Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Chanakyathegreat/Archive

Evidence submitted by Australisian
Chanakyathegreat and Bcs09 have very similar contribution histories. Bcs09 has edited the very same list of articles which Chanakyathegreat was being disruptive on and has made either the same edits or very similar edits to those which Chanakyathegreat made. Bcs09 was created shortly after Chanakyathegreat was banned indefinitely. Australisian (talk) 18:58, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * to check on the filer, compare with . T. Canens (talk) 15:12, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ that Bcs09 is Chanakyathegreat.
 * ✅ that Australisian is also the following:
 * And likely more. See Sockpuppet investigations/Vedant/Archive; I think there's an overlap. --jpgordon:==( o ) 15:49, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * And likely more. See Sockpuppet investigations/Vedant/Archive; I think there's an overlap. --jpgordon:==( o ) 15:49, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * And likely more. See Sockpuppet investigations/Vedant/Archive; I think there's an overlap. --jpgordon:==( o ) 15:49, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * And likely more. See Sockpuppet investigations/Vedant/Archive; I think there's an overlap. --jpgordon:==( o ) 15:49, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * And likely more. See Sockpuppet investigations/Vedant/Archive; I think there's an overlap. --jpgordon:==( o ) 15:49, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * And likely more. See Sockpuppet investigations/Vedant/Archive; I think there's an overlap. --jpgordon:==( o ) 15:49, 4 July 2010 (UTC)


 * The bunch of Australisian-related socks are blocked and tagged as socks of 3505fernando, but I would appreciate comments on what action should be taken on Chanakya/Bcs. As far as I can tell, Bcs was created to evade a 6-month block on Chanakya last July (and which, obviously, has expired about 6 months ago), and Chanakya, with the exception of four edits, has not edited since then. T. Canens (talk) 17:40, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Seems to me Bcs09 has essentially gotten away with it, but in the best way; Chanakyathegreat was a seemingly incorrigible edit warrior; Bcs09 has been quite well behaved and seems to be a good Wikipedia citizen. There does seem to be more here than meets the eye; I'm not sure this is over yet. --jpgordon:==( o ) 04:08, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

I have indefinitely blocked Chanakyathegreat with autoblock disabled so that he may continue to edit as Bcs09. This should ensure that he sticks with one account from now on. I'm sure he is (or will be) aware of this, and I don't think we need to take any additional action here. Marking as closed. –MuZemike 17:27, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by 88.106.92.8
Chakayathegreat and Bcs09 accounts are clearly the same person as they have near identical contribution histories as can be seen here:. Bcs09 was created on 17th July 2009 here:, very shortly after Chanakyathegreat received a 6 month ban on 7th July 2009 here:. Bcs09 has quite clearly been hiding behind multiple IP addresses within the 59.94.xxx.xxx range on articles which are not semi-protected as cen be seen here: All the IPs listed are from Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users
The filer in this case is an obvious troll with a deeply prejudicial attitude towards a certain country. He's clutching at straws here and hoping that a CheckUser will turn up something incriminating because he has no real evidence to speak of. The IP ranges mentioned in this case are an extension of the ones mentioned here where a sock of Yattum also tried to accuse me of sockpuppetry. When a CU actually reviewed the case and determined that I edit from a different CONTINENT and that Yattum's allegations were just an attempt at defamation which was no doubt fueled by anger as a result of this decision on the Frigate article. Vedant (talk) 12:41, 9 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Addendum: I'm unsure why this dimwit is allowed to continue making accusations despite the fact that he's indefinitely blocked from editing. I have no opinion on the IPs but I don't feel that this idiot has any right to edit Wikipedia or accuse other users of crimes he himself has committed. Vedant (talk) 17:32, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * This is the blocked sockpuppeteer User:Yattum making this request. --jpgordon:==( o ) 06:21, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

It is dead clear that Chanakyathegreat and Bcs09 are the same person from the past case; there is no need to prove that again. I have no opinion as of yet of the IP addresses. –MuZemike 07:06, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Is there also a reason not to believe that 88.106.92.8 is indef-blocked user Australisian? –MuZemike 07:25, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
 * No, which is why I said "Yattum". --jpgordon:==( o ) 16:20, 9 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Oh. My mind leaves me sometimes :| Anyways, marking as closed as a frivolous SPI case and CU request. –MuZemike 17:52, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

