Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Justice007/Archive

19 July 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * (former user id name was Ehasan Sehgal)


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

(1) The very common evidence among three of them are edit summaries with broken tone and grammar, (2) User:Justice007 created article about him self Ehsan Sehgal and managed duplicate users User:Majoroflaw and User:MJ84 to support the edits about his own article. (3) Utilized both the accounts/users User:Majoroflaw and User:MJ84 to specifically work for the article Ehsan Sehgal only. (4) To prove that other editors are also interested in article about himself (Ehsan Sehgal) he (User:Justice007) used multiple times the IP address 77.170.189.137 of his residing location on 31 May 2011 edits for 4 times, and repeated same on 5th June 2011, by using the IP address 77.170.189.137 from his residing location, repeated same on 8th June 2011.(5) The least doubtful sock of User:Justice007 also includes User:Tabassum Waarsi. Regards :) Omer123hussain (talk) 06:01, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Further investigation:
 * The similarity of user name and meaning between Justice007 and Major of Law.
 * The user Justice007 created article about him self Ehsan Sehgal and the user Majoroflaw created article about Ehsan Sehgals book Zarb-e-Sukhan.
 * The article Zarb-e-Sukhan was created on 13 May 2012‎ and the user Justice007 uploaded the same book image [|File:Zarb-e-Sukhan.jpg] of the book Zarb-e-Sukhan on 14 May 2012‎.
 * The similar introduction of user page Justice007 and Majoroflaw. --Omer123hussain (talk) 10:30, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * User Justice007 (former user ID name was Ehsan Sehgal), this ID was merrily shared by multiple persons as admitted by user himself here:User talk:Nolelover/Archive 4 It also proves that how eagerly and aggressively he is engaged in involving other establish editors to develop article about him self. Even the other established editors doubt about his (Justice007) multiple/sock ID here: User talk:Nolelover/Archive 4.

I am sure the accused sock user have many more multiple accounts, involved in many more conflicts.--Omer123hussain (talk) 11:38, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The limit is that, to convince and collect sympathy from established editors (Ex:here) to organize/develop his article (Ehsan Sehgal) he created ID (User:Moona Sehgal) with a name of female saying his own daughter, which had clearly raised doubts/questions by his sympathizers, and received a warning to avoid the practice of sock.

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I cannot see any violations from the diffs you have presented. Having multiple account is permitted as long as they are not used to game the system or for abusive editing, and I frankly can't see any evidence in your report where that is the case. May I inquire, what is the real purpose of this SPI report? Checkusers and SPIs are not for fishing.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 05:08, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * So you admitted that accused user maintains multiple ID's.
 * The accused sock is engaged in self publishing and One ID was used to revert other editors work and another ID is used to add self publishing information. Is it not destruction??
 * Do you mean to say, by using multiple ID's self publish is not gaming??
 * Using multiple user ID's to contentiously engage in reverting other editors work is not abusive/deceiving??
 * I Dont see any logic in your comment to rescue the accused sock, and encouraging sock user/multiple user maintenance.
 * Any way I added some more investigation above. :)--Omer123hussain (talk) 10:54, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually no, I have not "admitted" anything. Like I've said, show diffs and evidence which prove that there's been a violation. I still stand by previous argument, per WP:SOCK.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 20:18, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * From which way WP:SOCK applies to accuser usage of SOCK. Regards :) --Omer123hussain (talk) 22:46, 20 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Surprisingly, the initiator of the report finds enough time to do cross-talking here but apparently did not find it important enough to notify the user involved in this SPI, which is usually required when starting one. I've done the courtesy of doing that. It may also be of interest for admins to know that Omer123hussain appears to have a history of content disputes with Justice007 and turning up at pages which Justice007 has edited . Therefore, it may be neccessary to take the views presented here with a pinch of salt and some discretion. Cheers,  Mar4d  ( talk ) 20:18, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * As per the SPI Project page, it is not mandatory to intimate the accuser.
 * Almost every editor will face disputes when participate actively ( you might have also been thru this phase sometime ), any way it is of no sense to discuss about disputes here on SPI page. And it is not an excuse to maintain SOCK.
 * Latest sample of his destruction which I rescued later. Regards :) --Omer123hussain (talk) 22:36, 20 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Since a discussion on my talk page has been brought up, I hope I can comment on it: that discussion was over a year ago, and it was a very obvious question to ask a new editor who had created an autobiography. Only pulling that archive does not show the many excellent interactions I have had with Justice since then, and he has learned a lot in terms of policy. I know that his English is not the best, but Omer; you and I have had a couple discussion about your own grasp of the language. Not being fluent does not make him unhelpful or a sockpuppet. Furthermore, as Mar4d notes, Omer and Justice have had a long history and I have been right next to both of them for much of it; I do not have much faith in his intentions as the filer of this SPI.  Nolelover   Talk · Contribs  20:28, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * You mean to say an editor can use abusive comments when asked not to apply un-reliable bolgs as a sources. Which left me no option rather than to monitor and investigate him, and when I found him defaulting and gaming on WP, I have reported it here as per instructions by WP Policy.
 * If there is any disagreement with edits of fellow editors. It is not an excuse to maintain SOCK.
 * Any way I feel that enough stuff had been added to distract the topic from SPI. Please stick to the topic for which we are on this project page. Regards :)--Omer123hussain (talk) 22:36, 20 July 2012 (UTC)


