Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Iranzamin-Iranzamin/Archive

07 December 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Iranzamin-Iranzamin was a new account created Oct 2; they then got tangled up in a series of ongoing edit wars on Madai, followed by new account Jezebel1349 on Nov 29 who immediately joined in the edit wars on that page as well. See: ANI, where Jezebel1349 gets blocked for a series of nasty personal attacks after a 3RR/EW block. See also Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring The timing of two new accounts showing up on the same page, cooperating in a tag team manner etc. is somewhat suspicious. They both are very focused on Kurdish / ancient Turkic article topics, etc., though they primarily overlap (extensively) on Madai. Given one just got blocked for a week and the other one asked me to intervene and block the other party I am highly concerned this is a sock (though it's not 100% clear from mere duck test quite yet). Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 11:47, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Clerks haven't acted on this yet, and I wanted to re-emphasize the importance here.
 * Either this article has attracted a sockfarm who are being remarkably disruptive, OR we seriously need a lot of third opinion attention. Timing and behavioral suggestions of sockfarm are there but not conclusive.  Even if we bring in significant external uninvolved editors to review the content issue, the possibility of serious abuse would remain.  I personally am not convinced either way at this point.  CU is the only way to rule out a disruptive sockfarm.  Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 00:05, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

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

I live in Marmara Egitim Koyu and our IP is shared. Also I don't interested in Turkic ppl. If I were Jezebel, I cannot use my account too, because of blocking. Regards...Iranzamin-Iranzamin (talk) 11:54, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

His(Jezebel1349) first change on Madai is much more earlier than my discussion. Iranzamin-Iranzamin (talk) 11:58, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

And also he engaged in edit-war on Ural-Altaic languages with other user in the past, not only on Madai. Iranzamin-Iranzamin (talk) 12:05, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

It can investigate by checking my IP and his IP. But as I said, I use the university's common IP, not individual IP. And also it has nothing to do with the article Madai. Til is still engage in edit-wars and doesn't care third opinion. Why don't you do anything for it? '''And the IP who support him at talk-page could be his sock too. Why don't you investigate it? And another account who rv Jezebel's edits can also be his sock.''' Iranzamin-Iranzamin (talk) 12:17, 7 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't know what has suddenly made Madai such an attractive target for those who repeatedly blank info just because IDONTLIKEIT but there is a flood of them now and I cannot revert them all. Not that many editors seem to watch it.  One (Jezebel1349) targeted the references to the Kachin, another (Iranzamin-Iranzamin) goes after the references to Mitanni, while a third under various names (most recently Inanna-Inanna) will blank out any mention whatsoever of Kurds despite copious references to Mad in Kurdish tradition. They all do seem to share the same insulting habit of personal attacks against me when I restore the referenced information, though - and they are all SPA, redlinked names. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 14:21, 7 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I just added User:Inanna-nanna a SPA who a little while ago blanked out "Kurds" from Madai and may possibly be connected with either Jezebel, Iranzamin-Iranzamin or both. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 14:37, 7 December 2013 (UTC)


 * LOL. I am the person who added Kurd-related categories to the Madai such as Category:Kurdish people whereas user Inanna-nanna the person who has reverted them. And you say he or she is my sock. You are just laugable. Iranzamin-Iranzamin (talk) 16:22, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Note: These are my edits on Madai : https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Madai&diff=582274806&oldid=582242804

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Madai&diff=582274669&oldid=582274163

And this is Inanna-nannas' edit:


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Madai&diff=584983790&oldid=584978993

Inanna-nanna is not me but as I've said I use university's common/shared IP, it's not my individual IP. Iranzamin-Iranzamin (talk) 16:46, 7 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I said may possibly be connected, not for sure, that's why it bears looking into. Madai is an article about a minor biblical character, that over the past 10 years I've watched it and worked on it, hasn't attracted all that much raging controversy. Then, within a space of one or two days, suddenly in December 2013 we get 3 new editors with redlinked names, each hacking away at a different piece of referenced material to the point of 4RR. J deleted the references to Kachin Madai, I-n deletes references to Kurds, and you delete references to Mitanni.  All roughly around the same time.  So either something is going on or maybe a bunch of people in Kurdistan recently got internet access perhaps.  But any new editor that wants to make lasting contributions here should read WP:BRD about how to avoid edit wars.  For articles about who an obscure biblical character may or may not be connected with, one scholar's speculation is typically as good as another's, since the existence of the biblical character is not falsifiable in the first place, scholars are rarely in agreement, and it's all speculation anyway.  That is why this article, to be neutral, should include ALL of the speculations that various scholars have proposed, including even Kurd, Kachin, and Mitanni, setting aside whether we as editors personally think Madai existed or who his descendants could have been, and not try to pick and choose our favorite ones and argue over which ones get to be mentioned and which don't. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 17:01, 7 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Because it seems on "recent changes" and it is normal "according to me". The IP(Virginia?) in other words your baby and another user recently interest in artcile too. Iranzamin-Iranzamin (talk) 17:05, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Huh??? Which baby is that? What are you talking about? Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 17:10, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
 * The link you just added is to an IP in Canberra, Australia, so I'm still unclear what your point is? Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 19:46, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

