Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Highpeaks35/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Similar nationalist edits and reverts. Seems to be a sleeper account earlier but has become active ever since Highpeaks35 was topic-banned from India-related pages. Editing articles related to history and cuisine of South Asia and replacing names of other countries with India or Indian Subcontinent, classic trait of Highpeaks35. Involved in disputes where Highpeaks35 was involved in.

Here are some of the many edits where he tried to restore versions preferred by Highpeaks35,
 * Gotitbro 26 October 2019
 * Highpeaks35 13 April 2019
 * Gotitbro, 28 October 2019
 * Highpeaks35, 11 July 2018
 * Gotitbro, 26 October 2019
 * Highpeaks35, 24 March 2019
 * Gotitbro, 26 October 2019
 * Highpeaks35, 8 June 2018 Za-ari-masen (talk) 21:08, 11 January 2020 (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

 * ❌ ST47 (talk) 21:19, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Closing. Cabayi (talk) 08:28, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

All of these IPs are from the same ISP. Display the same nationalist behaviour as Highpeaks35, i.e. replacing Bangladesh with the phrase "Bengal region from the Indian subcontinent". Have been restoring versions preferred by Highpeaks35 in the same articles where Highpeaks has a history of edit wars as Highpeaks35 has been sanctioned from editing South Asia related articles.

Also, requesting a check if there is any sleeper accounts of Highpeaks35. Za-ari-masen (talk) 14:42, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Would like to add another IP. Same interests, same pattern of edits and use of same wordings in talkpages like Highpeaks35 (jingoism etc.). Za-ari-masen (talk) 05:37, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Another one,.

As part of the behavioral evidence, some of the IPs have interacted in different talkpages and a close look at their signature style would reveal the same pattern used by Highpeaks35, they all add an extra pair of brackets "" to their signature. Highpeaks35, 96.240.28.30, 2600:1001:b003:5c82:61d3:209d:ca6e:5364. Za-ari-masen (talk) 10:15, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Adding another two, , . The two appears when gets blocked for block evasion and has been edit warring in a similar fashion. Za-ari-masen (talk) 13:51, 13 February 2020 (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
We don't publicly disclose the IP(s) of named accounts. CU declined.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:26, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * This report appears to be a continuation of 's edit war on Bakarkhani against IPs &, an article from which both Z & G have been partially blocked. I'm reluctant to spend time as Za-ari-masen's cat's paw or to see SPI used as the big stick in an edit war. I'd close if I hadn't closed the last report, so I'll leave it as a clerknote Cabayi (talk) 11:11, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't even see an initial block nor edits from the user in the past 7 months. So any violation of the sock policy would be extremely thin if it did exist. I'm not sure what block evasion was referring to on 96.240.28.30, but either way, I don't fancy blocking an entire range of /36 Verizon wireless regardless if this case had merit. Therefore i'm closing. --  Amanda  (aka DQ) 02:33, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

(and many more IPs in the range 2600:1001:B000::/42 - they change by the minute)

Highpeaks35 was formerly a very active editor, who hasn't edited from their account since they were indefinitely topic-banned from India-related articles last June, see:. I don't see any indication that the ban was lifted. Maybe the paperwork wasn't done right, as this range was already reported in the previous report but the closing admin seemed to think there was no block/ban in place. Also, the previous reporter provided few diffs.

Here are some diffs of IPs repeating past edits of Highpeaks35, for the examples the previous reporter gave:
 * replacing Bangladesh with the phrase "Bengal region from the Indian subcontinent"
 * In Shorshe ilish, IP:, , Highpeaks35:
 * In Sandesh (confectionery), IP:, Highpeaks35: ,
 * In Mishti doi, IP:, Highpeaks35: ,
 * In Jalfrezi, IP:, , Highpeaks35:
 * Others are easily found...
 * same wordings in talkpages like Highpeaks35 (jingoism etc.)
 * IP: Highpeaks35:,  (in edit summaries)

The subject of India is Highpeaks35's focus, mostly in food and history articles. One of their main preoccupations is repeatedly adding "Indian subcontinent", especially replacing "South Asia" or other names. This was one of the issues leading to their topic ban; see these discussions and sanctions:, as well as: , , , etc. There are hundreds of examples of such edits in their history. The IPs exhibit the same habit and patterns.

It appears they've been extensively editing India-related articles while logged out for at least the past month or so, and continuing the same behavior they were topic-banned for. The listed IPs are wireless IPV6 addresses, a few of many between 2600:1001:B000:* and 2600:1001:B02F:*, within the range 2600:1001:B000::/42. The majority of the edits in that range lately are theirs, but not all. The edits start about 20 January 2020. The range was blocked from March through October 2019, for unrelated vandalism.