 * No, Justice007 is not a Majoroflaw but yes I accept that Majoroflaw sometimes used my computer during visits, because we just know each other as a family friend, and niether I am Majoroflaw nor influenced his editing. As a new editor that time, I did not know the policies completely and still have to read and learn more properly. Actually policy does not forbid two or more editors using same computer, but not knowing the policy completely, I did not notify that on my talk page that my computer was also being used by Majoroflaw. I can now say only that I will be careful in future. Otherwise that will be notified on the talk page. Justice007 (talk) 01:54, 24 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I did not comment before because of this, I would like to comment privately, I am sure my position will be clear.Justice007 (talk) 09:27, 24 July 2012 (UTC)


 * User:Justice007 has posted on my talk page from time to time with various requests, mainly regarding help in proofreading, etc. From my experience, he seems like an honest and sincere novice editor. As a result, I would keep in mind, WP:AGF regarding User:Justice007's comments, especially since the above report indicates that the accounts have not been used to edit war; the two users merely edit articles pertaining to similar topics. Nevertheless, if both User:Justice007 and User:Majoroflaw are using the same computer, I would advise the closing administrator to inform the two users about WP:MTPPT, cautioning them to avoid editing the same articles. I hope this helps. With regards, AnupamTalk 03:16, 24 July 2012 (UTC)


 * He (Justice007) is mostly engaged in edit warrings and involving others too: 3RR voilation here, 3RR waring here, 3RR edit warring here, disruptive edit warring here, Continuous stalking new editors, and other warnings here, here, here, here and here. What else is called Disruptive edit/Edit warring. Most of his contribution/edits (approximately 70% and above) are reverting others work, rather than improving it.
 * He (Justice007) had admitted himself that his ID is shared with multiple users, In this cases how can WP:MTPPT applies to and, as far they are one person, using same computer, for same purpose and with same edit summaries tone and grammar, then how are they two users?? Certainly He used IP address (as linked in investigation above) also to distract the editors attention.
 * Rather than responcing here, User:Justice007 is working in a group, and discussed to ignore SPI trail by his sympathizers concensuss here. Most of his destructive edits are even criticized by his sympathizers here. He is mis-using WP for his personal promotion/CANVASSING and sharing personel videos here and conteniously ignoring 3RR policy, using abusive slang in edit summaries & talk pages, involving others into edit warring by reverting there hard work. Regards :) --Omer123hussain (talk) 12:04, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Though check user confirmed both as a same user (SOCK) after his investigation, but still the user Justice007 is arguing that they are not the same. Regards :)--Omer123hussain (talk) 17:04, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

