Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Aparna tutu/Archive

07 February 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

There is a lot of overlap between these two accounts, both of which were created yesterday. The former account created 32aam adhyayam 23aam vaakyam, which Tony has also edited. This article is where both accounts made their first edits outside of userspace. Both have a tendency to mark edits as "minor" and in edit summaries:. Both also edited Arjun Prabhakaran, which the suspected master created. Once again, more labeling of edits as "minor," and Tony removed an AFD template several times:. So it looks like Tony may have tried to "help out" by saving the page. They also overlap on Gokul Ramakrishnan, Miya George, and Lal (actor):


 * Miya:
 * Aparna:
 * Tony:


 * Lal:
 * Aparna:
 * Tony:
 * Gokul:
 * Aparna:
 * Tony:.

That's a lot of similarity. All edits seem to be about the very specific topic of the Malayalam film industry, especially the film 32aam adhyayam 23aam vaakyam. The actors' pages edited by the two seem to be actors who appeared in said film; I believe that these two accounts are SPAs engaged in promoting it. GABHello! 16:09, 7 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Also, note the similarity between the film title and Tony's username. GABHello! 17:43, 7 February 2016 (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
✅. Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:50, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

23 February 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Pappan13 recreated Arjun Prabhakaran, deleted at AfD five days ago. See previous reports. - MrX 12:49, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Yes, it's obviously Aparna tutu; they even edited some of the other pages that the master edited -- see contribs. All of it is related to this one Malayalam film, and all the people are actors in the film. GABHello! 13:38, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * If -- as I suspect -- this is all promotional editing for the film, then they seem to be enlisting additional people located elsewhere to help out with their efforts. GABHello! 15:49, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
❌.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:02, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * If the CheckUser result says "unrelated", then I can only conclude that this is a good illustration of the fact that CheckUser is not magic pixie dust, because the behavioural evidence is so clear and unambiguous that I really have to agree with MrX and GeneralizationsAreBad. I have blocked the account. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:40, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

27 February 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Block evasion:. GABHello! 02:47, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that. Note the promotion of the "32" film, as well as the same actors, that Cu-confirmed sock also promoted:

GABHello! 12:01, 29 February 2016 (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

 * - In order to facilitate and expedite your request, please provide diffs to support your case. Please give two or more diffs meeting the following format:
 * 1) At least one diff is from the sockmaster (or an account already blocked as a confirmed sockpuppet of the sockmaster), showing the behaviour characteristic of the sockmaster.
 * 2) At least one diff per suspected sockpuppet, showing the suspected sockpuppet emulating the behaviour of the sockmaster given in the first diff.
 * 3) In situations where it is not immediately obvious from the diffs what the characteristic behaviour is, a short explanation must be provided. Around one sentence is enough for this.  Vanjagenije   (talk)  10:24, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * This IP is not active any more, and it seams to be dynamic. The one mentioned by at WT:Sockpuppet investigations is also inactive. I'm closing this.   Vanjagenije   (talk)  18:49, 2 March 2016 (UTC)