Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/JournalmanManila/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

In the article Woman Jasper0070 add [|this edit] by put this painting which was uploaded by Theseeker2016. The image I think is irrelevant to the article. Then Cleaner880 defend and retrieve the Jasper0070 [|this edit]. Jasper0070 also pushed the very same image in Crown (headgear) by this edit [|this edit] and made a multiple image format [|this edit]. I deemed the addition as out of place; among photographs of real crowns, there appear an unknown low quality painting of a Philippines women wearing a crown that seems to be nothing but a peacockery; to add anything Philippines in some articles despite how irrelevant it might be. So I fixed and cleaned up the article. Then again Cleaner880 come to rescue and retrieved Jasper0070's [|this edit], and again [|this edit]. The similar image push also appeared in Thai wikipedia [|this edit] and this [|this edit], the pattern is same, Jasper0070 image push is defended and retrieved by Cleaner880. Also appeared in Greater India [|this edit], defended and retrieved by 112.198.242.130 [|this edit]. In Southeast Asia image pushing [|this edit] defended and retrieved by 112.198.242.130 [|this edit] In my talkpage 112.198.242.130, 112.198.246.17, 112.198.242.124, and Cleaner880 left messages protesting my edits and even accusing that there is a soo called "Indonesian hostilities against Philippines" [|this edit]. All of this peculiar actions has made me think that all these users might be the same person using different IPs and usernames. Then I looked for Jasper0070's talkpage and status, I learned that Jasper0070 was being blocked because of being the sockpuppet of JournalmanManila [|this edit]. I think 112.198.242.130, 112.198.246.17, 112.198.242.124, and Cleaner880 are block-evasion accounts of Jasper0070 and ultimately JournalmanManila.  Gunkarta  talk 22:04, 5 August 2017 (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

 * Cleaner880 . GABgab 00:57, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

In the article Kinnara, Parashurama007 retrieved JournalmanManila's edit here, and provides false refs here that after careful examination has mention nothing about kinnara. This false ref was probably an effort to try to trick other editors into carelessly overlooked doubtful edits, by seemingly provides valid references. Therefore I put the citation need tags that later Parashurama007 removed here. Parashurama007 modus operandi, and weird attachments to pre-Hispanic Philippines articles kind of suspiciously similar to JournalmanManila and his previous sock puppets, like his edits in Kingdom of Tondo here seems to the continuation of what JournalmanManila's will do to the article. JournalmanManila shows no respect to copyrights (that is why he was blocked in the first place). He also often add false refs, the references that after careful examination, contains nothing to supports his claims/edits. I think Parashurama007 is a block-evasion accounts of Cleaner880, Jasper0070 and ultimately JournalmanManila. He is a persistent sock puppet that keep coming back and shows no remorse. —  Gunkarta  talk 23:44, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Another suspicious action is in the article Senapati, JournalmanManila edit here and being removed since the addition is not quite relevant and its link to Filipino styized title of nobility is obscure, since it was simply means "general" in sanskrit. After JournalmanManila being blocked, Parashurama007 retrieved his previous edit here and here. All those Parasurama007 edits seems has a suspicious pattern and motifs, helping, supporting and retrieving JournalmanManila's and his socks such as Cleaner880's edits. —  Gunkarta  talk 08:48, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

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

I firmly believe that User:Parashurama007 is a sockpuppet of User:Cleaner880 who in turn is a sockpuppet of User:JournalmanManila. As evident by Parashurama007 and Cleaner880's edits in the article Chopsticks as seen here and here. (N0n3up (talk) 01:52, 21 August 2017 (UTC))


