Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gmhusain/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

User has previously been sanctioned for disruptive editing and socks, including one eliminated account. Strong COI suspected evident in Talk page and article on Adaptogen. See IP users 37.208.22.209 and 27.63.55.26. Zefr (talk) 13:46, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Yep I agree that this is DUCK. the RW Panossian was a leader at the Swedish Herbal Institute (which is a dietary supplement company that has tried like crazy to market "adaptogens") and recently moved to another dietary supplement company.
 * The two users and two IPs are all SPA for adaptogens, each cite Panossian's work, their edit notes are the exact same style, and both write with the same authoritativeness of an expert in the field The new sock account seems to have been created in order to cite a work by Panossian that published very recently - that is what they added.  So yep, DUCK.  Jytdog (talk) 16:30, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

While you are looking it might make sense to compare to see if who did this which cites Panossian extensively and is marketingish, is another SOCK in this family.
 * another editor,
 * did this edit but they have edits about an institute in India so possibly is different (but is the same edit as the one by IP 27.63.55.26 diff Jytdog (talk) 16:55, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * What does this edit of your mean? I took a look at User talk:AlexanderPanossian and I don't see any "evidence".  Vanjagenije  (talk)  08:23, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry, this was a while ago and it was probably tagged incorrectly/done improperly. I think I meant that from reading the discussion at User talk:AlexanderPanossian and in combination with the editing pattern of both accounts at Adaptogen (and revision history), I felt there was enough behavioral evidence to issue a preventative block on as it was possibly being used abusively (contrary to, as the account was stale at the time) and tagged it as sockmaster (being the oldest account, created in 2014 although the user claimed to be "new"). Alex ShihTalk 08:44, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Do you think AlexanderPanossian should be indeffed as a sockpuppet of Anonymous.psy?  Vanjagenije  (talk)  09:11, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
 * My opinion is that should be indeffed for clear violation of conflict of interest, and I think there should be a CU check for sleepers since the COI editing has been ongoing at Adaptogen for the past several months, involving different users/IPs (courtesy ping to  for potentially more input). Alex ShihTalk 09:23, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Sock indeffed and tagged, IPs are stale. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  16:51, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Please, compare to the two blocked accounts.  is .  Vanjagenije   (talk)  17:53, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Gmhusain is to the two blocked accounts (I suspect there are some proxies involved). Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:14, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I've looked at Gmhusain and I know which way I'm leaning, but I'd appreciate a second opinion., would you be so kind as to oblige? Thanks, GABgab 00:34, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Gmhusain is related to the sockmaster, considering they started editing the same article right after the master was blocked. Combined with the "Possible" CU, I'd call that a proved theory. -- QEDK ( 愛  •  海 ) 08:23, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree, . Since it's the older account, I moved the case and retagged. Closing. GABgab 15:04, 18 October 2017 (UTC)