Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hardeep Delhi/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

The user/users have been constantly reverting the changes to include a list of shops and supermarket stores that has been pointed out to be violating WP:NOTDIRECTORY policies. There have been persistent edits from random IP addresses to include a list of shops and addresses to the Jorhat article although was scrapped previously by Adamstraw99, besides me. The user had also attempted to include info. in the Jorhat article in an advertising tone in 2017. Furthermore, the user behaviour suggests insertion of useless info. only to one sp. article, that is Jorhat. The article in itself requires a lot of clean-up as contains a lot of WP:SYNTHESIS, but disruptive edits to include useless, let alone information violating policies make it very difficult to keep the page relevant. Furthermore, the user communicates via the talk page in a disrespecting tone which is a direct violation of WP:EQ. Besides all these, the user/s (with same name aliases) also make legal threats, a direct violation of the WP:THREAT policy! Please refer User talk:Hardeep Delhi for more info. I would also nominate the article for protection to prevent disruptive edits. AnjanBorah (talk) 00:10, 18 April 2018 (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

 * Hardeep Delhi and Hardeep111 are probably the same person. That said, Hardeep111's last edit was in September 2017 and Hardeep Delhi's first edit was in April 2018, so the most likely explanation is that the person in question forgot the password for their old account or forgot about the account completely. There's no real abuse of multiple accounts here. With respect to the IPs, yeah, they were probably also the same person, but there's been no edits from them for two months, so blocking them would serve no purpose. All in all, no action is warranted here. --Deskana (talk) 14:53, 15 June 2018 (UTC)