 * Just a newcomer and NO idea about their accusations
 * Honestly, do not understand why i have been called out here for SPI as i had been accused of a sock of these various accounts? Hey, let me tell you this is my only account and i do not know who are these users, and i do not have even an idea what they done here in short i just new comers but they look like messed up?.  Corresponding to Kinnara and chopsticks , i just found it up on a site (which i do not remembered because im so busy in real life) But according to wikipedia, Sources must be valid and in academic standards, (as blog sites are NOT allowed in wikipedia as a references) so i must wrong in choosing a site with wrong sources "I learend my mistake" . and I had been apologized to that user and aknowledge my wrong but instead he give me a rude repply that " don't trick us to your modus operandi and one of the socks" and "he keeps watching me"    its a clear biting  a new commer (WP:BITE)  as i learned my mistakes i appologized to them and never engage in a argument  plus  i have no idea of why these users had been blocked  and my mistake was also same to what have they done? but i admit on what i done so i learned it as i repeat. As i read and  know the policies , i carefully check the references i doing some checks on articles (specialy in Philippine-related) are doubtful if i found the statments are legit i just put a references on it of course based on  academic works (you can check it up) and suddenly i encountered a sub sections to indonesia and thailand of some  articles here in wikipedia with lack of  references and citation just a statements so  i put a unreferenced-tag (Maintenance tags) on to it (as wikipedeia demands a legal source on any statements) then on this day 8/21/17 i found my self being called up to an SPI investigation, honestly all what i said is the only thing ive done, Maybe this spi are only a WP:bite motive of gunkarta because hes the only one to first gave me a bite motive , as i said aside to that mistakes i do not have done wrong / or abused my account as a firstimer , i must learn which is valid sources i ain't ignorant of policies here as i read the guidelines. So its up to admins to decide, and i hope there's a second chance to a new comers here , what i done is due to my first time editor but i learned my mistake by prejudging me easily as a sock is not correct either , its clear this is against WP:AGF. Im inocent to those socks thanks you! (Parashurama007 (talk) 03:51, 21 August 2017 (UTC))
 * biting new comer and accuse me with the thing I never been encounter are not good if there was a problem you can revert it and tell what mistake was (and as I apologized ) but why you need to bring me up here and charge me of heavy accusations ? Its clear that you want my reputation in short this is a misunderstanding between an accused newcomer and rude old users here i  join wikipedia because i like to help and contribute   and i know nothing on  their absurd accusations against me.(Parashurama007 (talk) 04:42, 22 August 2017 (UTC))

'''THIS IS A KANGAROO COURT ! IVE DONE WORKING BASED ON ACADEMIC SOURCES BUT THIS IS WHAT I GET? BLOCKING BY UNJUST ACCUSATIONS!''' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.54.119.100 (talk) 07:01, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
— Berean Hunter   (talk)  12:29, 24 August 2017 (UTC) — Berean Hunter   (talk)  21:43, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
 * - to confirm socking and check for other accounts as the archive shows that he will likely have them.
 * I can clearly link to,  and . I've also blocked the related ✅ sock . There are some busy ranges at play, so sleepers aren't always obvious.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots  20:13, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Ponyo. Tagging and closing.

Suspected sockpuppets



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

The original user JournalmanManila was blocked twice after two subsequent sockpuppet investigations were made including his/her subsequent accounts (Sockpuppet investigations/JournalmanManila/Archive). Now I think he/she's back again as user Searcher0 and user Hunter05. Considering both are recently made accounts, first one made 1 days ago and second one 3 day ago. User Searcher0 keeps editing and retrieving edits made by JournalmanManila or his/her sockpuppets. In Garuda, Searcher0 and IP retreived Parashurama007's edit here and here. The same in Kinnara retrieving Parashurama007's edits here and here. And Hunter05 made similar edits as JournalmanManila and his/her sockpuppets in Kingdom of Tondo in here, not to mention that the article was edited by the same editors including his/her other sockpuppets like Theseeker2016 and Jasper0070 and so on. I would also take a look at Darwgon0801's edits since it matches that of JournalmanManila and his/her sockpuppets. Not to mention that he/she uses either none or bunk cites as his/her edits, and his/her troublesome edits as here in previous sockpuppet investigations and based on this post by Searcher0 I believe he/she will not stop. N0n3up (talk) 00:28, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Not to mention that Searcher0 caused a nuisance in posting ANI here and this annoyance after being turned down. At this point, I believe that JournalmanManila and his/her sockpuppets are going to be persistent until they get what they want. (N0n3up (talk) 06:13, 28 August 2017 (UTC))
 * Users Searcher0, Hunter05 and the listed IP's are without a doubt definitely related to JournalmanManila, yet I'm not sure what to say about Darwgon0801. Although he/she did make edits on the same articles as the sockpuppets in Maharlika, Religion in pre-colonial Philippines and Kingdom of Tondo. But I still don't know whether to say if Darwgon0801 is actually related to JournalmanManila, I'll let others decide. (N0n3up (talk) 06:01, 28 August 2017 (UTC))

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

How come my edits match to those like JournalmanManila's? But I can assure you that I'm not him/her. I'm not a sock puppet of JournalmanManila. - Darwgon0801


 * You are against their Conflicts of interest.(Searcher0 (talk))


