Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Amrapahal Pahanswan/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Similar requests at other users' talk pages. ,. Both seem to have a similar style of writing both in the article and edit summaries, also in a non-neutral manner. They like adding big chunks of content per edit. , Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:16, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

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

 * Both accounts are ✅ socks of, who does not yet seem to have an SPI. ST47 (talk) 16:41, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Similat style of writing and addition of large chunks of content per edit. ,,. New user created immediately after the last two socks got indeffed. Edito interaction. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 19:22, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * RajeshRawal Mewari also nominated for GA two articles where they had minimal edits but prior socks had substantial editing.  Ravensfire  (talk) 01:01, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
 * - For confirmation and a sleeper check. —&#8205;Mdaniels5757 (talk &bull; contribs) 15:57, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * CU makes this . I've blocked and tagged based on the CU result and behaviour. . Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:02, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Account started editing immediately after socks User:JayantVitthal Babu and User:ShiamPothuganti got blocked. Keeps re-adding caste with the same sources,. Interaction shows substantial overlap. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:55, 21 September 2020 (UTC)


 * More diffs, . Similar way of asking for PP and notice how they term the PP templates. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:40, 23 September 2020 (UTC)


 * In light of 's explanation, I doubt there might be other accounts lurking. Requesting CU. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:06, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * There are telltale signs of the previous socks, e.g. look at the similarity between their and one of the sockpuppet's user pages: Rajanrao Shankar and JayantVitthal Babu. Their modus operandi is to create accounts with seemingly non-Rajput surnames and to proceed to spam biographies with Rajput-related details, along with making some frivolous edits to some non-Rajput biographies. Like the previous socks and the master, they have also a habit of adding fake refs, e.g. there no mention of the subject's caste in the sources provided by them in this edit, but they added Rajput anyway. And there are multiple other such examples as well. Also, they are hovering around the same set of articles, e.g. see their 'editor interaction' with the sock JayantVitthal Babu and the sockmaster. - NitinMlk (talk) 21:35, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
 * PS: My these observations are based on a cursory search, but I can provide more evidence, if needed. - NitinMlk (talk) 21:36, 22 September 2020 (UTC)


 * It seems even a CU block isn't good enough for the sockpuppet: . They mentioned that this time reason for blocking them isn't strong enough, which implies they have been blocked previously as well. Actually, they are more disappointed because it was a very difficult way for them to complete 500 and above edits, which simply means that, unlike them, their future socks won't be easily able to disrupt ECP-protected pages like the List of Rajputs.


 * As far as behaviour is concerned, they are a DUCK. The same editing pattern and multiple number of misrepresentation of sources, UGC citations, BLP violations in spite of being familiar with the relevant consensus from the beginning: . Note that caste requires self-identification in BLPs as per the long-standing consensus on this project (see here), but this detail is so obscure that there is no way for newbies to know about it.


 * I had a cursory look at their limited number of edits just now, but that was enough to find more examples to connect them with the master and the previously confirmed socks:


 * They use VisualEditor, just like the master and the previous socks.


 * Just like the master and the previous socks, they have a peculiar habit of adding a vertical bar (i.e. ) in the title field of citations and those vertical bars are followed by details which are not part of the title of the source, e.g.:
 * a) Master: & ;
 * b) JayantVitthal Babu (previous confirmed sock):
 * c) Rajanrao Shankar:


 * The master used to add incomplete/wrong nowiki tags (i.e. ) while adding content, e.g. see here and here, although I am unable to figure out their purpose. Rajanrao Shankar also adds these incomplete nowiki tags, e.g. see here, here, here, etc.


 * Changing title of Biography/Background section to Early Life section:
 * a) JayantVitthal Babu (previously confirmed sock):
 * b) Rajanrao Shankar:


 * Reinstated master's and sock's edits:
 * a) JayantVitthal Babu added Sikh politics template with this edit, which was reverted by user Fylindfotberserk with this edit. But Rajanrao Shankar reinstated the template with this edit.
 * b) The master added Punjabi Rajput claim with this edit, which was reverted by user Alivardi with this edit. But Rajanrao Shankar reverted Alivardi's edit.