10 June 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

He was editing as until he was blocked by Admin/Checkuser MuZemike as an obvious sock of banned user. This guy first edit was on the talk page where the discussion was left off, obviously a WP:DUCK. Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 14:44, 10 June 2011 (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 the data on this master is stale, so we can't run a CU. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 14:50, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Anyeonghaseyo! You may close this as MuZemike has just blocked him for abusing multiple account. Its the weekend, look on the bright side... at least the creep wasn't drinking and driving, right? Best. -- Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 16:24, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Um... right. We're done then. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 19:15, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

24 September 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

User:Taurgo has a near identical contribution history to user:Chanakyathegreat, who was banned for edit warring and POV. Taurgo is editing all the same articles and fighting all the same edit wars, usually Indian Navy, blue water navy and Royal Navy related. It looks as though Taurgo was created by Chanakyathegreat just as they dramatically increased edit warring and were about to be banned for the second time. Taurgo seems to be a pretty obvious sock. Quite vivid blur (talk) 23:11, 24 September 2011 (UTC) Quite vivid blur (talk) 23:11, 24 September 2011 (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 spent a lot of time looking, there are 200 contributions from Taurgo going back to June 2009. I tried to find an obvious smoking gun, such as account creation right after a block, but there was nothing that helpful. The timing of account creation doesn't really support or rule out sockpuppetry. I do see that Taurgo would often edit during Chanakyathegreat's gaps in editing; for example, Chanakyathegreat edited on June 2, 2009, then the next day Taurgo was created and made some edits, and then the following day Chanakyathegreat would edit again. That does suggest one person switching between accounts but doesn't totally confirm it.

Eventually it came down to the edits themselves. Taurgo almost exclusively edits the same articles that Chanakyathegreat did. The POV seems identical. There is just too much of a coincidence there, so much that I can comfortably conclude that they are the same person. I've blocked Taurgo as a sockpuppet. --  At am a  頭 20:36, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

08 October 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Came right out and said it. . Sighted sock, slammered same. Posting here for the record and for confirmation. Don't think a CU is necessary? - The Bushranger One ping only 21:40, 8 October 2011 (UTC) The Bushranger One ping only 21:40, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

09 October 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.


 * Patrolling clerk please note that I'm nominating "Taurgo" for double confirmation per suggestion below and to check for sleepers. As a regular of Indian Navy related pages, these are signs of socking and for "Flyingalbatross", I'm trying to eliminate that possibility of him being a quiet sock of "Chanakyathegreat" and to check if he might instead be a sock of, due to recent image copyvios (besides the transferral of copyrighted text, which is another obvious long-term problem on the pages) on the related pages. -- Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 13:58, 9 October 2011 (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

 * Only problem here is Taurgo. Do we keep that account blocked? Do we want CU to check for sleepers and a relationship between the two if any? It all is very similar. NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 00:41, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Flyingalbatross and Growingneurons appear to be the same person, but neither is related to Taurgo by checkuser evidence. Taurgo however appears to have two sleepers, User:U.ravishankar and User:Skonduri. Neither have edited.  I'm reluctant to block until one of the regular checkusers can have a look. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 16:55, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Shivanshankare is stale as far as checkuser goes. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 16:59, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Check up after Ellen, per ellen's request. NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 18:26, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Line break for readability. AGK [&bull; ] 21:45, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

I looked into this, per Elen's request. Technical evidence supports the following conclusions. that Flyingalbatross = Growingneurons. Also that these are additional socks of Flyingalbatross/Growingneurons.

Bizarrely, Taurgo has edited in the past two days from the same nation and geographical area as the above users, but also from a country that is in the other half of the world; perhaps that individual is travelling. Anyway, although he has edited from the same area, it was using a different ISP, and other technical indicators are weak, so a direct link there is. However, the geographical proximity may suggest meatpuppetry or collusion; the patrolling administrators may want to take this into account. Also, the following are ✅ socks of Taurgo:

, erring on, socks. A final decision on these will need to draw from behavioural evidence more than technical data:

These editors are periodically editing anonymously, but their ranges are also occasionally, although not terribly often, shared by unrelated editors. Do not hesitate to block with autoblock, but also do not be unsympathetic if there are unblock requests from other editors; there could be a small volume of collateral. AGK [&bull; ] 21:45, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I've blocked the three socks of Flyingalbatross/Growingneutrons/Chanakyathegreat. The Taurgo sockfarm I'll leave to another to deal with, given the complications of the status of the sockmaster. - The Bushranger One ping only 02:33, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I've blocked and tagged the two accounts that were confirmed as Taurgo. As to the other three, I'm going to let it go for now. Neither of the first two accounts has edited yet, so let's assume a little good faith. The third seems to be editing in a different domain. Relist if any of these accounts become active, or if there are others. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 18:00, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