 * Support. Concur with N0n3up's suggestion. I strongly suspect Searcher0 and Hunter05 are block-evading accounts and sockpuppets of JournalmanManila/Theseeker2016/Jasper0070/Cleaner880/Parashurama007/Xcalliber. Based on his/her behavioral pattern and edits in Garuda and Kinnara also Kingdom of Tondo, according to evidences as presented by N0n3up. My suspicion is those newly created account seems to support, rescue, and retrieve the reverted edits of his previous sockpuppets. If proven sockpuppet positive (as I strongly suspect), we are dealing with persistent chronic sockpuppet whom did not learn his lesson and shows no remorse. An ultimate solution is needed to avoid disruptive editings by these sockpuppets. —  Gunkarta  talk 04:24, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

I believe the the whole reason for i had been here is just because of; it  all started when i revert User:N0n3tup's edit's  after he removed the Philippine section on Kinnara and Garuda,  they excluded Philippines and i revert that because it contains academic works and based on scholarly books. so i find that it's a right thing to revert it.
 * SPI and Conflict of Interest

Here's the list : Kinnara:


 * http://www.newsweek.com/2008/04/26/going-for-the-gold.html Art Exhibit: Philippines' 'Gold of Ancestors' in Newsweek.


 * Laszlo Legeza, "Tantric Elements in Pre-Hispanic Gold Art," Arts of Asia, 1988, 4:129-133.


 * http://www.camperspoint.com/article.php3?id_article=239 Camperspoint: History of Palawan . Accessed 27 August 2008.

Garuda . - (Sources can be verify as a Legit WP:Verifiability)

And They remove the Philippine section despite of its academic source!and i restore it that's how the conflict got started. what an irony Yes! they remove it just because they like to say its either Irrelevant or that was work of a supposedly  blocked User. but i think it was irrelevant reasoning to exclude philippine sub-sections on the list because it was sourced. As i read WP:Deletion policy In the 14 statements of rules, there are no mentioned that the works of a blocked editor despite of reliability must be remove! and WP:Source  say's the source must be come from a Academic and scholar works like textbooks and and publications with free copyrght, and these sources are fit to all  mentioned on WP:Source, and as i observed  they have  the obviously Conflict of interest  and removing a legit sourced materials are a clear violation of wikipedia policies and not surprisingly , they Using SPI,  the misused SPI as their tool for blocking the editors who opposed to their conflict of interest , as i think, they using SPI as their "sword and sheild", Admins can judge this if i am just doing a hoax

Further more, as i observed this series of IP's are i suspected those are related to Gunkarta and N0n3tup , because when this anonymous user remove a series of sections about philippines, and a user revert it they will remove again because of their reason "Irrelevant" despite of stated sources: This following Ip's are removing the Philippine subsections despite its relevant academic references, i think they have more IP that used.
 * 114.124.143.186
 * 112.198.145.242
 * 112.211.163.186
 * 114.124.232.161

Yes this is easy to deny by them, but if you critically think of it based on their activity patterns and movement  i suspected that this IP's are link on their behaviors and interests , This is my defense here this is all about "Removing of a Legally Sourced materials based on their Conflict of Interest and sent editor to SPI as their Tool". now im not afraid of how you decide here but i hope admins become "Fair and Just" to this issue what i presented and why i have been called up in here .(Searcher0 (talk)) —Preceding undated comment added 03:23, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

