Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Depressed Desi/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets
Brought to attention when the sock promptly restored the revert of the master with the same reasoning, to circumvent the 24-hr one rvt enforcement.

Besides significant overlap on topics (WP:ARBIPA), and editing style (Talk page creations, pages moves, template edits, ITN noms etc.), editing overlap of the master and sock include: Master1, Sock1; M2, S2; M3, S3; M4, S4; M5, S5; M6, S6; M7, S7.

While the behavioral evidence here should suffice, asking for a CU to check for other likely sockpuppets. Gotitbro (talk) 18:01, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

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

Gotitbro has made accusations without providing substantial evidence. This is a personal attack. Many editors have overlap in editing space and a mere coincidence of a few instances doesn't make one a sock of another. Let's see, Gotitbro removed the same text twice as this user, this IP, this IP and this user on the Insurgency in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa article. Is he/she operating socks too? Maybe, as a boomerang the CU must be run on Gotitbro instead. Depressed Desi (talk) 20:02, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Please also note the user's attempt at canvassing here. This ill-intentioned report merely stems from a content dispute. - Depressed Desi (talk) 20:29, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Very . I think the behavioral evidence by itself isn't enough to block—several of the diffs provided are months apart in time and could be explained as two editors with similar interests—but the technical evidence pushes this across the line. I did notice a relatively significant amount of recent temporal overlap on multiple pages on the interaction timeline, and in my view, this was enough to run a check. I think this is probably the same editor controlling multiple accounts, but if it isn't that, then it is likely two people who know each other and are coordinating (WP:MEAT). Because the two accounts have commented in the same discussions to support each other (e.g. ) and because they have been used to circumvent 1RR (per Gotitbro above), I see this as a clear violation of the sockpuppetry policy. : both accounts blocked indefinitely in light of Depressed Desi's misleading statement above. Closing. Mz7 (talk) 02:02, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
New account restoring same edit as earlier socks on Insurgency in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

Same interest also involves Pakistan Junior League.

Several socks last time were blocked by based on this report. The SPI archives won't show some of the confirmed socks. TolWol (talk) 23:41, 13 September 2022 (UTC)


 * I compared Sockpuppet investigations/ShahabKhanJadoon1 with War Wounded and found a number of similarities such as addition of future events in 2022,, major edits on infobox of Insurgency in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, formatting Quaid-e-Azam Trophy, updating YouPorn article. It makes sense to merge this whole SPI with Sockpuppet investigations/ShahabKhanJadoon1 because that SPI entirely predates this one. TolWol (talk) 21:20, 19 September 2022 (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 known socks are ; CU log data puts War Wounded in the same country but a fair distance away from known Depressed Desi socks, though I'm not sure how trustworthy the geolocation is here.
 * For future checkusers: there's some technical overlap with Sockpuppet_investigations/ShahabKhanJadoon1 here, but I don't see enough similarity in interests to call them related. GeneralNotability (talk) 00:15, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 * War Wounded is also mentioned in Sockpuppet investigations/103.141.159.231 -- RoySmith (talk) 15:43, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Per my comments at Sockpuppet investigations/103.141.159.231, I am unwilling to block here. Two sockfarms have been mentioned, but I don't believe it likely that they're one and the same; the interests are markedly different, and they were active at the same time, meaning the user would have had to be successfully evading the CU with one set of accounts but not another. The lack of talk-space edits also makes behavioral analysis tricky. I'm not sure there's much else to be done here, marking for closure. Vanamonde (Talk) 16:30, 1 November 2022 (UTC)