We have to stay focused on the main issue: did Justice and Major--whether the same or different person--in unison disrupt editing and the normal consensus process. I glanced at the primary area of intersection, Ehsan Sehgal, and did not find any activity which would justify sanctions. There was a minor edit "scuffle" with some IPs around Dec 2011, but nothing that stands out. What does stand out is that there was an AFD in Jan 2012 and Major did not participate. That would seem to be the perfect opportunity to engage your puppet (not saying that Major is). Now that Major has come here and responded, I don't think that there was socking, and even if there was, there was no appreciable damage to the normal consensus process.– Lionel (talk) 22:51, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

So now I have to prove that I really exist?. Since when that certificate is needed?. I am neither worry nor care being blocked.Majoroflaw (talk) 21:29, 24 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I believe the foreclose of this investigation is immature, Requesting SPI-CU to consider the recent behavior of the accuser, Detail given below:
 * The user account is being utilized by multiple persons, as openly declared here. If CU is sympathetically allowing him to continue "then it should be declared", because I believe excusing of "not aware of policy", will not apply to accuser, as still the editor is aggressively engaged (Please see below reference) in vandalizing the WP policy.
 * The main issue is that the user is abusing the editors and still aggressively engaged in personal attacks here, and vandalizing the WP, for instance his recent work; here-Abusing and discriminating the editors, ignoring 3RR policy, reverting the good work due to personal attacks and when contacted not bothered to respond for reverts at article talk page nor on his own talk page. Regards :)--Omer123hussain (talk) 22:35, 7 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Do not mislead the community, there is nothing to do with sock, what you are referring the case this is edit warring or incivility,and that is not related here. What you are opening things that are old and already declared on the talk pages of me and Nolelover . If you are fair and assume good faith, let know your self both side comments, not the part which support you in your opinion. I have done nothing wrong,only my laptop has been used few times because of unfamilair of the many policies, though there is some right, to allow one laptop for more users.Stop misleading, editors can easily access and assess the talk pages, that your edits are/were disruptive.Justice007 (talk) 02:20, 8 August 2012 (UTC)


 * This is not the proper venue for personal attacks: I suggest WP:WQA. I did not see a violation of 3RR nor vandalism--anyway those are reported at WP:3RRNB and WP:AIV respectively. How about you just drop the stick, ok?– Lionel (talk) 01:46, 8 August 2012 (UTC)


 * This above comment by Justice again proves that he has learnt nothing, and is using excuses of shared laptop and WP:BROTHER to support uncivil/disruptive edits. In any case, as declared by Justice already this is a compromised account and need to be blocked for violating procedures.-- D Big X ray  06:03, 8 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, I expect a fair trial against the accuser Justice007 for;
 * Using id (Justice007) as an compromised account operated with multiple users, since he last admitted. And it is definitely need to be blocked, because even after this attempt letting the accuser in this case may be sometime misused as a reference/encouragement by the other SOCKS.
 * Justice007 and Majoroflaw are same, as confirmed earlier, (and later just because he do not agree, they cannot be declared individual; In earlier SPI's there are many Sock's who were just blocked due to similarity in there edit summaries, tone and attitude, then for both (Justice007 and Majoroflaw) we have a complete and a confirmed investigation).
 * Earlier and recently even after SPI trial, the accuser is aggressively engaged in (1)- Personal attacks, (2)- Abusing and discriminating the editors, (3)- After reverting others work; when inquired him, simply ignored and not bothered to respond on article talk page and even on his own talk page, until and unless the case was brought here.
 * Note: Will present more references for his (Justice007) abusive tone, personal attacks etc if required. Regards :)--Omer123hussain (talk) 21:48, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * confirmed is the same as . All others are . --  DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  19:07, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I doubt Justice007's comment because of the CU results that I saw earlier today, and how unlikely this is to be the case. He also had 4 days to comment on the SPI that this was the case, he only chose after the results to note this factor. There could be a coincidence that this is not the same person, but I highly doubt it, will not reveal what it is either, and if Justice would like to comment privately regarding this with other functionaries I would be willing to hear him out on the story. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  02:28, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