— Berean Hunter   (talk)  13:53, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * For a "new user", Searcher0 seems to be (suspiciously) well-versed and familiar to those sets of WP rules, as if he has done his homework. Are you sure you are a new user? And those IPs you mentioned was involved with previous sockpuppets edits. The possible WP:Conflict of interest in this case is actually came from those sockpuppets; JournalmanManila/Theseeker2016/Jasper0070/Cleaner880/Parashurama007/Xcalliber and possibly also include Searcher0 and Hunter05. Probably motivated by undue nationalistic agenda, or a wish to rewrite his country's history gloriously. Those sockpuppets has special interest of Pre-Hispanic history of the Philippines, also Hindu-Buddhist civilization in India and Southeast Asia. However, most often involved in inventing pseudohistory or making up history, due to lack of study and valid sources in this field. Yes, there is a few artifact linked to Hindu-Buddhist culture discovered in the Philippines. But this editor WP:UNDUE edit and describes as if there was a glorious, strong, rich, and sophisticated Dharmic culture existed in the Philippines, just based on the discovery of a few artifact and scarce historical sources. To date, there is no Hindu-Buddhist temples ever discovered in the Philippines, which doubt the said high influence of Dharmic civilization in the Philippines thesis as promoted by those socks. Although a few of his sources/references are adequate, many of them are false ref which is not WP:STICKTOSOURCE or just put there in order to discourage other editors to dip in and examine the bulk of false ref. The sockpuppets urge to include Philippines in many articles, despite how irrelevant it may be, is also considered as WP:UNDUE, WP:PEACOCK, and WP:OFFTOPIC. —  Gunkarta  talk 05:07, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * , I already had blocked the two accounts a few minutes before you posted the above and will likely endorse the checkuser request to confirm and find other accounts but what you should focus on now is providing evidence concerning Darwgon0801 and why you think he is a sock.
 * , I am not sure about Darwgon0801 as sockpuppet of JournalmanManila/Theseeker2016/Jasper0070/Cleaner880/Parashurama007/Xcalliber/Searcher0/Hunter05. In the article Kingdom of Tondo, most of his edits was just tidying edits made by editors there including those added by JournalmanManila's sockpuppets. I think they have established friendship, especially with Theseeker2016, as shown in this edit they seems to be involved in edit dispute with Stricnina here and here Theseeker2016 tried to recruit Darwgon0801 into his "camp" in this dispute on Kingdom of Tondo article. Maybe Darwgon0801 was just a compatriot, a fellow Filipinos just like JournalmanManila that shares similar views regarding Philippines history. Thank you for your efforts, I really appreciate it. —  Gunkarta  talk 15:46, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Mr. Gunkarta, I didn't establish friendship to them. I don't talk to them anymore. It may seem like that but I can assure to everyone, I'm not his puppet. I just now polish edits (like Alternativity's ones) on Kingdom of Tondo (also on others, specifically Indigenous religious beliefs of the Tagalog people) like you said. About that talk with Theseeker2016 before, I regret that. They could've suspected me in that time. But you were right about the compatriot statement. Pilipino po ako. By the way, can you guys take a look at Rajahnate of Butuan? I'm not sure if it is actually mislabeled as "Rajahnate" (based on an edit by Parashurama007, whom you stated is also a sock). But I think its only mislabeled as "kingdom" since it is ruled by Rajahs so I think Rajahnate is right. Thanks. - Darwgon0801


 * , to set the record straight, I did not put your name in the suspected list in the first place. My prime suspects here are Searcher0 and Hunter05. I just examine the possibility after your name turn up here. Sorry for the inconvenience. —  Gunkarta  talk 01:34, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I've now fixed my statement. - Darwgon0801

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
— Berean Hunter   (talk)  04:52, 28 August 2017 (UTC) — Berean Hunter   (talk)  18:10, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I've indeffed Searcher and Hunter, and blocked xxx.242. xxx.100 is already blocked. Those are all JournalmanManila. I'm not seeing the case for Darwgon0801 clearly and will leave the opportunity for more evidence to be presented before proceeding with the checkuser request. Why is Darwgon0801 thought to be JournalmanManila?
 * - to confirm the two accounts that I've blocked and find others.
 * and are ✅  socks. Please relist the SPI if there is evidence for a check on, though I will note they didn't turn up in either of the JournalmanManila ranges I checked. Also, this was a 2 for 1 deal as there is another sockmaster using the same /24 range.  I saw your email and have added a subpage to the CU wiki. Thank you for that and all that you do to help out at SPI.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots  19:53, 28 August 2017 (UTC)


 * The evidence against Darwgon0801 is too weak. Closing. Sro23 (talk) 03:05, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Users Skyrim9, Pricedelink and Keroscene777 all editing Philippines-related articles constantly evade. In Ramayana, this is last edit by Jasper0070 (blocked sockpuppet) and Skyrim9. In Archaeology of the Philippines, this is last edit by Dashcam (blocked sockpuppet) and Skyrim9. In Religion in pre-colonial Philippines, this is last edit by Parashurama007 (blocked sockpuppet) and Skyrim9. In Baybayin, this is last edit by Jasper0070 (blocked sockpuppet) and Skyrim9. In List of Filipino inventions and discoveries, this is last edit by Dashcam (blocked sockpuppet) and Skyrim9 and the list goes on. Also the fact that these sockpuppets always tend to be arbitrary regarding their edits, always reverting more than they should, and in the archives of past SPI's, there is a pattern. The same for Pricedelink and Keroscene777. I kind of have a vague assumption regarding Shaded0 but I could be wrong. (N0n3up (talk) 04:26, 20 December 2017 (UTC)) N0n3up (talk) 04:26, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

