Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Akbaralighazi/Archive

28 November 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

All these accounts edit in the same topic area. The article Khowar Academy Pakistan was twice created by User:Rachitrali, once deleted as CSD#A7 and other time as failed PROD. This article was again created by User:Akbaralighazi with the title Khowar Academy and deleted via AfD. But again created this time by User:Mirajbibi. All of them also appear in these deletion discussions with providing similar rationales ("...please do not delete this.."):

Besides Mirajbibi and Zaheeruddin25 commented with a gap of few minutes both the times. User:Shahabdulaziz, though created earlier but did his first edit when the article Chitral Vision was taken to AfD, with his second edit a comment at that deletion discussion. User:Mirajbibi 's 1st, 3rd, 4th and 6th edits after joining Wikipedia were creation of new and different articles, which may suggest that she had some knowledge about editing Wikipedia earlier. S M S  Talk 23:05, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Articles for deletion/Chitral Vision : Shahabdulaziz, Zaheeruddin25, Mirajbibi, Rachitrali (After closure), Zaheeruddin25 (After closure)
 * Articles for deletion/Khowar Academy : Akbaralighazi, Mirajbibi, Zaheeruddin25, Mirajbibi (After closure)

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * is . The rest, as well as are ✅ to each other. NativeForeigner Talk 20:45, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Master and confirmed socks all blocked indef. Closing now. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:22, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

According to this langcom email, Rachitrali, who was in the previous SPI as stale on en.WP, is in fact the same person as Akbaralighazi. Izno (talk) 16:00, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 * This mail only states a CU has been done on Incubator and IPs match following the en. investigation ("Two of the three most active editors are blocked on enwiki as sockpuppets of the same person. Therefore I made a checkuser request..."). This statement is a little circular so. --Dereckson (talk) 22:56, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually, it says that the match, not solely the IPs. It also doesn't say "Following the en investigation" but instead "we were made aware that, of the three editors in question, two are definitely the same person per a previous en.wp investigation (archived at Sockpuppet_investigations/Akbaralighazi/Archive), and a CU checked the third to see if he also was the same person". It is, of course, entirely possible that the CU messed up, but since I've never seen CU data, I certainly couldn't comment on it. Either way, I think either a clerk or CU here should have a discussion with the steward who performed the CU on Incubator. --Izno (talk) 12:36, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
 * The steward is user:Matiia. He can comment on whether such a check will be useful in his opinion, though I as the requester of that CU doubt it. -- MF-W 22:37, 4 April 2017 (UTC)


 * I received a comment at my user talk page on Incubator regarding this case at incubator:User talk:Izno. --Izno (talk) 17:28, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 * And now it seems there is also a conversation at User talk:Rachitrali. --Izno (talk) 12:37, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
— Berean Hunter   (talk)  21:20, 14 April 2017 (UTC) — Berean Hunter   (talk)  21:22, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Socks or meatpuppetry both have the same net result. His flagrant conflict of interest cannot be resolved here. His most recent creation ==> ݯ flaunts a keyboard ad. Indeffing and closing. I don't buy his excuse that he just happened to be editing in the same cafe and on the same subjects.
 * Btw, this was based on behavioral evidence and not on the CU results from elsewhere.



Listing the above per this. — Berean Hunter   (talk)  03:57, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets


Rachitrali0

Contributions of Rachitrali0

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Rachitrali0

This editor is attempting to submit an article on Rehmat Aziz GoldMedalist, and Rehmat Aziz has been salted. (I tried to remove GoldMedalist from the name, and discovered the salting.)}}


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

See the evidence above. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:50, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

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


 * This is confirm sock of User:Akbaralighazi. the moment this new sock account was created, Akbaralighazi sent me an email and tried to claim that its not him. Also, I suggest Sockpuppet investigations/Akbaralighazi be renamed Sockpuppet investigations/Rachitrali because Rachitrali is the main account of this sock master. --Saqib (talk) 06:01, 29 May 2017 (UTC)


 * This looks like the behaviour of Najaf ali bhayo, particularly this recent batch of socks. – Uanfala (talk) 11:00, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
 * No. Language and tone made by User:Rachitrali0 on his talk page is of User:Akbaralighazi whose real name is Rehmat Aziz Chitrali and operates under User:Rachitrali. Otherwise how would he know immediately that User:Rachitrali0 is impersonating him. --Saqib (talk) 11:06, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
 * That's a good point, but I was referring only to what I saw in the user's edits. – Uanfala (talk) 11:27, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
 * It appears to me that User:Rachitrali aka User:Akbaralighazi is using differents IPs to create socks and bio on himself to give the impression that someone is impersonating him, in a bid to seen as a victim here and eventually get unblocked. --Saqib (talk) 11:40, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't buy that theory since Najafalibhayo's involvement in this has been confirmed, and isn't just a claim made by Chitrali... - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 11:44, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I see. thats very strange yet interesting case. --Saqib (talk) 11:47, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Rachitrali0 is ✅ to Najaf ali bhayo and retagged. How does Akbaralighazi know your e-mail address?--Bbb23 (talk) 15:11, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
 * he sending me email using email form since I nominated his bio for deletion. --Saqib (talk) 15:27, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
 * When was the first time he used Wikipedia to e-mail you? Did you reply to him so he would subsequently know your e-mail address?--Bbb23 (talk) 15:36, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes I did replied to him when he sent me email for the first time on or around 20 April when I nominated this for deletion Articles for deletion/Rehmat Aziz Chitrali (2nd nomination). Obviously my email was revealed to him but every time he sent me email, he use the form instead of replying to my emails which I find strange. --Saqib (talk) 15:42, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Just so it's clear, there's no evidence that Akbaralighazi sent an e-mail using Wikipedia in the last 90 days.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:03, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I was getting emails from User:Rachitrali. --Saqib (talk) 08:39, 30 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Already blocked. Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  21:57, 29 May 2017 (UTC)