- NitinMlk (talk) 05:35, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * , help me out here - could you please provide diffs of where the past socks added the same information? GeneralNotability (talk) 15:49, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Oops! I linked the wrong diffs. I've corrected it. Extremely sorry. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:15, 22 September 2020 (UTC)


 * I believe there is enough here behaviorally to justify a CU - large topic overlap between the accounts, but nothing I'd call definitive enough to block on right now (plus, I know from experience that caste is one of those areas where lots of people show up with strong opinions without being related). If they are related, please check for sleepers per filer's request if practical. GeneralNotability (talk) 14:08, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Technically speaking, and  appear ✅. I have also found what appears to be a sleeper: .  Salvio 18:13, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Closing. The SandDoctor  Talk 04:19, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

The suspected sock Madan Lohamod Jhaderaa re-add caste using the same source as the confirmed sock. Considering their caste POV in articles, especially Rajputs. I believe it is the sockfarm. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:34, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Notice similar style of writing and additon of large chunks of data, mostly trivial and this, this confirmed socks. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:50, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

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

 * I think this is WP:DUCKy enough that CU isn't needed this time round. Dreamy Jazz talk to me &#124; my contributions 14:00, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Looks like another one. Restored the edits of the recently blocked sock Madan Lohamod Jhaderaa reverted by  here. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:59, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Requesting CU since this one was created before the last one got blocked. Perhaps there are other accounts lurking. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:02, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

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

 * Yes, I was just about to file a report for this too :). Dreamy Jazz talk to me &#124; my contributions 11:08, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
 * - Account was created before the last SPI, made edits up to around the last SPI was filed and then starts editing after the last sock in the case was blocked. This suggests there might be further sleeping accounts, so requesting and endorsing. Dreamy Jazz talk to me &#124; my contributions 11:10, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm reasonably convinced that this user is this sockmaster, so I've blocked based on behavioural evidence. Still want the CU request to go ahead though, for a sleeper check. Dreamy Jazz talk to me &#124; my contributions 11:15, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
 * ,, and are a ✅ match to one another. And they are also a  match to the master.  Salvio 14:10, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
 * With this, and also based on the sockpuppet Blindfishers's comment on their user talk page, I am completely sure that this is this sockmaster. Dreamy Jazz talk to me &#124; my contributions 14:12, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Dreamy Jazz talk to me &#124; my contributions 14:18, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I've tagged as proven to the master Amrapahal Pahanswan as the result was likely. Dreamy Jazz talk to me &#124; my contributions 14:21, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Similar editing area. Similar editing style. Dreamy Jazz talk to me &#124; my contributions 08:16, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

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
Pro forma report. Blocked on behavioral evidence. Dreamy <i style="color:#d00">Jazz</i> talk to me &#124; my contributions 08:16, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Similar editing area. Similar style to Aman Bainsla 28, but less similar to previously likely / confirmed socks. First account (the one without the "2" appended on the end) was created around 3 hours after my block of Aman Bainsla 28. Dreamy <i style="color:#d00">Jazz</i> talk to me &#124; my contributions 12:46, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

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
- previous checkuser check found a sleeper account (PoliticNSolitics). As there has been use of sleeper accounts, a check is requested and endorsed to find any sleepers. A check would also be useful to see if these accounts are confirmed to previous socks. Dreamy <i style="color:#d00">Jazz</i> talk to me &#124; my contributions 12:46, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * These two are ✅. but it's a pretty common UA on a busy range so request CU next time if needed. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 22:27, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Ran into this because of an apparently unrelated user getting caught in the edit filter trying to edit the archive to report it. Did my own investigation and looks very likely to me:

At Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, Puinjab continues an edit war over Arain/Rajput descriptions (diff) started by older sockpuppet JayantVitthal Babu (diff)

At Gurbachan Singh Salaria, similar caste-changes by Puinjab (diff) to a previous edit by older sockpuppet Rajanrao Shankar (diff) ~ mazca  talk 16:04, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

I've requested checkuser based on the archive; I considered just blocking based on WP:DUCK but I'm not quite at that confidence level based on the edits so far and not familiar with this particular sockmaster. ~ mazca  talk 16:09, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Considering their habit of nominating articles of people belonging to Rajput caste for GA here and these two by confirmed socks looks DUCKY to me. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:04, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * ✅ the the archive, plus . -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 11:53, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
 * both Puinjab and Indianno, thanks for the confirmation Amanda. Marking for close. ~  mazca  talk 12:46, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Newly created user restores edits by the recently indeffed sock. Typical style of additon of huge chunks of content at a time. Typical style of arrangements, writing and sourcing in articles. New user seems to be interested in mostly Rajput related articles like its predecessors, example,. Editor interaction - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:58, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