11 October 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

This user seems to be a sock which is making very similar comments to those made by confirmed sock user:Bcs09 here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Great_power/Archive_13#Britain. Quite vivid blur (talk) 20:02, 11 October 2011 (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
Aban1313 appears ❌ to Growingnuerons from the archive. TN X Man 20:22, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Closing with no action taken. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 00:58, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

17 October 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Strong behavioral evidence suggests that this account is the latest sock- or meatpuppet by this editor. Not quite enough to block without sending it through SPI first, so, here we are. Reccomend a check for sleepers based on past history by the suspected sockmaster. The Bushranger One ping only 03:29, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

You have my absolute support for this or ANY checkuser/Sockpuppetry case you can think of. I never ever used any puppets and I suggest you to do most rigorous check possible. Swift&#38;silent (talk) 06:44, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Go ahead

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.'' Can I ask how long this investigation might take as there is an big 'Suspected of Sock-puppetry' notice on my User page. Swift&#38;silent (talk) 05:49, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * How long will it take?

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - That account is old - from 2009. Its behavior is suspicious, I suppose, so I'll endorse to find out. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 03:33, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
 * There are a lot of IPs to sort through. Tiptoety  talk 03:36, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
 * . They are using 50+ IPs to edit through, some being proxies as well as quite a few different useragents making it nearly impossible to say one way or another if they are connected to any other accounts. I ran them against some of the non-stale accounts in the archive and came up empty handed. At best, I . Tiptoety  talk 04:15, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

04 November 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

User:Latestnewsupdate exhibits the characteristics of most other socks of Chanakyathegreat; a newly created account focused on anti-British POV, edit warring and naval related articles. Quite vivid blur (talk) 20:01, 4 November 2011 (UTC) Quite vivid blur (talk) 20:01, 4 November 2011 (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 following are the same:
 * matches technically, but has not edited any articles that I can see. TN X Man  20:25, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I left Koch unblocked atm, leaving that to another clerk. The rest are blocked and tagged.  Alexandria   (talk)  20:27, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Koch has a rather interesting edit history when you squint at it. Technical match is good enough for me. Blocked. - The Bushranger One ping only 22:15, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * matches technically, but has not edited any articles that I can see. TN X Man  20:25, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I left Koch unblocked atm, leaving that to another clerk. The rest are blocked and tagged.  Alexandria   (talk)  20:27, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Koch has a rather interesting edit history when you squint at it. Technical match is good enough for me. Blocked. - The Bushranger One ping only 22:15, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * matches technically, but has not edited any articles that I can see. TN X Man  20:25, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I left Koch unblocked atm, leaving that to another clerk. The rest are blocked and tagged.  Alexandria   (talk)  20:27, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Koch has a rather interesting edit history when you squint at it. Technical match is good enough for me. Blocked. - The Bushranger One ping only 22:15, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I left Koch unblocked atm, leaving that to another clerk. The rest are blocked and tagged.  Alexandria   (talk)  20:27, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Koch has a rather interesting edit history when you squint at it. Technical match is good enough for me. Blocked. - The Bushranger One ping only 22:15, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

22 December 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Behavioral evidence =. Requesting CU to be sure. - The Bushranger One ping only 18:58, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Go ahead and put this duck out of his misery. He has quacked his last quack. &mdash; Augmented Reality'' Woe90i 22:06, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - against  per Large similar reverts  and . Still looking around for a connection to the master, will post back soon enough. --  DQ  (t)   (e)  20:32, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Unless more diffs can be provided, all I can offer for a check against the master/sleeper check is the same topic area where socks were before, and abuse of multiple accounts as noted above. -- DQ  (t)   (e)  20:40, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The contribution history - comparing the Special:Contributions between Chanakya, his small army of socks, and these - is the main thing - both of these (the original and the one you found) are giant ducks on behavior. Chanakya's habit of "theme accounts" makes things more difficult; but given the subject areas, "attitude", and username-pattern to previous Chanakyasocks, IMHO these have enough to be blocked on the duck test alone. (I already would have, but decided to wait for CU first.) - The Bushranger One ping only 21:28, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ the following are the same as each other and matches to Chanakyathegreat:
 * Please check on behavior- they match technically, but seem to be editing different topics.  TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  15:15, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Blocked the lot for now, will look into the last one later. -- DQ  (t)   (e)  15:17, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Given the sock-spamming habit of this editor, who clearly intends to continue, would there be grounds for proposing a WP:BAN? - The Bushranger One ping only 22:03, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Please check on behavior- they match technically, but seem to be editing different topics.  TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  15:15, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Blocked the lot for now, will look into the last one later. -- DQ  (t)   (e)  15:17, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Given the sock-spamming habit of this editor, who clearly intends to continue, would there be grounds for proposing a WP:BAN? - The Bushranger One ping only 22:03, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Please check on behavior- they match technically, but seem to be editing different topics.  TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  15:15, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Blocked the lot for now, will look into the last one later. -- DQ  (t)   (e)  15:17, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Given the sock-spamming habit of this editor, who clearly intends to continue, would there be grounds for proposing a WP:BAN? - The Bushranger One ping only 22:03, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

