Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Esthappanos Bar Geevarghese/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets
Earlier this year, as part of a general sweep of Indian Christian articles, was identified as an employee of the Syro-Malabar Church and indeffed by C.Fred in May. Since July, two editors added heavily photoshopped images of Syro-Malabar bishops like those uploaded originally by EBG to the Commons (SD: ; WE:, , –derived from same original photo as SD's upload–, and etc.), and SD linked at least one in an article. Other images have been added via IPs (the latest is listed above). Of particular note is the obsession with adding the same image to the George Alencherry article (EBG was fond of flooding it), which C.Fred reverted most recently this week. Seems like an open-and-shut case of an indeffed paid contributor using socks as recently as this month. Request a CU to identify at least SD to WE and the IP, anticipate a stale on EBG–but, hey, a boy can dream...

Let me know if I ought to ping C.Fred for his expertise but frankly I overworked them last time we encounter this EBG fellow in another context. ~ Pbritti (talk) 01:25, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
 * since you noticed further disruption, figured you'd want to see this. ~ Pbritti (talk) 02:05, 23 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

 * - -- RoySmith (talk) 13:53, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Wiki Eapen is ✅ to Esthappanos Bar Geevarghese. Shamshabad diocese is . -- RoySmith (talk) 14:03, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
Both and  have continued the sockmaster's edit warring on Joseph Kallarangatt, deleting sourced information (D:, ; MT: ; sockmaster: ). Separately, IP has been inserting newly-uploaded images from sockmaster. has been uploading poorly-photoshopped images similar to those as sockmaster on the Commons and adding them to articles on Syro-Malabar bishops, just like sockmaster. ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:47, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
 * See this interaction on the Commons as evidence of concurrent sockpuppetry dating to June this year between EBG and KBM. ~ Pbritti (talk) 00:26, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Per 's possible determination on the CU, here are additional IPs that have shared behavioral similarities that could help triangulate personality and location: 117.217.157.54, 2409:4073:11F:4AFA:0:0:1C2B:50A0. The Commons uploads by KBM are the most damning in my humble opinion. ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:57, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Presently, admins on the Commons are treating KBM as a possible sock of EBG per behavioral similarities. KBM's global contributions show an immediate uptick in uploads–some thought to be identical to deleted images of EBG–on 20 May, the day after EBG received final warnings on Wikipedia. ~ Pbritti (talk) 00:48, 20 October 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

 * - -- RoySmith (talk) 16:47, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
 * The three named accounts are all, but it's really just geolocating to the same vague part of a large country so I wouldn't put much faith in it.  -- RoySmith (talk) 16:53, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
 * looks like UPE all across the board. Thoughts? DatGuyTalkContribs 20:00, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
 * The idea that this is UPE initiated by the Syro-Malabar Church seems highly likely to me. Accounts mentioned, IP left alone as stale. Closing. DatGuyTalkContribs 17:02, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
Sockmaster has been previously identified as an employee of the Syro-Malabar Catholic Church. Sleevachan is about as duckish as they come, editing exclusively Syro-Malabar subject matter and often restoring EBG/EBG sock material. Among these was the re-upload of poorly photoshopped images previously uploaded by socks (and under the same name as those uploaded to the Commons by ) and their insertion of said images into the same articles as previously. See Raphael Thattil (, IP , Sleevachan ) and George Alencherry (EBG , Sleevachan ; note repetition of "Catholicos-Patriarch" title). Please also consider data from the Commons when reviewing this SPI; see logs for File:Thattil.jpg (logs), File:Alencherry.jpg (logs), and File:Srampickal.jpg (logs). Requesting CU due to multiple accounts and IPs being active concurrently in previous instances with expectation of stales on the archived instances. ~ Pbritti (talk) 20:20, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the quick CU–fully understand regarding the staleness of the archived cases. Further behavioral evidence has accrued over the last few days: Sleevachan content from Joseph Kallarangatt regarding the subject's involvement in a controversy, mirroring EBG sock 's similar  last year. Additionally, the disruptive insertion of poorly photoshopped promotional images into articles has persisted. I would appreciate an expedited administrative action if possible. Thank you. ~ Pbritti (talk) 14:35, 21 August 2023 (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

 * Geolocates to the same place as the archive, but given how stale the archives are, that’s all I can reconstruct from it. Courcelles (talk) 21:18, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
 * That’s enough evidence to block/tag as suspected. Case closed. Courcelles (talk) 17:35, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
According to c:Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems/Archive 109, Phillypaboy123 is a "probable sock" of Sleevachan (who is currently blocked as a Esthappanos Bar Geevarghese sock). Considering Phillypaboy123 is currently active at the English Wikipedia, I'm raising this up in the SPI.

Note: Raising this as a response to m:Steward_requests/Global. Martin Urbanec (talk) 11:29, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Comments by other users

 * Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


 * please note that a CU was performed through the Commons' channels, with a determination of Unrelated (see Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Phillypaboy123). The Commons CU resulted in their block there being reduced from indefinite to 3 months (see Phillypaboy123's Commons user talk). I believe that Phillypaboy123 is a disruptive editor, but evidence suggests they are not a sock. I would encourage a clerk to decline a CU. ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:47, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Ah, thanks for the info! I somehow missed that Commonswiki SPI. In that case, . Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:42, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * No worries. I was a little bit surprised when I first saw that they had been blocked as a sock on the Commons, as an account with a name suggesting Philadelphia residency (where there is a substantial Syro-Malabar population) probably would not match with an account that emanates out of south India. Gladly, I think this was simply a reasonable mistake; I'll be sure to improve my reporting on the Commons should any additional EBG accounts pop up. ~ Pbritti (talk) 21:02, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * is technically ❌ to this case. Behaviourally, I'd give it a 'meh'. They have quite a few edits about the Church (incl. on Commons), but also many that are unrelated, especially prior to 2023. They've they haven't been asked to edit in the topic area. There would need to be a smoking gun pattern, such as reuploading the exact same image as a blocked sock, or a sock uploading an image on Commons and then Phillypaboy adding it to an article on enwiki for a meatpuppetry block. DatGuyTalkContribs 19:51, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Can you explain the situation please? Phillypaboy123 (talk) 19:53, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 'Esthappanos Bar Geevarghese' is an employee of the Church who was caught engaging in undisclosed paid editing, which is a violation of the Wikimedia Foundation's term of use, as well as sockpuppetry, which is a violation of the English Wikipedia's policies. This page serves as an investigation into whether or not there are other accounts that are operated in a similar way that violates our policies. Your username came up because you've engaged in similar behaviour to previous accounts that have been blocked, both here and on Wikimedia Commons. However, while your behaviour is suspicious, I haven't found strong enough evidence to consider you a sock of the aforementioned user. To expand on what I said on your talk page, if you have any paid relation to the Church you are required to disclose it. If you have another sort of conflict of interest, it is strongly encouraged to disclose it. DatGuyTalkContribs 20:09, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I am reconfirming that I am not a paid employee of anywhere for wikipedia Phillypaboy123 (talk) 20:13, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  11:30, 21 January 2024 (UTC)