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

 * . Dreamy <i style="color:#d00">Jazz</i> talk to me &#124; my contributions 12:10, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Username. Edits. Dreamy <i style="color:#d00">Jazz</i> talk to me &#124; my contributions 15:39, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

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
Pro forma. . Dreamy <i style="color:#d00">Jazz</i> talk to me &#124; my contributions 15:39, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Made an edit request for extended confirmed page which I upgraded protection for yesterday, by pinging me directly. Although the suggested change was good, I reviewed their contributions and saw similarities between the users (including some strong writing similarities). The timings of their edits compared to Puinjab 2 seems suspicious too. Dreamy <i style="color:#d00">Jazz</i> talk to me &#124; my contributions 14:25, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Seems like it. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:57, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
This user was created around 8 hours before the block of Puinjab 2, which suggests it was sleeping. Previous sleepers have been found in this case. Dreamy <i style="color:#d00">Jazz</i> talk to me &#124; my contributions 14:25, 22 October 2020 (UTC)


 * ✅. No sleepers immediately visible., closing. Mz7 (talk) 05:06, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Similar habit of adding sister projects and removal of "commons category" from articles. Similar Rajput centric edits. Requested the addition of Chakar Ali Khan Junejo, Muhammad Khan Junejo (other socks edited these two articles) in this list article. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:04, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

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

 * Shared interests, similar edit summary style, overlaps with past socks in the specific interest in Chakar Ali Khan Junejo and Muhammad Khan Junejo (and citing the same book to prove their notability)., . GeneralNotability (talk) 12:43, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Similar edits, adds "sister projects" like the previous banned socks, ,

Rajput caste biased edits, adds a source claiming self-identification, after the last banned user adds a huge chunk of content with caste (Rajput) mentioned but not self-identified. Note that this comes after I removed mention of Rajput citing lack of self-identification here