24 December 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

WP:GIANTDUCK - not even trying to hide block evasion. Already bagged and tagged, here for the record. The Bushranger One ping only 02:37, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
 * And another. This is getting ridiculous. Requesting fresh CU for more sleepers. - The Bushranger One ping only 04:53, 24 December 2011 (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

 * Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents - The Bushranger One ping only 05:00, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
 * For the record, the two above are ✅ socks of one another, and highly related to Chanakyathegreat. The problem here is they are editing from a large "data range" which appears to be used by various mobile devices making it hard to really set a rangeblock that would 1)be affective and 2)not cause larges amounts of collateral damage.  Tiptoety  talk 07:31, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

25 December 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

More socking from Chanakya, degenerating to personal attacks now. The first two are already blocked, having been emitting the ; third is suspect. Requesting CU due to the habit of sockfarm creation this user has. The Bushranger One ping only 20:25, 25 December 2011 (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

 * and look .  looks  bordering on ❌. The contributions don't match quite as well with that account as they do the other two as well. Also, in the future I ask that you at least list a few diffs that back up why you feel these accounts are ducks so I do not have to go digging through all their edits. Thanks,  Tiptoety  talk 09:12, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Alright, and no worries - with this user, diffs are hard to find though, due to his habit of having "theme accounts" each in a seperate India-related topic area; the contributions have to be viewed as a whole instead of a diff or two being smoking guns. But I'll see what I can do when (unfortunatly, I doubt it's an if) the next time Whack-a-Sock is needed. - The Bushranger One ping only 10:24, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Both likely socks have already been blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 09:14, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

26 December 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Replicating the very same edits as recently banned socks user:Quietnoted and user:Bestquick on the Royal Navy article and replicating the same POV on the great power article as most Chanakyathegreat socks do, i.e. removing the UK. Quite vivid blur (talk) 18:08, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Has User:Armyjawan1 not been dealt with yet?, hes displaying similar areas of interest to Chanakya and socks. Notably to do with articles relating to the Indian air force.  &mdash;  Woe90i Woe90i 23:16, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Dammit, we just had this case less than 12 hours ago. Endorsing for confirmation, sleepers, and any sort of IP blocking that can be done. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 18:26, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It's pretty much ✅. A range block is not possible. WilliamH (talk) 18:48, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Blah, okay. Blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 19:33, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Hopefully once the holidays are over he'll go back to school and have less time to be tenditious... - The Bushranger One ping only 20:57, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

27 December 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

- the usual removal of the UK from the Great Powers article and other anti-UK edits. Already blocked, added here for the record. CU optional for sleepers if another thinks it's needed. The Bushranger One ping only 19:57, 27 December 2011 (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

 * It's obviously him, nothing else to report. WilliamH (talk) 22:54, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

08 January 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Most recent sockpuppet of User:Chanakyathegreat. Behavioral evidence, usual Indian POV, large scale reverts and disruption. Admitted sockpuppetry on my talk page. Requesting CU if you need to be sure.TalkWoe90i 17:15, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry this should be at Sockpuppet investigations/Chanakyathegreat.TalkWoe90i 17:15, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Haha, when facts are put up, you can't stand me right. I don't lie like you do. There is a lack of good Admins. Its all the likes of Milbourneone who take you under his arms protecting you to continue with your rampant vandalism of pages and your POV pushing starting with British pages.:) Hope someone grows some brain somewhere.Correctiondetail (talk) 17:18, 8 January 2012 (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

