Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Editwikig/Archive

16 May 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Opened per the Duck test; Editwikigu tagged as the sock because Editwikig was created first. Firstly, basically the same User name. It may be the case that this User is operating two accounts out of ignorance of WP policies - s/he has demonstrated limited knowledge of how to edit, such as not knowing how to reference shown by this edit by Editwikig and this edit by Editwikigu. These edits themselves provide indication that this is the same person using two accounts. Against the "doesn't know better" argument is the fact that the two accounts have not been active at the same time until a subject of interest Kashi Samaddar was put up for AfD a few days ago. Since then both accounts have been used (albeit incompetently) in support of retaining the article - this edit by Editwikig and this edit by Editwikigu twelve hours later. Both accounts have also been used to attempt to add the same material to the Kashi Samaddar article, for example this edit by Editwikigu (one of several over the last few weeks) and this edit by Editwikig. Regardless of any innocent motives for setting up two accounts in the first place, recent editing appears to be deliberate use of two accounts to advance a particular position. YSSYguy (talk) 06:15, 16 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Editwikigu has left a message on my Talk page, claiming that Editwikig is a different person. I don't know what to make of the claim, given the "betterment" comment accompanying the Log of the account creation for Editwikigu posted below by Vanjagenije. YSSYguy (talk) 12:50, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

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


 * A different person, but according to them "a colleague in same office with similar Indian feelings." So maybe more of a meatpuppet? -- ‖ Ebyabe  talk -   Health and Welfare   ‖ 17:48, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * . Those two are obviously the same person (see: ). I'm putting this on hold until we discuss this with him ( already sterted discussion at User_talk:Editwikig, waiting for the answer).  Vanjagenije  (talk)  10:32, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I was just about to post here! In any case, I do think that this is a WP:DUCK scenario. I was debating opening up an SPI myself, but I wanted to see what they were going to do with the AfD. IE, were they going to try to each post a "keep" argument or only one account post? Both accounts posted on WP:REFUND, which is how I first noticed them. (Requests_for_undeletion, Requests_for_undeletion) Other than that, there isn't a huge amount to tie them together, although I do think that they're the same person. There might be the chance that they were trying to create two accounts for public and private locations (ie, one of the valid reasons to edit with two accounts), but if they're aware of that policy then they'd also have to be aware that the policy also requires users to very openly label the accounts as such and to give a valid rationale for two accounts. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  10:42, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
 * We know that Editwikigu account was created by Editwikig (log). User Editwikigu does not admit socking, but claims that Editwikig is his "collegue" (diff). That is highly improbable taking into account their (similar) edit history. He also claims that Editwikig has retired. I propose Editwikig be indeffed, and Editwikigu warned to stop sockpuppeting.  Vanjagenije   (talk)  14:10, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

— Berean Hunter   (talk)  14:00, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
 * It is the same person. A comparison of edit summaries makes this clear. 72 hours for the master and indeffing sock. Closing.