Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jabramse/Archive

14 March 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

The IPs 81.141.94.0 and 5.80.230.221 edited the article Ravi Zacharias recently. There was an edit war. On the talk page, Jabramse admitted that these two IPs are used by him.

The IP 81.141.94.0 edited the article Cochin Jews on 17 February 2015 and 25 February 2015. The IP 5.80.230.221 edited the articles Knanaya and Essenes on 7 March 2015 and 11 March 2015 respectively. Today, on 14 March 2015, the IP 81.141.94.141 made edits to the article Saint Thomas Christians. The edits made by these 3 IPs are similar in nature.

It seems that, to confuse others, the same user has created a new account Josslined (talk) which is similar to my username and this new account has edited the article Saint Thomas Christians today. Jossyys (talk) 12:01, 14 March 2015 (UTC)


 * All the 3 IP addresses traced to the same location   (Country: United Kingdom, State: Oxfordshire, City Location: Oxford).


 * Please check these two edit summaries . Jossyys (talk) 01:30, 15 March 2015 (UTC)


 * This was the first response from Josslined. Please note that the tone of the user changed considerably after the location of the 3 IP addresses added here. Jossyys (talk) 04:39, 15 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Additional Information
 * The account Jabramse was created by the person who was using two IP addresses 81.141.94.0 and 5.80.230.221.
 * The account Josslined was created by the person who was using the IP address 81.141.94.141.
 * The changes made by these 3 IP addresses to different articles are similar in nature   and they have been traced to the same location as explained earlier.
 * What I am saying is that these 3 IP addresses are used by the same person and we have two accounts Jabramse and Josslined directly connected to these 3 IP addresses. Though the new accounts Jabramse and Josslined have not edited the same article, both Jabramse and Josslined and the three IP addresses directly connected to them have made many similar edits. Jossyys (talk) 12:48, 15 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Please check these edits: both Jabramse and Josslined use the term "rogue editor" to address other users  . Jossyys (talk) 14:26, 15 March 2015 (UTC)


 * The IP address 81.141.94.141 chose a username Josslined which is very much similar to my username and the first edit by Josslined was to undo the user's own IP edit which was reverted by me earlier . Was it intended to trick others? Can I object to the use of such a misleading username by another editor? Jossyys (talk) 02:32, 16 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Please notice the usage of the words: "plausible" and "let alone"  . Jossyys (talk) 03:02, 16 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Please see the usage of the words: "may have" and "may have been" . Jossyys (talk) 05:48, 16 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Please check these edits: both Jabramse and Josslined have made edits based on a person's "Nambudiri Brahmin origin" . Jossyys (talk) 23:34, 16 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep it clear


 * Has raided FreeKnowledgeCreator.
 * ,, same lecture about "great great great grandmother".


 * are same. Josslined registered his account only after he found his IP 81.141.94.141 being discriminated.
 * Interested in St Thomas, and has same view concerning role of Jews in this context.
 * Jossyys is correct about the "Nambudiri Brahmin origin".


 * same locations.  Occult Zone  (Talk • Contributions • Log) 06:51, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Can be closed as no action.  Occult Zone  (Talk • Contributions • Log) 02:03, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

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

Points to consider:
 * 1) I am just a user who was editing the Saint Thomas Christians article, without an account.
 * 2)  Jossyys accused me of 'sockpuppetry', for not having an account while editing. All the edits made by me on this article have just one IP address.
 * 3) None of the alleged IP accounts or users have been collaborating in editing the Saint Thomas Christians article.
 * 4) 2 of the IP address, 81.141.94.0, and 5.80.230.221, were used by Jabramse before that account was created, in a completely different article, and clearly not as sockpuppets.
 * 5) I made it clear that the IP address 81.141.94.141  was mine, in the article history. I created this account in response to the first accusation of being a sockpuppet, for not having an account.
 * 6) The nature of my edits are not questioned, and there is currently no dispute to their contents.
 * 7) No evidence of Sockpuppetting is hence provided. Josslined (talk) 15:33, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Point of clarification: Ips associated with Jabramse and the IP asscoiated with me and my account HAVE NOT EDITED the same articles.Josslined (talk) 17:21, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

I would like to request that this investigation be terminated now:


 * 1) There is sufficient evidence to prove that there has been no sockpuppeting.
 * 2) There has been NO ATTEMPT at proving improper use of multiple accounts, let alone significant evidence to suggest a common user. All Jossyys claims he/she wants to prove that the 3 IPs and the two users are the same, which is NOT evidence for sockpuppetting.
 * 3) Enough time has been spent on this misguided attempt to malign a contributor.