Requesting CU, since this one started editing from 23rd October and the last one was blocked on 26th. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:50, 28 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Again removed the "commons category" like the previous socks. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:44, 28 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Noticed similar behaviour of adding "sister projects" here. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:05, 3 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Added another, restored some of the same paragraphs and the same block of Indic Quote by "Akbar" , that was previously added by confirmed sock , reverted by . Seems like the Maharana Pratap article needs to be sock-protected for a longer period or may be indef protected. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:05, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Comment This edit from prior sock has similar language to this new editor .  Specifically, "Hindu" rather than just Hindu.  The user names "Rajanrao Shankar" and "Rajendra Saradhna " are pretty darn similar as well.  Ravensfire  (talk) 15:38, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I forgot about the older sock edits @The Great Khali. Typical Rajput POV there too. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:39, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Added a CU request to the template. I am suspicious but not seeing anything genuinely WP:DUCK quacking, and the fact that this sock started editing well before the previous one got blocked is odd. This looks worth a check, or indeed if anyone else feels they can block purely on behaviour I'm not going to argue. ~ mazca  talk 22:31, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ to one another:
 * No conclusion as to if they're linked to the master.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:46, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, clearly some level of disruptive sockpuppetry going on here then, but could you just clarify the nature of the "no conclusion"? I'd obviously expect no direct connection to the master as it's a stale account by CU standards, but does the IP range involved just make it impossible to judge if these are connected to the more recent checkuser-confirmed sockpuppets like or ? I only ask because CheckUser seems to have historically had a pretty good hit rate on this sockmaster. ~  mazca  talk 00:14, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Mazca - All I meant was that I didn't find any direct links to the master, such as other blocked socks of the master in the IP range. I wouldn't use that sentence to cast too much doubt as to whether or not they're actually linked; I just didn't find any clear link with the technical data I retrieved. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   13:43, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, clearly some level of disruptive sockpuppetry going on here then, but could you just clarify the nature of the "no conclusion"? I'd obviously expect no direct connection to the master as it's a stale account by CU standards, but does the IP range involved just make it impossible to judge if these are connected to the more recent checkuser-confirmed sockpuppets like or ? I only ask because CheckUser seems to have historically had a pretty good hit rate on this sockmaster. ~  mazca  talk 00:14, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Mazca - All I meant was that I didn't find any direct links to the master, such as other blocked socks of the master in the IP range. I wouldn't use that sentence to cast too much doubt as to whether or not they're actually linked; I just didn't find any clear link with the technical data I retrieved. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   13:43, 13 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Per confirmation of Rajendra Saradhna to Amrapahal Pahanswan in the case below, Maharahana Pratap is confirmed to Amrapahal Pahanswan too. Tag. Close. Dreamy <i style="color:#d00">Jazz</i> talk to me &#124; my contributions 19:05, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Similar editing area (Rajput caste related articles), Maharana Pratap, Rana Sanga, etc. Similar Rajput POV. Similar style of edits, addition of large chunks of content. What's more noticeable is the sophistication by which the newly created user (created on 12 November 2020) references links (using sfn templates, etc). ,, Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:18, 13 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Added another with the interest in same topic area, especially Indian "Rajput" politicians Rajnath Singh, Jaswant Singh, Vishwanath Pratap Singh, Bhairon Singh Shekhawat, Chandra Shekhar, etc. All of these articles have been edited on by the older confirmed socks. Also notice the similar style of addition of huge chunks of data as well as puffery. Immediately started editing after PP expired on the article here, also see, . Requesting CU since this one is from 29 October 2020. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:19, 13 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Also note the GA nomination here, one of the characteristics of the sock. Pinging as well. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:31, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Looks like some of the article requires EC protection. ? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:25, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Changing case status to CU request for Fylindfotberserk as they mentioned requesting CU but didn't change the status Dreamy <i style="color:#d00">Jazz</i> talk to me &#124; my contributions 12:29, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I had noted a in the last 30 mins via my watchlist that Indianpoliti has been making edits very similar to previous socks. Dreamy <i style="color:#d00">Jazz</i> talk to me &#124; my contributions 12:34, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
 * - there are similarities to Amrapahal Pahanswan + similarities to the socks noted above as being no conclusion to the master. As these accounts were not picked up in the previous checkuser, these accounts if checked may be linked to other socks. Sleepers have been used before, so endorsing for a sleeper check and also to see whether these accounts are confirmed to the master or the other group. Dreamy <i style="color:#d00">Jazz</i> talk to me &#124; my contributions 12:40, 13 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Also found and ✅:
 *  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   13:39, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
 *  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   13:39, 13 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Tagged. Pages protected. Close. Dreamy <i style="color:#d00">Jazz</i> talk to me &#124; my contributions 19:06, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Similar style of addition of large chunks of content, complex referencing and similar addition of "sister project links" and removal of "commons categories" templates just like the other confirmed sockpuppets, ,. Suspicious from a few day old account. Also note this, like some of its predecessors, this user typically make page protection requests in user talk pages. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:06, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

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

 * I'd be interested in seeing a CU on this, since the suspected master often has multiple accounts open. It's also odd that this new suspected sock claimed to be an apprentice editor with far less than 1000 edits. It's as if they created a user page solely to throw off suspicion. I also think it's weird that they know how to formulate complicated bulleted references, which is not something newbs know how to do or would think to do. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:43, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
 * is confirmed to . I don't have a clear connection to the master or other socks, but they are in the same (very wide) range and country. I'd say that this is if not .  ~Oshwah~  (talk)  (contribs)   22:00, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Dreamy <i style="color:#d00">Jazz</i> talk to me &#124; my contributions 14:41, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Based off possible / likely result, plus I see ducky similarities in edit summaries / evidence presented, tagging both as proven. Blocked 969 Movement 2. Close. Dreamy <i style="color:#d00">Jazz</i> talk to me &#124; my contributions 14:42, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Similar editing area (Indian politics and history). Similar style, removal of commons category wikiquote and addition of sister project. Interaction Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:35, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