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

I strongly suspect that user:Skyrim9 and user:Reign05 are the block-evasion accounts/sockpuppets of JournalmanManila. While user:Pricedelink and user:Keroscene777 are possibly also another sockpuppets, although I'm not quite sure. His/her insistence on Philippines inclusion on Hindu-Buddhist articles such as Ramayana and arbitrariness by breaking WP:3RR (although s/he wait for 24 hours) here is kind of reminiscence of what JournalmaManila would do. Plus his/her rambling back and forth also SHOUTING during discussing edit disputes in the talkpage here and here is actually the typical behavior of JournalmanManila. I would like to emphasize that this is recurrent problems, and shares N0n3up's frustration that this user:JournalmanManila has made problematic edits, disrupted wikipedia articles multiple times, and has done some unredeemable transgression by always comming back as sockpuppets in numerous instance. S/he is a persistent sockpuppet that keep coming back without regret.  Gunkarta  talk 07:06, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

I concur with User:Gunkarta's observations regarding user:Skyrim9, user:Reign05, and user:Pricedelink. The edit pattern and telltale sentence construction provide strong evidence that they are likely sockpuppets. (I am less sure about the other account mentioned - user:Keroscene777, whose behavior is somewhat similar to JournalManManila's, but whose grammar seems to be somewhat better than the other accounts. I also concur that a more permanent solution is needed to prevent JournalManManila from creating new sockpuppets.  Perhaps more expereinced editors can advise? JournalManManila's POV-pushing edits really are extremely disruptive. - Alternativity (talk) 09:02, 20 December 2017 (UTC)


 * I'd request to get my name off the list. I poked my head in quick with AWB flagging the article when it was in rather poor shape then dug a bit out of interest. Any help from me you need let me know though. Shaded0 (talk) 11:58, 20 December 2017 (UTC)


 * I clearing my self on this, they have gone too far, The root of the problem was started when User:N0n3up  has  been removing the Philippine sections of  Ramayana in many times, [|This]  which is already revised by the members , even that complainant named User:Gunkarta  |this |this  and  later User:Alternativity  he which actually   added extra sentences on what originally short revision did by Gunkarta [|this]  .  So  i do not understand why these complainants are bring this matter up here, and  why they are trying to push the removal of the Philippine sections in what so they called "clean up",  that even if the statements / sentences there have a supporting references resulting to series of reverts and also cause of my rants on the talkpage.

These what they called “Disruptive editing” was actually supported by an Academic references :


 * Check users / Admins can verify if these following sources written by  Juan R. Francisco was a type of  "Pseudo-History" or if this sources where really an undue POV pushing . it was the same references that i give to  User:N0n3up  to check and review, but i guess he just ignoring it.

These sources where written by the Indiologists from the University of the Philippines which N0n3up branded as “Vandalism”,  how come that a books written from the University of the Philippines  and the Indiologists like Juan R. Francisco turned to become  irrelevant or worst the branding of  Vandalism? (if so, how these people wasting their time and effort just to create "fables" or a "fairytale" to lure people? ) but they can't even answer my question they are just silent and no reply on the talk page [], or even message me about it. i guess these complainants are refusing to deal with it fairly by examining sentences per cited references mentioned in Philippine part, as what i did before i put it there. Admins can check these references, i hope they can examine this carefully  As “ they just  only  forced to deal it fairy”  and accusing  a member with good intentions, "i will never make an undue POV pushing here because i believe in  references must be  cited per sentences". (Skyrim9 (talk) 14:02, 20 December 2017 (UTC))
 * I agree with Gunkarta and Alternativity. JournalmanManila and his/her sockpuppets have been evading manl blocks and have abused of multiple accounts and to be honest, this is going too far and needs a permanent solution IMHO. (N0n3up (talk) 19:49, 20 December 2017 (UTC))