I would also like to point out Wikipedia Guidlines:

" Anyone who uses multiple accounts in good faith is not violating any policies, shall face no action, and no attempts shall be made to determine if such accounts are linked"

So given no allegation or evidence of improper use, it is patently against wikipedia rules to use this investigation as a pretext to determine whether or not some accounts are linked, which is what this investigation has become.

Josslined (talk) 00:51, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

@ Vanjagenije There is no evidence for Sock puppetry, not even what you call weak evidence. The so called weak evidence, i.e. both users use English language, and have edited about people or communities in Kerala, is not even weak evidence for the claim that they are the same person, which would not even be evidence for sock-puppetry.

Encouraging the pursuant of this investigation is against wikipedia policy as I have already stated. I am planning on appealing the conduct of this investigation which I consider it as a violation of my privacy and breaches the trust wikipedia had ensured to its contributors.

Also note Jossyys new 'evidence' is ridiculous. I corrected an article which wrongly stated someone was a Nambudiri Brahmin when he was a Saint Thomas Christian. This has no relation to Jabramse edits in a completely different article.

Stalking my activity and making requests for the IP addresses I use is something I am beginning to find as somewhat harassing and a violation of the privacy users are entitled to. Josslined (talk) 01:25, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * -, please provide some evidence of connection between Jabramse and Josslined (preferably some WP:diffs). I don't see any currently.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  11:01, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
 * , I don't understand this: what is the point of you requesting the CheckUser, when you openly say that those two users use different IPs? What would CU show us that we already do not know?  Vanjagenije  (talk)  14:59, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
 * My intention is to prove that the three IP addresses and the two accounts are used by a single person. Please advise me what to do. Jossyys (talk) 15:12, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
 * You have to show the connection (see:WP:SIGNS) between those IPs/accounts. By now, you only showed that they edited same article(s) and used same two words in their comment. That is now enough. Stronger evidence of sockpuppetry is needed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  15:27, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply. Could CheckUser be used to know whether Jabramse at any time used the IP address 81.141.94.141 and Josslined at any time used the IP address 81.141.94.0 / 5.80.230.221? Jossyys (talk) 15:54, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
 * No, we will not publicly connect an account to IP addresses. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:01, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
 * That being said, those three IP addresses belong to BT, and due to the nature of their networks, it's not unreasonable to suspect that they were all used by one person, but any connection will have to be based on behavioral evidence. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:05, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I shall look for more evidence. Jossyys (talk) 16:22, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Please tell whether CheckUser can reveal any other account that uses any of the three IP addresses given above. Josslined does not appear to be a newbie. Jossyys (talk) 13:07, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Technically: yes. WP:CheckUser is able do determinate which account uses which IPs. But, Wikipedia policies prevent CheckUser from conducting checks unless there is strong evidence of sockpuppetry. Also, CheckUser may never publicly reveal which account uses which IP, because of the privacy concerns. CheckUser may only reveal if two or more accounts use same IPs, but may not reveal which IPs are those. And that may be only done if there is sufficient evidence. So, in this case, CheckUser may only be used to tell if Jabramse and Josslined use the same IPs, but not to tell which IPs. But even for this we need some solid evidence, and the evidence you provided is weak. I don't say that there is no evidence at all, but what I say is that the evidence is weak. They use similar words in their comments and edit summaries, they made some similar edits, but that may very well be a coincidence. As about your second question: WP:IMPERSONATOR says that user may not choose username that is misleading, i.e. too similar to an existing username. But, Josslined is not very similar to Jossyys (that is just 4 letters out of 7), so I believe you have no ground to complain.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  17:23, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply. WP:IMPERSONATOR says that one should not choose a username that implies a relationship with an existing editor (unless the account is actually owned or the relationship is acknowledged by the editor themselves). In this case, both usernames start with "Joss." When everyone is free to choose any username, I do not understand, why the IP address 81.141.94.141 chose a username that implies a relationship with an existing editor who reverted the edits of the same IP address. The particular context in which the username Josslined was created, is also a matter to be considered. Jossyys (talk) 23:43, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I have added one more evidence. Please tell whether the investigation can start based on behavioral evidence, without using CheckUser. It has already been proved that all the three IP addresses traced to the same location. Jossyys (talk) 23:40, 16 March 2015 (UTC)


 * - The provided evidence is not enough. And, also, the Editor Interaction Tool shows that none of the accounts or IPs edited same pages concurrently, so even if they are run by the same person, there is nothing WP:ILLEGITitimate there.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  13:20, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
 * What I see from the evidence added by is that  was using those three IPs before he registered is user account. That is not sockpuppetry. The connection between him and  is still unproved. Evidence of that connection is very weak.  Vanjagenije   (talk)  19:06, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Closing with no action.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  08:44, 16 April 2015 (UTC)