He or she is interested in article too. And this IP comments only to support you. Iranzamin-Iranzamin (talk) 19:48, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
 * So what? It is someone I don't know in Canberra, Australia, and certainly no "baby" of mine! Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 19:50, 8 December 2013 (UTC)


 * "So what?" This IP can also be your sock too. And also you said "baby", not me. Iranzamin-Iranzamin (talk) 19:57, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

And this :https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Auric Iranzamin-Iranzamin (talk) 19:59, 8 December 2013 (UTC)


 * No, they cannot be my sock. You are the one under investigation presently, not me, and you are the one who said "baby" first, earth to zamin Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 20:03, 8 December 2013 (UTC)


 * If I open a investigtion page for you, you will be "under the investigation" too. You called this IP "baby" on talk-page. You can look at talk-page. It is not hard to find. Iranzamin-Iranzamin (talk) 20:09, 8 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Oh, you're right, I forgot I did call that IP 'baby' and also 'Virginia' on Dec. 5 at Talk:Madai, but I was being sarcastic and colloquial! probably shouldn't do that so much... And if you want to investigate whether or not I am an IP in Canberra (who is arguing against me now) and / or User:Auric (ping), be my guest...! Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 22:57, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

It means that s/he knows you before and the IP's joined the Wikipedia on 5 December 2013 and its most of comments about Madai. Iranzamin-Iranzamin (talk) 23:27, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
 * The IP said that: There you go Til, you're now an Indian, by Vishnu! How many does this make? You should keep a list :) 
 * Perhaps they noticed that over the years many novice editors have angrily accused me of belonging to many disparate races or nationalities when they ran out of other arguments, but none of them has been correct yet! Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 23:33, 8 December 2013 (UTC) I don't think he mean to imply that I am actually from India, if that's where you got that idea. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 23:34, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Wow, my first time being accused of being a sock, I feel so honored! Seriously though, I'm in Canada, which makes it rather hard for me to be Til's sock.-- Auric    talk  23:58, 8 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I am not sure about you, but location have nothing to do with it. One can be his friend and write comments to support him and edit the article to avoid 3RR. The IP that I've mentioned is so...Iranzamin-Iranzamin (talk) 00:02, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * That is not what a sock is.-- Auric    talk  00:16, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * It is meatpuppet, according to my investigation. Iranzamin-Iranzamin (talk) 00:18, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Just thought I better clarify the identity of the mysterious IP from Canberra: it's me! If you look at my Talk page you'll find it says I've retired from wiki. Would that that were true, but I'm weak. Yes, I do know Til, he's a merry prankster from way back and I enjoy teasing him, which is why I made that comment about him becoming an Indian - I'm well aware that he's been accused of belonging to just about every nation on Earth, and possibly the Vogons as well. Generally speaking I don't support Til's world-view, but I've always found him to be reasonable and fair provided you treat him seriously (which, alas, I don't always do - like I said, I enjoy teasing him). Anyway, hope that clears up who the mysterious Camberran is. PiCo (talk) 00:19, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I am talking about ''MEATPUPPET. And you did support him BEFORE I mentioned it there. Then, you began to disaggreeing with him just AFTER my words about it. Iranzamin-Iranzamin (talk) 00:26, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I never agreed with him: I made a jocular reference to his being accused of being an Indian, then I suggested some better sources to him, then I used those sources myself to replace what he'd written, and he reverted me. PiCo (talk) 02:40, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I am going to sleep and I have no time for these kinds of superfluous things. I'll write tomorrow about it. Regards...Iranzamin-Iranzamin (talk) 00:30, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Despite the third opinion suggestion about Mitanni, Til is obssessively adding Mitanni-related informations to the article. Iranzamin-Iranzamin (talk) 00:47, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Am not. And it's been locked again for a week, so we will have all that time now to get more opinions on whether or not we can use sources that suggest a link between Madai and Mitanni, despite your reasoning that all these sources must be mistaken. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 02:44, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Just stop making propaganda here. No one need your "explanations" about the topic here. Because they are able to read and thus, they can understand everything by reading the talk page. Iranzamin-Iranzamin (talk) 13:51, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Most of it written by you. So I guess you are saying YOUR "explanations" are allowed, but mine are not.  What a boss. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 14:44, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * You are just distorting my words smart guy but it doesn't work here. Find yourself a "real" job. Regards...Iranzamin-Iranzamin (talk) 14:50, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Ooh! You're clearly way more experienced at editing wikipedia than I, so how 'bout I just let you "show me the ropes"...! Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 15:05, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Note: Is this IP belongs to you PiCo? Iranzamin-Iranzamin (talk) 13:51, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes - I realised Til was right about Kachin Madai being ancestor to all Kachin, so removed that phrase. PiCo (talk) 22:13, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
 * And this IP belongs you too? Iranzamin-Iranzamin (talk) 22:16, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
 * They are from different locations, if I am not mistaken. Iranzamin-Iranzamin (talk) 22:20, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I suggest you find interests outside Wikipedia, and away from the computer - the real world isn't here.PiCo (talk) 22:59, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Is it the answer of my question?! I don't think so. And also you should suggest it to your friend-if you are not sock(or meat) of him. Iranzamin-Iranzamin (talk) 00:17, 10 December 2013 (UTC)'''