I have had long arguments with JournalManManila's many many sockpuppets, and I have to concur that User:Shaded0 does not seem to match JournalManManila's profile. So far s/he has demonstrated good manners in nondisruptive arguments, has good grammar, respects the wikipedia consensus process, and doesn't overstate/draw undue conclusions from what's written in sources. These to me seem to be the main hallmarks of JournalManManila's profile. I don't know User:Shaded0, but s/he doesn't seem to fit. Skyrim09's shout-filled, POV-pushing rants on this page alone, on the other hand, sound a whole lot like JournalManManila. Perhaps we should put the similarities in table format so that we can see the evidence more clearly? On a last note: I'm on record saying that the Philippines section in Ramayana should be put back, on the basis of reliable scholarly sources. But that's not the issue here; we can resolve this on the relevant talk page, or via the WP:RSN if need be. What we do need to find out is whether Skyrim09 (and Reign05) are actually just JournalManManila/Jasper007 avoiding his block. Me, in these two cases I'm convinced by the similarities. - Alternativity (talk) 11:49, 21 December 2017 (UTC)


 * for what reason i will put a statements without a valid references? this is an encyclopedia, the dispute over Ramayana are the reason i know for poking my name up here as N0n3uP tries to remove Philippine sections many times but i keep reverting on what he did, and when i ask them for what valid reason for the removal since it was supported by a book references,  plus give them the proof "i never receive any reply from them,  not even a single period on the talk pages  "specially from this N0n3up .  i think it was reasonable to be get rants when someone here keeps removing a sections supported by academic source isn't? i told to check it if it was a "pseudo history pushing" or WP Undue.  this is seems fishy  my question was "Whats wrong with you?" (Skyrim9 (talk) 12:27, 21 December 2017 (UTC))

You know what? Sometimes I agree with you. Sometimes you say things that I think are correct. And in this case, I respectfully disagree with User:N0n3up about the reliability of a source. ''But that isn't the issue here. The issue is whether you are actually the same user that went by the names User:JournalManManila, User:Parashurama007, and User:Jasper0070 among others. Meaning, whether you are a sockpuppet''. If indeed you are a sockpuppet, then you are supposed to be penalized for the behaviours of those accounts, and you are using this account to avoid the penalty. Wikipedia policy says that means you should be blocked.

Ordinarily, I make it a policy to give people the benefit of the doubt. But you have consistently disrespected wikipedia's consensus process by attacking the opposed editors on personal grounds, rather than discussing the merits of the source based on WP:RS or even of the evidence you say is presented in the sources themselves. Further, you have repeatedly misrepresented the content of sources by asserting (here and on the Ramayana template) that the Darangen and Biag ni Lam-Ang are "versions" of the Ramayana. Most damningly, you consistently demean the people who don't share your interpretation of facts as either stupid, crazy, or conniving, and you seem to believe that your "truth" is the only truth, with other people's interpretations being invalid.

All of these are behaviours that I have come to associate with JournalManManila, so I'm convinced you're him. Let me cite specific instances that convince me, for admin's reference:

1.Same Thematic Pattern of Editing Behavior a. Focus on articles connecting Philippine history with India or China (not evidence per se but establishing a pattern of behavior)
 * See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/JournalmanManila
 * Compare with: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Skyrim9
 * Also compare with recent JournalmanManila sockpuppet Parashurama007: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Parashurama007&offset=20170821182438&target=Parashurama007

b. Pattern of edits seems to indicate a thematic continuation from the edits of Parashurama007, a checkuser-confirmed sockpuppet of JournalManManila
 * See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Parashurama007&offset=20170821182438&target=Parashurama007
 * Also compare with recent JournalmanManila sockpuppet Parashurama007: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Parashurama007&offset=20170821182438&target=Parashurama007

2.Resorts to personal attacks instead of explaining the merits of the source
 * See rant by confirmed JournalManManila sockpuppet Jasper0070: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AGunkarta&type=revision&diff=793187599&oldid=793085121%7Cthis
 * Compare with: existing arguments on this page as per the date of this edit. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/JournalmanManila&curid=54773593&diff=816452724&oldid=816449290 )

3. Misrepresents (or jumps to conclusions/creates synthesis based on) sources:
 * See assertion that Biag ni Lam Ang is a version of the Ramayana here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ramayana&diff=prev&oldid=807668018 (After checking by multiple editors, community consensus is that these sources do not support the assertion.)
 * Compare with rejection by user Mimihitam of similar (although weirder) POV-pushing by confirmed JournalManManila sockpuppet Jasper0070 equating Bohol with the legendary land of Suvarnabhumi ( https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Suvarnabhumi&diff=797653346&oldid=792860923 )

(Sorry if this one is complicated: should I look for simpler examples? This was just the first that I found out of many that I know exist.)

