 (UTC)y internet connection, Politecnico di Milano). Checkusers can easily distinguish my working IP with user Khodabande. That we both have same opinion about a matter can't be considered as Sockpuppery. If admins need more clarification, I am ready to answer.--Aliwiki (talk) 19:51, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Comment: The above user says he is from Italy. Well I am from North America. My name is also Ali, and the user Cabolitæ seems confused because when I e-mailed him, it has my name which is "Ali" (like at least 5-10% of the Iranian population first name). But Cabolitæ is absolutely making a false statement that the name in the email that I sent to him states: "Ali Wiki" like the user above. If he has proof for this, then he should forward the e-mails that I sent him to the relevant admin with me CC'ed on those. Rather, it has my full email name : "Ali M..". I am writing from a totally different continent than AliWiki. Sometimes I check wikipedia in starbucks (where there is I know two other wiki users), hotles, universities, resorts and etc (which might have floating ips with different people and I ask my privacy as well as other people who write from universities or labs or etc. to be kept private since it can show the places I go to which violates Harassment). But I can assure that the ips that I have used for my account will comeup in a different continent and region of the world as the above user (since he claims to be from Italy and all the ips I have used for my account are from North Americaq).--Khodabandeh14 (talk) 04:24, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Based on the policy: I claim I am from North America and Ali Wiki claims he is from Italy. The checkuser admin can confirm this if he/she wishes. However, I take my privacy very seriously and I do not like to disclose where I am in North America. So please do not release ips or users from other universities/hotels/labs/cafe's. I request that if the admin sees a checkuser is necessary (and again the e-mail evidence mentioned by the user Cabolitæ  is false as my name is Ali M... and not Ali Wiki), only to disclose if Ali Wiki is the same as my account. Any additional information by checkuser (I travel widely but maintain this account, however I use public computers in labs, universities, hotels, starbucks, etc) can be answered by me in private e-mail. Thank you. --Khodabandeh14 (talk) 04:51, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Generally, do not reveal IPs. Only give information such as same network/not same network or similar. If detailed information is provided, make sure the person you are giving it to is a trusted person and will not reveal it themself.
 * If the user has said they're from somewhere and the IP confirms it, it's not releasing private information to confirm it if needed.
 * This is (presently) not a checkuser case and thus your IP will not be checked. Even if it was, it would not be released. -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 05:00, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. because I have never been in this process. I though it might reveal my ip. The user Cabolitæ is absolutely making up that it is an e-mail with the same name (note my first name is Ali, but Ali is the most popular name among 1.2 billion Muslims after Muhammad and in Iran, it is actually the first if not second popular name).  However, the last name of mine is different than the above user (it is not Ali Wiki).  I can forward the admins the emails that I have sent the user  Cabolitæ(it has the date and yahoo tag i.d.).  It is still in my sent-mail.  Alternatively, that user Cabolitæ can forward to the admin with a CC to my e-mail account (I do not trust the user after the false accusation).  If an admin needs only confirmation from me, then can send me an email and I will forward them those e-mails (with exact date and tag).  Thank you--Khodabandeh14 (talk) 05:24, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks like the user left this message on my page . --Khodabandeh14 (talk) 11:57, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I also mentioned it at the end of this page. Cabolitæ (talk) 14:47, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
I see radical differences between these two accounts. Can you clarify anything on-wiki that suggests that these two users are the same? Right now I am inclined to believe that they are not. Alternatively, can you clarify what you mean by "email with the same name" -- are you talking full names or just first names? There are a lot of people in the world with the same first name. -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 04:59, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * The reason I believed that they were sockpuppet accounts was that their contributions in the discussion was "complementary" and their edits were "sequential in time", and both put forward the same position, arguments and point of views. I observed a strong similarity between the off-wiki communication of one user and on-wiki discussions by the another. As to the names, I wouln't disclose the name of the user to respect his privacy.
 * I believed there was an IP check for this process by the clerks. If there is not, then I propose to drop the case, with my sincere apologizes to both users. Cabolitæ (talk) 07:02, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * There can be, but you didn't open such a case. If you would like to convert it to such a case, I can do that for you, but I can also tell you that check would be declined because right now I'm seeing too many significant behavioral differences. -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 15:01, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I thought that with normal SPI cases, the clerks would personally check the users' IP addresses, and that checkuser should be used only for vandalism cases. Anyhow, there is no need for that for instance. I am dropping the case. Thank you, by the way. Cabolitæ (talk) 19:05, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll mark this for close, then. If you would like to re-open the case, please feel free to do so. TN X Man  13:57, 17 October 2010 (UTC)