Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/JithDominicJose04/Archive

03 September 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

This is a follow-up from this ANI discussion. I' meant to bring this to SPI a couple of weeks back, but I forgot. The accounts have created a veritable walled garden around some non-notable films and actors. It's obvious there's COI/paid editing involved as Kreativekkonect is a PR firm operating in the film industry. I've blocked the first two as suspected socks and have had a lot of images deleted at Commons too. The question is if these are socks or meats, and how many more there are. Some examples to link them are KKonnect 24x7, Jith Dominic Jose (both deleted, so no diffs). All accounts have the habit of adding unrelated references to articles to indulge in reference padding. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  16:07, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I suspect there are a lot more accounts that are related in some way, although they may not all be strictly sockpuppets. is almost certainly a sock, used only to strip deletion tags (as far as non-deleted edits go...).  created Vijesh Gopal, one of the articles that JithDominicJose04 has edited repeatedly. Another involved article, where JithDominicJose04 added an image in violation of copyright, had previously had another such image deleted. That article, Junaid Sheikh, was created by, an odd account that made one poorly-worded help desk post in 2006, then returned this May to begin editing in this topic area. Whether or not that account is related to JithDominicJose04, it is certainly related to , whose first edits were immediately to Abduraooft's nonstandard-named sandbox for the Junaid Sheikh article. I think the suggestion that this is all related to a PR firm / paid-editing enterprise is very likely. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 21:22, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * The following accounts are ✅:
 * is ❌.
 * is and is older than the master.
 * Blocked JithDominicJose04. I’ll leave the tagging and any other clerical issues (moving this to the stale master?) to others.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:28, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * While 's findings show technically unrelated, I can clearly say based on behavioral evidence that there's meat puppetry involved (based on the editing history of the articles I was able to match the two sets of accounts to two different cities 600km apart). Since the group involves a publicity firm, I'd hope we can rename to that name instead of the oldest account. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  03:52, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I've blocked referencing this SPI but did not tag, and also  as an obvious sockpuppet. I'm closing now so that the clerk/CU can decide what best to do with respect to the right title for this SPI and move/archive. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  19:26, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * While 's findings show technically unrelated, I can clearly say based on behavioral evidence that there's meat puppetry involved (based on the editing history of the articles I was able to match the two sets of accounts to two different cities 600km apart). Since the group involves a publicity firm, I'd hope we can rename to that name instead of the oldest account. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  03:52, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I've blocked referencing this SPI but did not tag, and also  as an obvious sockpuppet. I'm closing now so that the clerk/CU can decide what best to do with respect to the right title for this SPI and move/archive. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  19:26, 4 September 2015 (UTC)