Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ahmed shahi/Archive

Evidence submitted by Tajik
This is just a first guess. Both users have the same writing style and apparently the same POV. User:Ahmed shahi is currently banned. I am asking for this file after being advised by an admin to do so.

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Requested by Tajik (talk) 19:27, 24 May 2010 (UTC) . Kevin Rutherford (talk) 20:09, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Sock blocked and tagged. Sockmaster's block reset for the block evasion. –MuZemike 20:20, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Tajik
was currently banned because of edit warring and inappropriate behavior. Last week, was banned indefinitely as a (suspected) sockpuppet of Ahmed shahi, and Ahmed shahi's ban was extented to 2 weeks. Now has appeared, again with the same field of interest, the same style, the same POV, the same articles. It may be another attempt by the sockmaster to evade his block. Tajik (talk) 10:49, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Requested by Tajik (talk) 10:49, 29 May 2010 (UTC) . Kevin Rutherford (talk) 17:43, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Sock blocked and tagged, Ahmed shahi's block is now indefinite. –MuZemike 17:58, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Tajik
The same reasons as before: a new account which has very similar edits to those of User:Ahmed shahi, uses the same writing style and phrases, same reasoning, has the same point of view, etc. Tajik (talk) 18:14, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims. i'm new person.. and i added AFGANISTAN means LAND OF AFGHANS and that is very well sourced but my edit was reversed by this tajik man. this aint something someone can deny because in all afghani languages that is what afghanistan name means and this encyclopedia usually ask for such information right there where i putted it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Seasonall (talk • contribs) 14:01, 5 July 2010 (UTC)  i also corrected mistake in the ethnic group with the percentages because the OTHERS is no where mentioned as 9.2%. show me where someone said OTHERS are 9.2%?

the person who filed this report is the one using sockpuppets and deleting sourced material from pages. <---sockpuppet of tajik.--Seasonall (talk) 16:17, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * If you think so, please feel free to ask for an investigation on your part. Tajik (talk) 16:32, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Could you please elaborate on the similarities you're seeing? I'm seeing distinct differences myself. If you could provide some concrete examples this would be better. -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 07:01, 5 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Since was banned, several new accounts with the same field of interest, same wording, same phrasing, same POV, etc. have showed up, some of them proven to be ducks/sockpuppets. I am not accusing this new user, but because of the its character as a new account, the same field of interest (Afghanistan and Pashtuns), and the same POV (dubious pseudo-sources quickly googled on Google-Books, adding irrelevant information to the intro, etc) I am asking for a checkuser investigation. Just an example: the user above insists that the useless information "Afghanistan means Land of Afghans" should be mentioned in the lead and that "it is sourced", while it is indeed a useless information (there is an entire etymology section) and uses an unreliable pseudo-source (a travel guide! While the rest of the article is based on excellent academic works such as Encyclopaedia of Islam). I had exactly the same discussion with Ahmed shahi. He used to add irrelevant information to the article and then attach it to unreliable sources which he had quickly googled. That was one of the reasons why he got banned. As for the numbers: the user above did not correct anything. It was me who calculated those numbers based on population-numbers given in the Encyclopaedia Iranica (the numbers were re-checked by a few other users, including an admin; see Talk:Afghanistan), and now I have restored the original and correct numbers that were altered by various IPs and by the user above. Tajik (talk) 14:43, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Not because of the explanation above, but because of my own analysis and research. I've decided there are enough similarities to offset the differences I'm seeing (but insufficient for a DUCK case, as they are merely circumstantial) and a checkuser is warranted. However, I would like to note to Tajik that, in the future, diffs should be provided rather than general statements like "I had exactly the same discussion with Ahmed shahi" as this provides no evidence except word-of-mouth. -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 17:08, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Inprogress -- Avi (talk) 18:35, 6 July 2010 (UTC) -- Avi (talk) 18:42, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * All blocked and tagged. TN X Man  18:56, 6 July 2010 (UTC)