← After carefully reviewing this case with my WP:AFG hat on, I am confident in saying that these two accounts are being operated by the same person. Obviously, from a cursory CheckUser the two are confirmed but after a more careful examination their movements throughout the day (as well as throughout the world) match far too closely for this to be a case of WP:BROTHER or a friend who came over and used Justice007's computer. Tiptoety talk 05:59, 24 July 2012 (UTC)


 * @ Justice007, the functionaries page has info on how to contact us if you wish to comment on the connection privately (see the email address there). You mailed us.
 * @All, remember this section is only for clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  05:43, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * On hold till the review of the mail to functionaries is complete. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  05:54, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I have reviewed the email from Justice007, and have emailed him back a few more questions. I would encourage Majoroflaw to contact Functionaries with his side of the story. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  18:01, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

— Berean Hunter   (talk)  13:12, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
 * After talking with Justice007 via the Functionaries list, I do not believe that the users are the same. All the answers provided match the technical information provided and new technical evidence indicates that these two are not the same person. I will note that Justice007 appears to not have known about our meatpuppetry policy, which I have now informed him of. I will also note there was a declared connection with Moona Sehgal, but again, not the same person, and I will not comment on the connection. I do recommend some leniency to be given as the user seems not to have know the policies. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  00:56, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Closing as no action taken.

— Berean Hunter   (talk)  23:21, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Reopened to checked status for further review as we don't do "immature" closings; did you mean premature? We address sockpuppetry here and do not handle all admin chores. Patrolling admins may address this case and we welcome its review.
 * There really isn't anything left to do. We were not going to block to start with, and I see no reason to continue this hunt. AGF is a good practice here and I support DeltaQuad's comments above. Closing and archiving. Tiptoety  talk 03:23, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

same editing pattern. the accounts are being used for writing autobio. Ehsan Sehgal 119.160.118.108 (talk) 13:51, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * User:Vanjagenije: apparently, Justice007 decided to retire from WP after he was caught editing his own autobio (Ehsan Sehgal) and was warned not to edit his own bio. Look at his contributions. he was also warned on his talk page for attacking other users. KingssttLove is a SPA which have been editing Ehsan Sehgal page on and off since 2014. Given that Justice007 has been using socks in the past, it is likely that KingssttLove is another sock. --119.160.119.188 (talk) 09:53, 27 May 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
. CU declined.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:56, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * .&#32;In order to facilitate and expedite your request, please provide diffs to support your case. Please give two or more diffs meeting the following format:
 * 1) At least one diff is from the sockmaster (or an account already blocked as a confirmed sockpuppet of the sockmaster), showing the behaviour characteristic of the sockmaster.
 * 2) At least one diff per suspected sockpuppet, showing the suspected sockpuppet emulating the behaviour of the sockmaster given in the first diff.
 * 3) In situations where it is not immediately obvious from the diffs what the characteristic behaviour is, a short explanation must be provided. Around one sentence is enough for this.  Vanjagenije   (talk)  20:56, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * No diffs provided and the account is dormant. Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  18:56, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

When I was working on the Pakistani articles so I tagged many articles with maintenance tags as they lack reliable sources. Therefore, I tagged this article but soon a user emptied most of the article and eventually, he started AfD for that hoping he will save the article by doing this. But in between, she (or he) continued to chip in with different IPs (maybe by using circumventing tools).

First IP was this who commented on the AfD saying keep this article. Then second IP commented on the two AfD which are related. Then third IP commented on the AfD but the link he shared said everything because link was from Google in the Netherlands but IP shows he is from Iran. You can see my comment on the AfD. Then fourth and the last IP commented on the AfD and so the nominator withdrew his nomination and all this happened almost synchronously.