 * Obviously that's him, nothing else to report. Clerk assistance requested to merge this. WilliamH (talk) 17:21, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
 * So merged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 18:13, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

09 January 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

The Quack of Doom. Both already blocked due to deafening behaviorable quacking, but the history of Chanakya's socking is that where there's one, there's more. Requesting CU for sleeper check. The Bushranger One ping only 19:32, 9 January 2012 (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

 * Nothing else to report via CheckUser, but a range block is not possible. The absolute best option is to semi-protect the pages in question due to sockpuppetry (which is a valid reason under protection policy). WilliamH (talk) 19:35, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * They're blocked, so I'll mark for close. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  19:50, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

12 January 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Behavioral. Themed account name, exact same areas of editing interests, continuing to fight the same conflicts of previous Sockpuppets. TalkWoe90i 12:27, 12 January 2012 (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

 * ✅, tagged, blocked. Amalthea  12:56, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

13 January 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Behavioural evidence = absolute sock of Chanakya. The usual stuff, themed user name, blatant POV, exact same editing interests, has returned to pick-up where his last sock started and was banned...request CU to put the final nail in the coffin. Suggest maybe semi-protection on the articles the sock has returned too. Prevent any new sock from causing trouble if he cant edit. Cheers. TalkWoe90i 03:04, 13 January 2012 (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

 * . Account blocked and tagged, but endorsing for confirmation, sleepers, and any sort of IP blocking that can be done. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 04:15, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * No double-check necessary here, new user restoring edits from yesterday's sock makes this one obvious (and also ). Like described in the archive, range blocks are in this case not doable. Revert, block & ignore them as they come in. Amalthea  10:44, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * account has been blocked and tagged, so closing this case. SpitfireTally-ho! 19:10, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

25 January 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Editing pattern (ship articles) and report at ANI by a "new user" - standby for furthers from others. Calabe1992 02:34, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Adding one more (another "newcomer" whose first edits are at ANI). Calabe1992 03:30, 25 January 2012 (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 and tagged per WP:DUCK, but endorsing for confirmation and sleepers. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 03:13, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

No doubt that Tonnyn and Werestep are ✅ as sox of each other - no sleepers found in the woodwork, rangeblock would still take out half of India. Just tag 'em and bag 'em. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 03:41, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Were done here. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  15:00, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

04 February 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Behavioural evidence = perfect match. Themed user name, same primary area of editing interests, back to pick-up where he left of with previous socks. TalkWoe90i 01:54, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

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


 * . Blocked and tagged accordingly. Believe a sleeper check should be carried out given past pattern of this banned user creating sockfarms. - The Bushranger One ping only 02:16, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - Sure, let's take a look. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 04:44, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
 * , same for . I didn't see any other obvious sleeper. -- Luk  talk 11:29, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Both blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 14:27, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

05 February 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Chanakya sock newly created to slander/attack me/my edits. TalkWoe90i 14:35, 5 February 2012 (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 and tagged per WP:DUCK. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 15:04, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

17 February 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Behavioural, typical attacks to me or my edits - this time on the Blue-water navy article (an article Chanakya[s] are famous for being disruptive in). Also on another article talkpage he has returned to his usual rant about racism and how Wikipedia is run by an elite group of white users etc etc TalkWoe90i 01:47, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

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

All of the edits from the below accounts are being reverted, but not all are yet blocked. Someone needs to do so. Calabe1992 15:23, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * and blocked accordingly. Request CU go ahead for sleeper check. - The Bushranger One ping only 01:54, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I've reverted their edits since it's so obvious. Calabe1992 01:56, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Added one more, loud quacking. Calabe1992 02:06, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Ugran blocked due to . - The Bushranger One ping only 02:16, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * for sleepers and confirmation. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 02:14, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ the following:
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 14:07, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * All confirmed socks blocked. NativeForeigner Talk 20:30, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 14:07, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * All confirmed socks blocked. NativeForeigner Talk 20:30, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 14:07, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * All confirmed socks blocked. NativeForeigner Talk 20:30, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 14:07, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * All confirmed socks blocked. NativeForeigner Talk 20:30, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

18 February 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Contributions, edit summaries. Calabe1992 02:36, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

