Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Insaankhan/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets

 * ( original case name)


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

- Shujakhan88 moved a sandbox in the userspace of Insaan1986 to attempt to create Draft:BitRaser / Draft:Bitraser. The COI declaration on both User Pages are word for word identical as well. - Rich T&#124;C&#124;E-Mail 12:17, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

that is my account I had created, but did not use it for the same, Please consider this as my noviceness. Please advice on the same. In the meantime i am trying to delete that username/id. I dont know how to delete but i will research and delete insaan1986. Because i dont want to use it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shujakhan88 (talk • contribs) 12:23, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

i dont know how to delete the account, so the only summation is that I dont want to use insaan1986 and you can delete it or remove it. Consider this as my ignorance and carelessness in creating two accounts and then using only one.

Please help or guide. Shujakhan88 (talk) 12:31, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

could you check as well? That is another Bitraser related SPA, who made the same edits to List of data-erasing software (cf Shujakhan88 and Stonu2003), was told that the list only includes links to existing Wikipedia articles, and when Shujakhan88 had created BitRaser in articlespace, Stonu2003 added it to the list article in. --bonadea contributions talk 15:48, 21 September 2021 (UTC)


 * @Bonadea I'm confused about, "That is another Bitraser related SPA". Is there some previous case this is related to which I'm not finding? -- RoySmith (talk) 16:31, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - I've blocked Insaan1986 without tags. Please move the case to Shujakhan88 and close. Bbb23 (talk) 13:59, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Based on 's comments, I think a CU is in order. Stonu2003 is either yet another account of the same person, or, at a minimum, a meat puppet. I'll leave it up to the clerk whether to move the case first before considering a CU.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:01, 21 September 2021 (UTC)


 * - There's no doubt that insaan1986 and Shujakhan88 are the same from both behavior and their statement in this SPI. The question for CU is mostly if Stonu2003 is also the same person. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:52, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
 * - ~TNT (she/they • talk) 20:04, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
 * are ✅ to . . Keep open while I finish conducting sleeper checks please ~TNT (she/they • talk) 20:10, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
 * ~TNT (she/they • talk) 20:13, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
 * For the scripts and the lazy (i.e.: me):
 * --Blablubbs (talk) 21:20, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Shujakhan88 isn't the oldest account - that would be Insaankhan, which was created in 2008 (!). However, that account made a total of one edit, three years ago, so I'd rather move the case under the next oldest active account, which is StellarBitRaser., , - any thoughts? Thanks, Spicy (talk) 15:59, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't know that there's any hard and fast rule on this, but moving it to the oldest makes the most sense to me. The only times I know of when we don't do that is when there's a well known case and years down the line we discover an older account; moving it at that point would just disrupt institutional memory.  That's not an issue here.  The interesting thing is that Insaankhan hasn't edited in 3 years, yet TNT was able to confirm them to Shujakhan88.  I assume that means there was some other recent event (perhaps just logging in) that was visible to CU, so they actually are active in some sense.  Of course, you've asked three different people for advice, so I expect you'll get at least three different conflicting opinions. :-) -- RoySmith (talk) 16:09, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
 * No one asked me. I agree with Roy's reasoning and conclusion. Is this a vote?--Bbb23 (talk) 16:16, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Apologies, just wanted to make sure I was doing the correct thing - I'll move the case under Insaankhan. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 16:22, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
 * No need for apologies, it was a perfectly reasonable question. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:32, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
 * @Spicy: For what it's worth, I think there is more than one defensible opinion here; I have for example, previously not moved to zero-edit sleepers, or kept cases under a CBANned master, even if they technically weren't the oldest account. From a practical perspective, you could make an argument that it wouldn't have mattered if you had pretended not to notice the account ages and just closed this in place (you'd likely be correct in making it), and that has by far the most edits and can hence be functionally considered the master. I would have definitely not moved to, since they also only made a small number of edits and aren't that much older than the rest. In the end, I think it's not a big deal either way as long as the tags are a) consistent and b) have some reasonable master (by far the oldest, by far the most active, by far the most well-known); the "procedurally correct" and safe option is always to move to the oldest account, though. --Blablubbs (talk) 16:56, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Moved case to oldest account, retagged socks, closing. Spicy (talk) 16:41, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
 * @Spicy: For what it's worth, I think there is more than one defensible opinion here; I have for example, previously not moved to zero-edit sleepers, or kept cases under a CBANned master, even if they technically weren't the oldest account. From a practical perspective, you could make an argument that it wouldn't have mattered if you had pretended not to notice the account ages and just closed this in place (you'd likely be correct in making it), and that has by far the most edits and can hence be functionally considered the master. I would have definitely not moved to, since they also only made a small number of edits and aren't that much older than the rest. In the end, I think it's not a big deal either way as long as the tags are a) consistent and b) have some reasonable master (by far the oldest, by far the most active, by far the most well-known); the "procedurally correct" and safe option is always to move to the oldest account, though. --Blablubbs (talk) 16:56, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Moved case to oldest account, retagged socks, closing. Spicy (talk) 16:41, 29 September 2021 (UTC)