4. Identical sentence structure and grammar; See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AGunkarta&type=revision&diff=793187599&oldid=793085121%7Cthis Compare with: existing arguments on this page as per the date of this edit. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/JournalmanManila&curid=54773593&diff=816452724&oldid=816449290 )

There are other points, and further examples of the same points, but these are just the ones I have time to provide evidence for at the moment. Perhaps others can add? - Alternativity (talk) 14:35, 21 December 2017 (UTC
 * well i know my self that i never did a type of undue nvov here and even pushing a "pseudo history " or what so ever which is a fairy tale like it can be Prove, even you turn it upside  down,  i never did  that disruptive  editing  or vandalism. okay i have a grammar  issue sometimes,  but it was not a reason  to poke me up here just  because  of "identical factor" well i am certainly not for undue pov or pushing  non academic  sourcing like what you trying  to tell, These statements  have a cited source i make sure of it , As if UP and JR Fransico  are making fairytale. But for now i can prove it,  because  it was from UP and the root of this issue  was the removal and restoration  of Philippine section  in Ramayana  which is an indian litrature  with an influence  in southeast  Asia.
 * By the way ,Why are you alternativity and N0n3up are insisting of something  i never did before  in the first place?  That thing supposed  to be a content  dispute  i can't  find a lead for why i poked up here aside from i reverted no3ups removal of sourced statements you said i must address  it to the articles talkpage  but as i said i recieve  no reply from you all. Then i got my reply was in here something's  fishy.(Skyrim9 (talk) 16:07, 21 December 2017 (UTC))

First of all, let me remind us that this is about sockpuppet investigation, not about edit dispute on valid references of Ramayana (in this case I have to agree that Maharadya Lawana was influenced or highly localized version of Ramayana). Let me provides this case with chronological background.

First, in past year (August 2016) until past months (August 2017) we encountered JournalmanManila and his sockpuppets which known for his/her insistence on creating a false historic narration of "strong Indic/Dharmic/Hind-Buddhist civilization in the Philippines," which kind of false and misleading due to lack of evidences and sources. Jasper0070, one of JournalmanManila's puppet, add Philippines in Ramayana article here to include much irrelevant additions, that most was not related to Ramayana in an attempt to paint "strong Indic culture in Philippines". Parashurama, another JournalmanManila's sock puppet help out too here, of course after examination, all that bunch of supposedly references mention nothing about Ramayana, and being removed. Ref falsifying was the hallmark of JournalmanManila edits.

49.149.97.134, an anonymous IP address retrieve again much of JournalmanManila edits here and again by 122.54.197.173 here. By this time JournalmanManila and some of his sockpuppet has been banned, so he seems to went to guerrila warfare using unregistered user IP address editing. And again being removed due to its questionable relations with Ramayana here

Then user Skyrim9 retrieved much of previous edits done by JournalmanManila sockpuppets here. Skyrim9 appear in 18 September 2017, several weeks after Searcher0 and Hunter05 (the latest JournalmanManila sockpuppets) being banned in 28 August 2017. And s/he seems to pick the baton where JournalmanManila and his many sockpuppets left, to continue the flame I think which is suspiciously another sockpuppets of JournalmanManila. Soon we involved in edit disagreement, and he almost breaking WP:3RR (although s/he wait for 24 hours) here.

The stalemate or status quo condition on Ramayana at that time is that, I had improve the refs and we keep the Philippines subsection that has clear reference linked to Ramayana, which was only the Maharadia Lawana here. While discarding Biag ni Lam-ang and Singkil/Daragen that is not related to Ramayana at all, which was much added by JournalmanManila's sockpuppets, and later retrieved by Skyrim9. By that, time status quo on Ramayana reached, but the strong suspicion that Skyrim9 is one of many sockpuppets of JournalmanManila was not yet being satisfiedly addressed yet. I would like to use this opportunity for us to address this highly possible (yet another) sockpuppet infringement done by JournalmanManila. Thank you.  Gunkarta  talk 08:32, 22 December 2017 (UTC)


 * At the first place i never did those disruptive editing what so ever, and i have a "suspicion" because,   "why you three are so eagerly  insisting of Those  things which i never did ?" and poke me up on spi.  Note: those things where the start of this matter, and i can't even find a lead aside from  the time since this N0n3up's removing  a source  statements which i always keeping  back, "he is also the one who started the SPI case and poke me up here!  so they have connection  and he calling the Philippine sections as " vandalism ". even you turn this matter  upside down, Gunkarta i really never did a problematic  editing here like  what you all insists. maybe it was seems problematic on your side because your opinions where challenged by the Sources.   but nothing personal just because of "Grammar issues" you can poke my name up here,  since i never did a disruptive editing, vandalism, "Pseudo History insistance" or Undue NPOV pushing  etc. which is what we called "fairytales" , just an Academically Cited Source per Sentences.  (Skyrim9 (talk) 10:11, 22 December 2017 (UTC))