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


 * , re Also, is there a good way to find out the creation date of an account that exists but has made no edits: You can use Special:CentralAuth, i.e. check Special:CentralAuth/Yanurag27 in this case (or hit "CA" in the checkuser template). If you install User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/cuStaleness.js and User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/sockStaleness.js, the information will also appear inline when you look at SPI casepages. Blablubbs | talk 20:39, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * The suspected sockpuppet was globally locked on 25 December. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  12:39, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
 * - from the behaviour and the time the account was created, it's looking ducky. Endorsing a CU to look for other sleepers. Not blocking because this account has been globally locked - will tag after the CU. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  16:34, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Also found and confirmed:
 * Blocking all socks and tagging. This SPI can be closed...  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   18:59, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I propose the following accounts which appear to me due to technical results:
 * These accounts all turned up when searching a range that contains many of the existing socks. Each of them has made 0-25 edits. Would appreciate others' opinions since I'm still new at this. Also, is there a good way to find out the creation date of an account that exists but has made no edits, such as ? EdJohnston (talk) 20:33, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
 * IMO, KhammaGhani 33 is probably a sock of this user see --  Green  C  22:20, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , there are a load of really useful scripts that you should consider installing. put me onto a load of them, but User:PleaseStand/userinfo.js is one that I'd recommend for this question. When I go to an account's userpage, I get a bunch of links, including one which tells me how old the account is, with a link to the creation log that gives me the exact time. Very handy.
 * , can I ask for your opinion on the above accounts? I intend to request G Lock of all the confirmed socks, since the sock reported in this case has been locked for cross-wiki abuse - I'd appreciate a steer on whether you agree with the above. Thanks Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  22:40, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Girth Summit - I'd agree that they're, yes. They're all using a common user agent, but they're on the same range (albeit a very wide one).  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   00:38, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
 * These accounts all turned up when searching a range that contains many of the existing socks. Each of them has made 0-25 edits. Would appreciate others' opinions since I'm still new at this. Also, is there a good way to find out the creation date of an account that exists but has made no edits, such as ? EdJohnston (talk) 20:33, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
 * IMO, KhammaGhani 33 is probably a sock of this user see --  Green  C  22:20, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , there are a load of really useful scripts that you should consider installing. put me onto a load of them, but User:PleaseStand/userinfo.js is one that I'd recommend for this question. When I go to an account's userpage, I get a bunch of links, including one which tells me how old the account is, with a link to the creation log that gives me the exact time. Very handy.
 * , can I ask for your opinion on the above accounts? I intend to request G Lock of all the confirmed socks, since the sock reported in this case has been locked for cross-wiki abuse - I'd appreciate a steer on whether you agree with the above. Thanks Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  22:40, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Girth Summit - I'd agree that they're, yes. They're all using a common user agent, but they're on the same range (albeit a very wide one).  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   00:38, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
 * IMO, KhammaGhani 33 is probably a sock of this user see --  Green  C  22:20, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , there are a load of really useful scripts that you should consider installing. put me onto a load of them, but User:PleaseStand/userinfo.js is one that I'd recommend for this question. When I go to an account's userpage, I get a bunch of links, including one which tells me how old the account is, with a link to the creation log that gives me the exact time. Very handy.
 * , can I ask for your opinion on the above accounts? I intend to request G Lock of all the confirmed socks, since the sock reported in this case has been locked for cross-wiki abuse - I'd appreciate a steer on whether you agree with the above. Thanks Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  22:40, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Girth Summit - I'd agree that they're, yes. They're all using a common user agent, but they're on the same range (albeit a very wide one).  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   00:38, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Girth Summit - I'd agree that they're, yes. They're all using a common user agent, but they're on the same range (albeit a very wide one).  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   00:38, 1 January 2021 (UTC)


 * OK, blocking and tagging the likely socks, will request G lock on all accounts; closing.  Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  10:31, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Similar edit area (Rajput caste related). Note heavy editing in Jaswant Singh article alonwith susbtantial changes in the external links section, templates, etc (a characteristic of the sock) ,. Also note controversial move twice to "preferred" name with prefix 'Thakur' typically used by Rajputs. Requesting CU as well, considering their past record. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:34, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Also note this comment, I don't understand what they meant by "Or make this article move protected or I will move it". - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:37, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

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

 * One account is locked for long-term abuse:Eliko007 (I have no idea how this sockfarm has any relation to Jobas, but regardless) and the other hasn't edited in two months and seems to be a throwaway. Closing. Sro23 (talk) 21:12, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Similar topic area (politics). Similar habit of removing "commons category" and adding "sister projects" like the older socks. Also similar addition of large chunks of data like the predecessors. Also note the expertise, not commonly seen in a new user, unless it is a sock. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:40, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Similar use of sophisticated method of referencing (efn usage), here by a confirmed sock and here by this 'new' user. Also requesting CU based on their history of having lurkers. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:12, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Jubeboxer, matches with the recently blocked sock User:गहराई.


