Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Chander/Archive

07 November 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Contributions closely resemble (mostly to one of the sock User:Digvijay411, and was created at about the same time), they are editing the same articles that the master had interest on. And as usual, they were in dispute (as the history of Karan Singh Grover tells) with Durr-e-shahwar's sock. Looking at the date of creation, there might be a probability of sleepers. — UY Scuti Talk  06:40, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Per this, User:Digvijay411 is the sock of User:Rishika.dhanawade. The suspected sock has had high interests in the topics edited by the sock master. In this 50 revisions, Digvijay and Jimmy Aneja reverted the same revisions here and here, while letting away Rishika's revision here. I suspect they might've been using these accounts to show that consensus is on their side. — UY Scuti Talk  10:43, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I so knew something was fishy about this.— UY Scuti Talk  17:17, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

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)  09:24, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * compare those based on provided diffs.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  10:45, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * and are ❌. I should add that I don't find the diff evidence persuasive.
 * The following accounts are ✅:
 * The behavioral evidence is strong. My suspicion is paid editing. Please create a new SPI with Chander as the master. I believe they are the oldest account., once that is done, ping me because I want to block the accounts as a checkuser block.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:21, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * ✅.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  16:28, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * The behavioral evidence is strong. My suspicion is paid editing. Please create a new SPI with Chander as the master. I believe they are the oldest account., once that is done, ping me because I want to block the accounts as a checkuser block.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:21, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * ✅.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  16:28, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * The behavioral evidence is strong. My suspicion is paid editing. Please create a new SPI with Chander as the master. I believe they are the oldest account., once that is done, ping me because I want to block the accounts as a checkuser block.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:21, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * ✅.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  16:28, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * The behavioral evidence is strong. My suspicion is paid editing. Please create a new SPI with Chander as the master. I believe they are the oldest account., once that is done, ping me because I want to block the accounts as a checkuser block.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:21, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * ✅.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  16:28, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * ✅.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  16:28, 7 November 2015 (UTC)


 * All the accounts have been blocked and tagged. Closing. Bbb23 (talk) 17:38, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

14 December 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Same editorial pattern and most interested subject Karanvir Bohra. Whereas, Tags were removed of maintenance plus this article was written by IP addresses with tag removal process despite protection. D&#39;SuperHero (talk) 06:50, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment: 's past history of edits are mostly targetted to Indian soap opera actors. Seemingly, This sock has done numerous edits to Karanvir Bohra, see, , and in which he added a Redlinked template. Whereas edits of Chander matched same patterns, have a look, , , ,  and . Chander constantly edit warred and restored his own views. Despite only writing "Unexplained Revert". Pattern of Rishab has a resembling edit pattern by Sockmaster. D&#39;SuperHero (talk) 11:07, 16 December 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)  23:31, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * - Please, compare Rishab Sarpotdar to the master.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  19:12, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Technically, Rishab Sarpotdar appears to Chander. Mike V • Talk 20:55, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Behavioral evidence is not strong enough to block, so I'm closing this with no action.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  21:50, 16 December 2015 (UTC)