 * These complainants already cleaned up the statements and also they do an additions of terms until N0n30p remove it and went up to the series of reverts that lead up here. [|This]  which is already revised by named User:Gunkarta  |this |this  and  later User:Alternativity  he which actually   added extra sentences on what originally short revision did by Gunkarta [|this]  . So the issue was only started when i revert Sourced PH sections in which n0n3up always trying to remove  (Skyrim9 (talk) 12:27, 22 December 2017 (UTC))


 * Here we go again with your routine of back and forth with your misleading argument on the validiy of quoted references etc. I suggest we left that Ramayana editing disputes back in Ramayana talkpage, and actually I agreed on including Maharadya Lawana as one of Ramayana rendering, although highly localized and possibly rendered from another derivative Muslim Malay/Indonesian version. The problem and suspicion was started when an anonymous IP 122.54.197.173 retrieve JournalmanManila's edit here and then you came along to retrieve again much of JournalmanManila's sockpuppet edits here. Which led us to suspect that you are another sockpuppet of JournalmanManila.  Gunkarta  talk 12:44, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
 * i am not out of the topic, i encountered  your friend  N0n3up because  he  reverting a sourced sections, which is the reason why i am here. wheather you like it or not that was part of it . Since its your  complain right?  Now,  why do you insist that i am doing something  you accuse ? At that time when non3up removed ph section  because  it was a vandalism  or disruptive  edits,  where are you?  You just let him and i keep on restoring  a source  statements  because  it was reasonable. And then after i revert non3ups doing you and your friends  file and spi case and poke me up here? And you keep insisting of that thing on me so i smell something's  fishy on you  (Skyrim9 (talk) 15:54, 22 December 2017 (UTC))
 * In Ramayana case, I stepped back and keep my silence to let wikipedia consensus works in Ramayana talkpage, and eventually I believe Philippines Maharadya Lawana might be recognized as a version of Ramayana if provided with sufficient credible references. However, I think it is necessary to sufficiently address the sockpuppet suspicion which involved you. And here you are again, keep sliding fast forward to 19 December 2017 here and 20 December here, while the actual question/problem started in 29 October 2017 with your involvement here when you took the baton left by JournalmanManila sockpuppets, and salvaged his/her works. Which is a typical give-away trait of sockpuppets, that usually return back to the crime scene to retrieve and protect the works of past sockpuppets/puppetmaster.  Gunkarta  talk 17:26, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
The case is. Therefore, the only thing I can do is compare the listed named suspected puppets against each other. In the beginning of your presentation, you have the right idea, including diffs of a suspected puppet and a comparison diff of the master or a sock. However, you need to elaborate on why the pairs of diffs are similar. It's not obvious, and, otherwise, all you have is that the suspected socks and blocked socks edited the same articles. And you need comparison diffs for every suspected puppet. Saying "and the list goes on" won't work. Also, a "vague" suspicion about a user (Shaded0) is not a reasonable basis for accusing that person of socking. Finally, two users - Keroscene777 and Shaded0 - are older than the master.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:06, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
 * The following accounts are ✅ to each other and behaviorally likely to the master:
 * Blocked the two unblocked accounts and tagged all. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:21, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Blocked the two unblocked accounts and tagged all. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:21, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Blocked the two unblocked accounts and tagged all. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:21, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Blocked the two unblocked accounts and tagged all. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:21, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Blocked the two unblocked accounts and tagged all. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:21, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

New user Kufarhunter immediately restores a paragraph at Kinnara, resuscitating an edit war previously dropped when  had been blocked. I haven't looked into whether the restored claim even has merit because it looks like a patent sockpuppet. Not familiar with the case, though—only got a talk page message czar  04:13, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * This is indeed Gunkarta. This is the same edit made by Kufarhunter in involving/making a Philippines section as this by Searcher0 and this] by JournalmanManila, and Kufarhunter's contributions so far are Philippine-related edits like the puppetmaster and his/her sockpuppets. (N0n3up (talk) 00:38, 2 April 2018 (UTC))

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * ✅ to each other and to previous socks plus:
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:00, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:00, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:00, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:00, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:00, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:00, 2 April 2018 (UTC)