In other words, whenever someone tries to tag or remove unreliable material they start to empty or delete it. One user starts an AfD and other chip in to say keep.

I dug more and found out similarity with previous AfD. It was started at the request of Justice007 when another user tried to fix things on the page. Similarily, other accounts chip in like MJ84 commented to keep, who is suspected sock of Justice007.

He once tried to move his userpage live revealing he is trying to create a autobiography. Another user tagged it autobio and nominted it for speedy deletion. Then came series of comments on the talkpage comment1, comment2, comment3 and comment4. These diffs will help to know his editing style.

Then, it was heavily edited by many to conform it according WP policies like this. After this he commented to have a fair review and after edits by other users he was happy per comment. He again commented when other users edited his the article.

He tried to nominate when user tried to edit the article and same way MJ84 commented to don't delete it.

Same way when a user tried to clean the article another user named Majoroflaw came to stop the clean up.

Article was continued to be edited by Majoroflaw and KingssttLove until recently when it was cleaned up by Drmies and Winged Blades of Godric 1 and 2. It was immediately followed up by comment1 and comment2 and suspected account came to rescue him here and here. Please note the writing style (i.e. putting comma after every sentence).

He again came to stop the editing process and repeated his habit of cleaning the stuff in the article. (attemp1 and attempt2) After this he retired.

Following points will help more:


 * Moona Sehgal made 31 of her 38 edits to the page Ehsan Sehgal and his books per this.
 * User:MJ84 edited almost all the pages which User:Justice007 edited per this. 22 edits to Ehsan Sehgal page, creating his book page and a attempt to create Muslim United Nations per this.
 * The comments on the AfD Articles for deletion/Iqra Nadeem makes it more clear, where two suspected users and master commented to delete the article.
 * KingssttLove has made 31 edits on the articles out of which 19 are on Ehsan Sehgal and other mostly match with edits of Justice007. Check here.
 * Three users excluding KingssttLove has shared IP template on their userpages.
 * All users use user-page (rounded) template on their user page.
 * Username User:Majoroflaw is the name which is actually 'Major of Law'. On digging, It tells us that User:Justice007 has also major in Law. Check this.
 * Userpages of Moona Sehgal and User:Majoroflaw are similar. 5 boxes on Majoroflaw userpage are also on Moona Sehgal userpage.

It looks like user is WP:GAMING the system and is trying to influence the AfDs by using different tactics. He maybe trying to prove a WP:POINT. I am also pinging who is long involved and could give better insights.  Greenbörg  (talk)  08:01, 21 July 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
, CU declined.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:48, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
 * None of the listed accounts have edited in around a month, so investigating this would not be time well spent given the SPI backlog. I'm closing this without prejudice; if the account starts editing again, this can be reopened for investigation. --Deskana (talk) 13:05, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Justice007 is back. Created article on his book under the title Zarb-e-Sukhan (Kulliyaat) early this year. An article on same book was previously created under title Zarb-e-Sukhan.

Also edited his own bio page Ehsan Sehgal. Back in 2017, he declared he's retiring and would stop using and. Saqib (talk) 09:18, 3 May 2020 (UTC)


 * For the record above reported IP has now engaged in disruptive editing at Shahid Khaqan Abbasi in retaliation to when I filed the first SPI. --Saqib (talk) 16:05, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * For the record above reported IP now impersonating, in an AfD. --Saqib (talk) 11:40, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * What the problem is that you want to grasp? - Why you do not discuss rather than coming here, any of the users that you mentioned, seem they tried only to write article and left, is that misguiding the community, is it your problem? -
 * Read this An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing and what do you think about James Heilman, and Doc James? - Read the talk page of Ehsan Sehgal, who created the article, show the diff, what Justiceoo7 edited in his article to prove your blame - I glanced that showed only adding references and reverting vandal. Your conduct establish this — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:1c00:1604:bb00:459b:2ced:129e:aab0 (talk)
 * Concerns: It seems these users User:MistyGraceWhite, User:Hammad, User:AaqibAnjum, User:Orientls, User:Saqib, User:Störm fall under