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


 * Simply reported to AIV. Obvious sock is obvious.Jasper Deng (talk) 02:40, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Appreciated. Probably already worth a sleeper check, though, unfortunately. Calabe1992 02:44, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Quackus rex. Blocked, tagged, and the articles this latest sock attacked semi'd as they're favourite Chanakyatargets. Fully concur that another sleeper check should be run given the sockfarms of "role accounts" this banned user is fond of creating. - The Bushranger One ping only 02:51, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * The last case was less than twelve hours ago. Running a CU would be overkill. Relist tomorrow when more accounts show up. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 04:27, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

21 February 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Too obvious. TalkWoe90i 09:33, 21 February 2012 (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
match to. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 14:33, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  15:10, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

02 March 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Behavioural evidence = perfect match. Swearing, attacking editors and banging on about about his racism conspiracy. Typical of Chanakya. TalkWoe90i 09:47, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

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

Another one: <span style="font-family:'Courier new',monospace">Klilidiplomus+Talk 13:24, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * . Both blocked and tagged accordingly. Request CU to clean up the rest of the sockfarm based on this user's past history. - The Bushranger One ping only 13:30, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * They just keep coming... <span style="font-family:'Courier new',monospace">Klilidiplomus+Talk 13:36, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Bagged and tagged. - The Bushranger One ping only 13:47, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
The following are all the same:
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 14:30, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * All blocked, tagged, and checked at the game warden's station. Semiprotection applied to the two articles involved (Potential superpowers, Great Britain) for a month. - The Bushranger One ping only 14:49, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 14:30, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * All blocked, tagged, and checked at the game warden's station. Semiprotection applied to the two articles involved (Potential superpowers, Great Britain) for a month. - The Bushranger One ping only 14:49, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 14:30, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * All blocked, tagged, and checked at the game warden's station. Semiprotection applied to the two articles involved (Potential superpowers, Great Britain) for a month. - The Bushranger One ping only 14:49, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * All blocked, tagged, and checked at the game warden's station. Semiprotection applied to the two articles involved (Potential superpowers, Great Britain) for a month. - The Bushranger One ping only 14:49, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

05 March 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets

And:


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Too obvious. TalkWoe90i 15:15, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I've blocked Alsoarise and Pilotsent, FWIW. They're creating them as they go.   Acroterion   (talk)   15:47, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
No unblocked accounts found, just keep reporting them as they come in. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 15:34, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * And all of the socks in round MCMXVII bagged and tagged with the latest article attacked semi'd. Really, doesn't this guy have better things to do with his life? - The Bushranger One ping only 20:50, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

08 March 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.


 * Obvious socks are obvious; all adding lame anti-racism notes to british military pages. Dreambroad's last edit before being blocked said he'd do this. Floquenbeam (talk) 02:41, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I see BSadowski has added a couple more. Acalamari's block log entry for Firstconch  seems to imply that this was going on a week or two before Dreambroad, so I've probably filed this under the wrong sockmaster name.  But I don't know the name of the older account, so... oh well. --Floquenbeam (talk) 03:07, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I found it. It's User:Chanakyathegreat. --Bsadowski1 03:37, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Bsadowski. --Floquenbeam (talk) 04:40, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Obvious socks are obvious. Just block and tag on sight next time. This brings his confirmed count up to 80.Jasper Deng (talk) 04:29, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Gee, thanks Jasper. Excellent instructions, I don't know why I didn't think of that. --Floquenbeam (talk) 04:40, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Don't you think this guy needs an edit filter?Jasper Deng (talk) 04:41, 8 March 2012 (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
Pages semi-protected for 3 days, but hoping a checkuser can see if there is a targetted rangeblock that can be made. Evidently each new account is created after the previous one is blocked, so autoblock isn't affecting them. --Floquenbeam (talk) 02:41, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * - Sleeper check/is there a small rangeblock that would be effective? NativeForeigner Talk 03:32, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * These are all Chanakya, as noted above. is another account. I've placed some rangeblocks, but they bounce around several subnets. Let's see if it quiets down.  TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  14:20, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * archived to Sockpuppet investigations/Chanakyathegreat from Sockpuppet investigations/Dreambroad SpitfireTally-ho! 20:38, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