The IPs geolocate to New Jersey/New York area, which fits with the information on Highpeaks35's user page noting their favorite hiking areas are in New York State, as well as the IP 96.240.28.30 that was previously blocked as a sock. Highpeaks35 revealed their IP a couple of times in January 2019, having the same geolocation, network, and in an adjacent range 2600:1001:B100::/43; see and  (this was part of an ANI report that also included evidence of abusively editing while logged out) as well as this:. I don't see any other obvious edits in that range though.

There are edits showing what is obviously Highpeaks35 editing from the 2600:1001:B000::/42 range over a period of several years. In the days just before their account was created, there are numerous edits adding "Indian subcontinent" with the edit summary improve accuracy, see: 2600:1001:B00F:4C54:BC22:DD55:B6DC:5713, 2600:1001:B023:DFE4:CDAE:B526:53FD:EA52, 2600:1001:B02B:2BAB:DC11:CBD7:2B9A:77B2, 2600:1001:B00C:9A30:581F:752A:36F1:215, etc. Compare to several hundred with the same edit and summary by Highpeaks35 immediately after, and over the following two years:. Other edit summaries like "adding geography" or "historical geography" are sometimes used. For example, see these nearly identical edits changing "South Asia" to "Indian subcontinent" with the summary move to historical geography, December 2017 - January 2018, IPs:, , , , ; Highpeaks35: , , and change to more accurate geography, Highpeaks35, 2019: , IPs, 2020: , or many other very similar edits from IPs in 2020: , , etc.

Following the account creation, edits from the IP range dropped off, though there were still a few that are obviously them editing while logged out, for example making the same "Indian subcontinent" edit with "improve accuracy" summary, 2018:, , and continuing an edit war from December to February 2018 in Naan. They seem to have stopped using "improve accuracy" after receiving warnings about it.

In the recent IP edits, just in today and yesterday's edits alone:, , , , , , , , , , , ,. Compare also the edit summary of the last one: sorry, geography is most accurate per the sources. Nation states did not exist in the 1600s, when Kulfi originated with this one of Highpeaks35 also changing a food origin: modern nation states did not exist during that period, as well as:  Indian subcontinent covers modern day nation states.

Other recent "Indian subcontinent" edits by the IPs:, , , , , edit-warring in Momo (food) in late Feburary (compare Highpeaks35's edits to the same article, and similar edits and edit-warring from the IP range going back to July 2017) and many more.

More specific is that things, especially food, are native to the Indian subcontinent - IPs:, , , , ; Highpeaks35: , , ; and even more specifically, that things are intertwined with the broader Indian subcontinent - IPs: , , , Highpeaks35: , , , , , , etc.

Although the IPs haven't used Highpeaks35's signature edit summary "tweak", many of them parrot other distinctive ones such as:
 * recent IP: adding geography to help new readers
 * recent IP: adding images relevant to the section to help new readers
 * recent IP: clarifying to help new readers
 * recent IP: Fixing the lead sentence to help new readers
 * Highpeaks35: Fix grammar error, minor addition to help new readers and other edits
 * Highpeaks35: improve caption to help new readers
 * Highpeaks35: I added it to help new readers and prevent anachronism. (on talk page)
 * 2017 IP: minor note to help explain the subject to new readers
 * reverse to the last clean version (note "reverse" instead of "revert"; also many of these are reverting removals of "Indian subcontinent") IPs:, , , , , , etc.; Highpeaks35: , , , , , , etc. etc.; 2018 logged-out IPs: ,
 * many minor variations of ‎remove poorly written and unsourced content IPs:, , , , , , etc.; Highpeaks35: , , , , , , and many more.

There are various other typical edit summaries. Since there are such a large number of edits, it should be fairly easy to find more evidence if necessary, and I haven't really touched on their many edits to History of India and similar articles.

-- IamNotU (talk) 03:10, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks everyone for the comments, and for reopening it, my mistake for not putting the range in the IP list. I started reverting some of the obvious edits. Hopefully they'll realize the jig is up and quit socking, maybe take a year off. If so we won't need a range block or page protection. --IamNotU (talk) 17:24, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I looked through the top half of the evidence and it is indeed about as compelling a case as I have seen. --regentspark (comment) 01:45, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * IP edits too old. Closing. Bbb23 (talk) 18:10, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I put the /42 range in the list of suspected puppets (it was in the body of the report), which indicates more recent IP edits, and am reopening.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:34, 11 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Given the blatant and extensive evasion of the topic-ban and the recurrence of the issues that led to that topic-ban, I am indefinitely blocking with the first year of the block being in the form of an AE-action.
 * Unfortunately, I don't believe it is feasible to block the /42 range without considerable collateral damage and the list of targeted articles is too wide to semi-protect them all. So we may need to deal with continued topic-ban/block-evasion, which is likely, with piecemeal reverts. Unless, or  have further thoughts or suggested actions, I believe this report can be closed. Abecedare (talk) 15:02, 12 March 2020 (UTC)