Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HinduKshatrana/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Apparently resorted to sockpuppetry since he has been warned enough on his talk page for recent disruption.

Compare the diffs here:


 * on Bodanones
 * on Abhira dynasty.
 * on Bhandaria, Bhavnagar

. Wareon (talk) 16:15, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Socking is still going on, but now his IP is changed but the IP range is still the same. Can you take a look? Abhishek0831996 (talk) 07:59, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I agree this appears to be HinduKshatrana, but they haven't edited while logged out recently enough for me to block any IPs. Left a warning on their talk page; if this continues, blocks may be in order. GeneralNotability (talk) 01:17, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

IP socking is continuing: Heheya Kingdom, Abhira dynasty.

Engaging in IP socking even after warning by . Abhishek0831996 (talk) 09:02, 17 October 2021 (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

 * Both pages protected. Nothing more to do. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  16:34, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
Many of these accounts are blocked for socking while some are not, some seems like sleeper accounts, a year old with single digit edits and then sudden activity. Almost every accounts has some pages that are common and most account has activity only on those articles, nothing else. Some even have similar names like HinduKshatrana and KshatranaHindu. There has been quite a rise in socking and disruptive editing on Ahir caste related pages, atleast two separate SPI blocked quite a big group of them but I suspect these are also related to those accounts. Many accounts are created and then discarded after a few edits. Their usual target pages are Yaduvanshi Aheer, Hindu Ghosi, Jadaun, Ahirwal, Ahirwada, Ahir clans, Yadava, Ahir, Krishnaut, Ahar caste Gopa, Abhira tribe, Indian rebellion of 1857, Gadariya where all these accounts edits are mostly similar reverting or editing. This is quite a big arena, and many of the new socks are creating too much trouble on many pages, if a checkuser could run a check on them whether these blocked accounts are related to these other accounts or not. Sajaypal007 (talk) 10:27, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Can you reopen the SPI? I am seeing some good amount of similarities and will post them under 24 hours. Abhishek0831996 (talk) 14:56, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * -, you've listed something like a dozen accounts. Several of them are blocked already under other sockpuppet investigations and others haven't edited in months, and your justification boils down to "interested in the same topic" which is not sufficient.
 * GeneralNotability (talk) 21:46, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
 * No diffs provided. This looks like a fishing expedition. Closing. Spicy (talk) 11:58, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
 * you may open another filing if you wish. Spicy (talk) 14:58, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets

 * KshatranaHindu moved Ahir clans to Yadav clans, while HinduKshatrana is mentioning "Yadav" at the first sentence of this article.
 * On Hindu Ghosi, HinduKshatrana mentions on lead that the subject traces origins to "Yaduvanshi Ahirs" while KshatranaHindu removes mention of "Krishnavanshi" to keep it limited to "Yaduvanshi".
 * Tag team edit war on Jadaun show 100% identical edits.

. Abhishek0831996 (talk) 16:18, 18 April 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) 15:09, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * CU data says these are ❌. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:42, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, in that case the only scenario I can see here is a joe job., closing. --Blablubbs (talk) 13:47, 20 April 2022 (UTC)