 * 1) Attacking sister projects.
 * 2) गहराई was making frivolous templates. This new user is making frivolous categories.
 * 3) Both are attacking B. R. Ambedkar who they consider foe.
 * 4) This is an exact match
 * 5) On sister project

what do you think? User:गहराई was blocked by you. These reports are pending since long. Walrus Ji (talk) 11:23, 16 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Well I think you are right. I had already opened an SPI on this guy on 11th. Merged your case in it. There is another one "User:Jashlore" above. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:26, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
 * , ok. I did not notice that last report was on the same username. Thanks for the merge. I have added the CU request. --Walrus Ji (talk) 11:31, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Tagging irrelevant templates like "good article" or "pp" is one of the characteristics of the sock-master as done here by Jubeboxer. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:19, 16 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Adding User:BJP4U a newly made account of User:BJP OFFICIAL --Walrus Ji (talk) 15:42, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
 * on B. R. Ambedkar,   vs  Walrus Ji (talk) 15:38, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * . Same country, different geolocations and user agents. The ranges are also very wide...  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   21:49, 18 January 2021 (UTC)


 * One account is already locked and the other hasn't edited. Closing. Sro23 (talk) 21:12, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Similar editing area, Rajput related, this time in Maharana Pratap article (a Rajput individual by caste) in which previous socks were also interested. Addition of huge chunks of POV material and sophisticated referencing styles (usage of 'sfnm') is a give away, especially when the user is just over 24 hours old. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:41, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

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

 * Already locked. Sro23 (talk) 21:13, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

First edit was to restoring the same infobox on Karni Sena. Compare Special:Diff/1023635976 and Special:Diff/981909134 Otherwise edits in the same topic area as well. Tayi Arajakate Talk 15:37, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

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

 * - all previous socks of this master appear to be too for CheckUser data to exist. Mz7 (talk) 01:56, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I'd call Nimesh Pathora's version of the infobox sufficiently different to make sockpuppetry unlikely. Closing. GeneralNotability (talk) 03:12, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.


 * Dawnpope created the page Bihari Hindus and Gopalam Reddy comes after 6 days to add over 2000 bytes of content.. Both users significantly added content in the same section of the same article. Dawnpope makes same edits to the bullet list of the same section of the same page 3 days after Gopalam Reddy.. Same edit summary.. Similar edit summary.. Both uses Visual editor to edit.
 * Creates user pages with similar edit summaries like older socks: my, my wiki page., My page, my info., My description..
 * Habit of adding portals to articles like older socks:, ,
 * Habit of overciting and adding citations alone like older socks:,,, , , ,
 * Almost all the older socks use Visual editor like these two.-  SUN EYE 1  06:41, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Dawnpope and Gopalam Reddy use the same edit summaries as, Added a related category, Added portal, Added further details, corrected external links and added portal., Added one more name
 * All the three used "2" instead of "two".
 * Mealiyta also created user page with the edit summary Created my user page. similar to the older socks as said above. Mealiyta could also be one of the socks of this user. -  SUN EYE 1  06:29, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

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 this case related at all to glocked user m:Special:CentralAuth/Mealiyta? Both Dawnpope and Gopalam Reddy are to that user. ST47 (talk) 21:43, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
 * As I understand, Mealiyta is also a sock of this master. I blocked and tagged both as proven socks. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  23:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I also blocked and tagged .  Vanjagenije  (talk)  07:59, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
 * . --Blablubbs (talk) 20:37, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
Account created only 3 days after the last SPI. Same interests at Template:Riots in India, Hinduism in Bangladesh, Template:India Related city Portals, Glossary of Hinduism terms, Category:Omani Hindus, and more. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 15:18, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

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

 * The CU data is consistent with the data in the CU logs for past cases; the date of article creation is suspicious; there is indeed a great deal of overlap in articles of interest. to be sure it's the same person.   Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  11:37, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Behaviour matches up very well. as proven.  I took your comment above as possilikely, but feel free to change the tag to suspected. Closing. DatGuyTalkContribs 15:27, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
 * No, that tag is fine - I almost blocked myself, and would likely have applied a proven tag myself, but thought a second pair of eyes on the behaviour might be useful. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  16:06, 13 November 2022 (UTC)