Meatpuppetry characteristically, because of editing on many articles together, and comenting and awarding on talk pages. It is not coincidental that they all are here with selected decision delete without internet connections for conspiracy. The way of convincing: Such private movements create clear doubts and something not as the rules. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:1C00:1604:BB00:459B:2CED:129E:AAB0 (talk)


 * I'm shocked to see this. I've never interacted with, , and  - my contribution to any article started by  does not pass under meat puppetry, because I had done this at his request on my talk page. Have a look at  Special:MobileDiff/955745807, I do not find any article of his where I've contributed besides this. It definitely isn't meat puppetry. As for the AfD, I had this article in my watchlist, and this is why I participated in AfD. My earlier vote in the AfD was Speedy Keep and I added I number of sources and content to article. However, based on consequences, I moved my vote. Thanks Aaqib Anjum Aafī (talk) 13:08, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
 * IP is hurt that we are voting to delete his article so we must all be sock/meat puppets. I agree that it is no coincidence that the majority of voters, except the IP and his sock, are voting delete. It is the way Wikipedia debates are designed. MistyGraceWhite (talk) 20:16, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Agree with MistyGraceWhite and AaqibAnjum.—  Hammad     (Talk!)   01:45, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Everyone reported is blocked (IPs are rangeblocked for 3 months), the sockmaster hasn't edited in years so I don't see much value in blocking them at this time. Since all named accounts are blocked and stale and CU won't connect the IPs, I don't see much value in actually tagging at this time. Closing. creffett (talk) 00:49, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

A spa creating Draft:Ehsan Sehgal - the version is very similar to now salted Ehsan Sehgal. WP:DUCKTEST Saqib (talk) 19:15, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I am not sure what Saqib was looking at but Draft:Ehsan Sehgal is wholly same as the article on Conservapedia written by Ehsan Sehgal aka Justice007 himself. I recommend indef block for both Justice007 and this suspected sock. Orientls (talk) 16:43, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

I do not know who is justice007 and what to gain Saqib since he has multiple times blame other contributers as sock but it never came true. I think he should be blocked from editing, blaming others without proof, he is suffering from Ehsan Sehgal phobia. He and his team illegitimate deleted the article that had most reliable sources. Saqib put Wikipedia on legal risks as this news, I read, it is shameful act of Saqib and his email contact team to blackmail the subject that I feel. I hope this time Saqib should be block from editing for false report and blames. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ubaid Qundeel (talk • contribs) 19:36, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Point to be noted. Ubaid Qundeel claims he "do not know who is justice007" then how come he knows the background of this issue. --Saqib (talk) 14:19, 7 September 2020 (UTC)


 * You cannot edit the article Ehsan Sehgal anymore as you and your team fall under legal risks as I read this news. Please stay away from editing and stop sending others for that purpose. You are not here to decide who should be on Wikipedia and who not. As a rule, you are not allowed to edit when there is a legal threat. Ubaid Qundeel (talk) 17:26, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Ubaid Qundeel has been indef. blocked for issuing legal threats. This SPA was previously closed without blocking the sock master Justice007. Now it make sense to block Justice007 and close this. --Saqib (talk) 08:43, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I took a look at Ehsan Sehgal and can reasonably conclude that the two are not "very similar" and are, in fact, quite different in layout, content, etc. The SandDoctor  Talk 16:00, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I concur with that Draft:Ehsan Sehgal, other than being about the same subject, was totally different than Ehsan Sehgal.  There may be competing UPE editors here, but I'm not seeing this as socking per-se, so closing with no action. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:34, 10 September 2020 (UTC)