Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Burbak/Archive

17 October 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

The mentioned i.p.s are used by the reported user for the same actions of either removing the maintenance tags or reverting the same targeted edit MahenSingha (Talk) 18:40, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
 * here
 * here

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've declined the CU request. We almost never publicly disclose the IP of a registered account.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:28, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * for 203.189.97.0/24 and 109.123.64.0/18 to look for abuse and/or collateral for possible rangeblocks. The first IP above resolves to v203-189-97-11.myvps.jp, which is indicative of a web host, and the second IP belongs to uk2.net, a web hosting provider.
 * The evidence indicates that Burbak has been using web proxies, or proxy-like services, in a manner inconsistent with policy. A block for sockpuppetry is warranted. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:17, 21 October 2015 (UTC)


 * The 203.189.97.0/24 range has zero collateral. The 109.123.64.0/18 is busier with a number of registered accounts, though most are spammy in nature. -- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 17:53, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Ponyo. I hardblocked the /24 and softblocked the /18, both for a year. Closing. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 22:19, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

When an IP removed Burbak's edits to Greater Nepal, Trevor97 restored them. In addition, they show similar interest in Madhesi people:,. This edit by Trevor97 is very close to being identical to this edit by Burbak. Sro23 (talk) 19:36, 28 August 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

 * The evidence is convincing enough for me to make the call. Please note the diffs above, as well as the "Fabricated lie" edit summary's similarity to other IP socks' complaints about "pseudohistory" and "manipulation of history." Similar edit summaries, too: . Also a similar interest in caste anthropology, including Rajputs: . Admin action requested: Please block this sockpuppet. Thanks for your help, GABgab 20:52, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Sock blocked. Nakon  04:37, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Noticed some unusual intersection across multiple sometimes obscure pages. See also here. Compare,   ,. Note how edit summaries are often very similar, if not identical among these users. Sro23 (talk) 02:44, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

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

I am ready to admit that the Burbak account was indeed mine however the Trevor97 account was not. I was still in school when I was using the Burbak account hence the quality of my edits where quite bad however they do not reflect the quality of my edits now. With this account I have amassed 1600+ edits and have created multiple articles which have been reviewed such as Oinwar dynasty, Shiva Singh etc. I have also cleaned up previously vandalised pages such as Maithils. I have also interacted with multiple senior members and admins who can attest to the fact that I no longer vandalise pages.

I am ready to accept any sanctions handed to me however I don't believe I should permanently lose the privilege to access Wikipedia because I made some misguided edits as an uninformed student.Damien2016 (talk) 15:45, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Blocked and tagged. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  16:11, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Still claiming that how "Maithils" are being badly received in Wikipedia. Still claiming that the map used on Indo-Aryan peoples is incorrect. D4iNa4 (talk) 17:03, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

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

This accusation is based on the mere fact that I, a new user, has the same opinion about the denigration of our language as some old user. It may shock you but there are 43 million Maithili speakers in the world. Notice how accuser puts Maithils in quotation marks? That shows you the disdain he has. Axomika (talk) 16:45, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - All previous socks are long stale. Sro23 (talk) 17:05, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Editor is now blocked. Closing. Sro23 (talk) 17:13, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I was gonna say, Axomika and Burbak have similar interests, but their style is different; Burbak edited articles disruptively until indeffed, but had nothing corresponding to Axomika's aggressive noticeboard posts and, especially, edit summaries. I don't think they're the same. Also I guess it doesn't much matter, as Axomika has just been indeffed for persistent unevidenced accusations of racism, see this ANI thread. Bishonen &#124; talk 17:14, 27 February 2018 (UTC).