Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BDKSH/Archive

15 May 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

The pattern of edits made in Institute of Engineering and Science IPS Academy by the users User:BDKSH and User:49.202.57.127 made me suspect that the user might be socking.. After a level 3 warning to the user BDKSH on adding promotional contents to the article, the edits cam from the Ip 49.202.57.127 and 49.202.33.108. The Ip did the same edits to the article after I reverted the previous additions (adding the removed promotional contents). The following diffs might give some idea, diff1, diff2 and diff3. Regards -- JAaron95 &#124;  Talk  &#124;  Contribs   21:16, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * A few problems with this SPI – (1) It was not filed with the SPI report template that can be accessed from simply running the form on the main SPI page; I've fixed this myself. (2) BDKSH is not currently blocked, so what part of WP:ILLEGIT does this fall under? –Chase (talk / contribs) 22:22, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for doing my work here..! As I'm new to this area, don't know the procedure... You asked "what part of WP:ILLEGIT does this fall under?". I think it falls under Circumventing policies or sanctions(WP:EVASION). Please do remind me the procedures here if I'm doing something wrong. Regards -- JAaron95 &#124;  Talk  &#124;  Contribs   05:36, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * WP:EVASION means using other accounts or IPs to edit while being blocked. is not blocked and has never been blocked. So, this is certainly not a case of WP:EVASION.  Vanjagenije   (talk)  10:01, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Not sure which point this would come under, however I guess the user didn't want himself to be blocked in the account of getting user warnings. So, he started editing from other IPs.. If this is the wrong place for my report, should i report the user somewhere else? Regards.-- JAaron95 &#124;  Talk  &#124;  Contribs   10:12, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
 * This is the right place. What you say is against the rules, user should not use alternate accounts or IPs to escape warnings. But, as long as I see, those two IPs have not received any warnings. Were they doing something disruptive?  Vanjagenije  (talk)  10:17, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I did not give them warnings as I suspected that the user BDKSH might be doing the edit, signed out. After giving level 3 warning to the user BDKSH, the same pattern of edits came from the two ips, and I thought separate warnings were unnecessary and reporting seemed to be rather a good idea. You might wanna look Institute of Engineering and Science IPS Academy for the pattern of disruption by the user and the ips.. -- JAaron95 &#124;  Talk  &#124;  Contribs   10:30, 16 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Ok, I issued a formal warning to BDKSH to stop using IPs for editing. If he continues the practice, please, report him again here.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  10:39, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

, for future reference I believe that you meant that he was trying to avoid scrutiny instead of evading a block. — Berean Hunter   (talk)  13:14, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

09 June 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

It seems that the user, BDKSH is again editing from IPs to the page Institute of Engineering and Science IPS Academy which by the way are promotional... The user has been formally warned previously for socking after opening an SPI case (here) JAaron95  &#40; Talk &#41;  15:21, 9 June 2015 (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
— Berean Hunter   (talk)  15:46, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I've added semi-protection for one month. Although the B D Kushwaha account is older, I would suggest that we leave this under the current master name. I'm indef blocking this user because they have an obvious COI and intentionally damaging the articles of competing institutions (diff 1, history of another article) in addition to the promotional socking. They are using IPs to avoid scrutiny in those articles as well. Blocking IPs for two weeks and closing.

21 June 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

User is back making promotional edits in Institute of Engineering and Science IPS Academy JAaron95  &#40; Talk &#41;  15:49, 21 June 2015 (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

 * Obvious, blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:16, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

15 July 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

User might be using another IP to add back the promotional contents in Institute of Engineering and Science IPS Academy immediately after the semi-protection expired. JAaron95 Talk   05:51, 15 July 2015 (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)  09:28, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Hello The article's history talks for itself. I am surprised you are asking for diffs in this evident case (edits came in immediately after the semi expired, edits were almost the same), although I'll provide you with some.. Master:diff 1, diff 2. Puppet: diff 1. Regards-- JAaron95  Talk   11:09, 15 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Admin action needed - . Block the IP for three days.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  12:26, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Also I'd suggest the admin to consider protecting the article for an extended time period..-- JAaron95 Talk   12:35, 15 July 2015 (UTC)


 * IP blocked for three days and article semi protected for a year. Closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:41, 15 July 2015 (UTC)