11 March 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets

This edit by Orangewhitegreen is almost identical to this edit made by a confirmed sock of this user and on the same page, I have no doubt this is the same editor – Phoenix B 1of3 (talk) 04:15, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't really know if this is enough evidence, especially since his socks aren't of this nature lately.Jasper Deng (talk) 04:20, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Its the same edits, these edits on the same page and by recently created accounts . – Phoenix B 1of3 (talk) 04:24, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Strike that Phead128 is not a recent account and may not be involved, I may have mistaken the redlinked username as being such. – Phoenix B 1of3 (talk) 04:29, 12 March 2012 (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
Orangewhitegreen does not appear to be related to anyone, Phead128 was not checked, per withdrawal above. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 14:30, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Relist if there becomes further concern for the unrelated user. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  22:40, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

09 April 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Obvious sock of Chanakyathegreat. TalkWoe90i 22:53, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Yep... this (the ending statement) and this look pretty loudly quacking to me. - The Bushranger One ping only 01:12, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh goodie... Chanaky again. This looks worthy of a duck block to me. Calabe1992 01:23, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, too obvious. Looks like a sleeper too.--Jasper Deng (talk) 03:55, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Such a shame... that is indeed his "great" hallmark of MO, if only his energy was spent on improving the quality of life instead. BTW, result's out and I've tagged him accordingly, again. -- <i style="font-family:Rage Italic; font-size:large; color:green;">Dave</i> ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 10:08, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * That's a ✅ match. No sleepers for now. - Mailer Diablo 08:55, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

23 April 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Hitraclerwiki and Wikihitlesfatherracieasm identified as socks of this master and blocked/locked by User:Reaper Eternal. I'm reporting here for the record. While confirming them to each other as WP:DUCK (I didn't know the loooong history here), Wikifullofracim popped up and I whacked it down also as obvious-is-obvious. Sleeper-check (based on long history of lots of socks)? DMacks (talk) 17:07, 23 April 2012 (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
No unblocked accounts found, all these are ✅ as Chanakya. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 17:58, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * All tagged, including IP. Calabe1992 18:09, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

28 July 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Behavioral evidence = Perfect match. Same editing interests, still insulting other editors and claiming Wikipedia is racists. TalkWoe90i 10:14, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment: I concur with Woe90i, especially after looking at the way Thakshak phrase his word in the edit summaries, sure sounds like a duck to me. -- <i style="font-family:Rage Italic; font-size:large; color:green;">Dave</i> ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 14:46, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment Seems like a duck to me too.Restoring the older version of the page in List of active Indian Navy ships almost confirms it!  TheStrike  Σagle   14:49, 28 July 2012 (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

 * . 100% behavioral match. Blocked accordingly. - The Bushranger One ping only 16:45, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

27 August 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Behavioral evidence suggests its chanakya, removing my edits on blue-water navy for example. TalkWoe90i 16:17, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * The quacking is faint - so far - but it's there. Added CU request - The Bushranger One ping only 23:33, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually BR, I would consider that one single ping from him a very loud and clear indication of being the BANNED one. -- <i style="font-family:Rage Italic; font-size:large; color:green;">Dave</i> ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 01:50, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * when considering technical and behavioral evidence. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  01:36, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. - The Bushranger One ping only 02:02, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

20 January 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Earlier diff 1 and Diff 2 - from 2 users who were then blocked for being sock puppets of Chanakyathegreat. Diffs 1 and Diffs 2 of edit by Lotows - been reverting to the same exact version. Anir1uph &#124; talk &#124; contrib 16:30, 20 January 2013 (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

 * Looks like a duck, and it's already been blocked. - The Bushranger One ping only 23:27, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  08:37, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  08:37, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  08:37, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  08:37, 21 January 2013 (UTC)


 * All new socks blocked and tagged. Someguy1221 (talk) 08:41, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

30 June 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Similar behavior and introduction of the same material  ƬheStrike  Σagle  sorties  07:53, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Eh sorry, here they are... Edit by a confirmed sock-

Edit by the new suspected user:  I hope it's enough......if no...he just inserted a (legit) image created by CTG into the article... Thanks,  ƬheStrike  Σagle  sorties  12:01, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I don't see the no-doubt red flag for a Chanakyasock yet, but there is quacking going on. - The Bushranger One ping only 22:23, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Using at least one diff from the master and one diff from the suspected sock, please demonstrate the overlap between the two, otherwise this investigation will be closed. It's completely unreasonable for the person most familiar with a situation to expect those less familiar with it to retrieve his argument for him. WilliamH (talk) 08:00, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the diffs - it looks . WilliamH (talk) 16:48, 1 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Behavior is convincing in its own way. Indef.  Tagged.  Closing. Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124;  WER  00:36, 2 July 2013 (UTC)