Per WP:MEAT, "meatpuppet" is a very extreme, derogatory and ugly term that is sure to enflame any conversation. What is the difference between "meatpuppetry" and WP:CANVASS anyway? (NOTE: I have not engaged in either one online of offline, other than to try onsite to get an uninvolved 3rd party to comment on the Mitanni issue, and I am still waiting for that to happen.) I think with "meatpuppetry" what they have in mind is more something like a husband and wife both editing with separate accounts from the same computer or location and supporting each other. It's not like a card you can play whenever you are in a dispute on wikipedia and for example five editors are all disagreeing with you and you say something like "Oh yeah, well the five editors who disagree with me can all be defined as MEATPUPPETS of each other, because they all share the same opinion, therefore they all lose and I win!" No, that's not what it is supposed to mean. And anyway, when have PiCo and I ever agreed on anything? (Well almost never!) Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 15:18, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
 * You thought that we all idiots. Briefly, ppl are able to read and they can understand what's going on. Thus, I am not going to write here ,if nobody manipulate me. Iranzamin-Iranzamin (talk) 15:39, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh no I never said anyone was idiots! I have been hoping to get a third opinion on Mitanni at Talk:Madai for a long time now and my previous attempt only got the comment "TLDR" ("Too long, didn't read") before branching into other issues beside our impasse over Mitanni.  The whole page is TLDR and confusing, so I don't think it's out of place to stress that the only issue you and I have argued about is the Mitanni one, with all the competing non-Mitanni issues that are cropping up simultaneously on the same topic. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 16:10, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
 * You are distorting everthing and just making your own propaganda. Therefore, they must read the talk page instead of looking your or even my "briefs" about the issue despite TLDR. Actually it's not longer than this page. And I was talking about socks and meats, not 3rd opinons. Anyway, as I've said, I am not going to write things here and there not to make it longer. Everything was said about the issue by you and me. Thus, it is time to wait. Iranzamin-Iranzamin (talk) 20:15, 10 December 2013 (UTC)


 * The problem is solved in talk-page. We've reached a consensus and decided to add these sentences to the article: "Madai is assaociated with Medes in Biblical sources and by vast majority of scholars. On the other hand there are some scholars that have associated Madai with Matienne, Mitanni and Mannae in addition to Medes." In order to solve other conroversies such as Kachin, there are 5 days. Regards, Iranzamin-Iranzamin (talk) 23:50, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
,, and .--Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 22:00, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
 * The following accounts are ✅ from eachother, , , ,
 * Addendum: It is likely that the master is using a shared/school IP, however the overlap in editor interaction and usernames is telling (save for who has no edits and a dissimilar name). --Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots  22:14, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Master and confirmed socks all tagged and blocked indef. Closing now. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:23, 12 December 2013 (UTC)