Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kavin Mudaliar/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

The user has been using the wiki page Tuluva Vellala for disruptive editing, point of views and editing with one of their sock accounts. Recently, this user has starting making vandalizing edits using both the accounts, removing the personalities from Notable Tuluva Vellalar section without proper source. The user also claims some of the notable personalities aren’t Tuluva Vellalar even after sharing citations and in turn push their own POV into the page. The style of editing between the two accounts are the same. The revision history of List of Mudaliars page shows these 2 accounts making similar edits there. Please refer the following diffs in the Tuluva Vellala and List of Mudaliars page:

 

--Srivatsarcot1 (talk) 05:20, 30 April 2020

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
 
 * my initial impression from looking at the diffs is I don't see any evidence of socking. The Interaction Timeline doesn't make me think so either; it's mostly one of them did a bunch, then some time later, the other one did a bunch.  I'd either close this, or ask for more specific evidence.  -- RoySmith (talk) 14:09, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I personally don't find the Interaction Timeline very reliable (alternatively I just don't know how to use it). I prefer the "Editor Interaction Utility" which gives this showing a possible connection between the accounts particularly given that it's a relatively niche area. User talk:Srivatsarcot1 was especially interesting to me: both accounts commenting on the talk page of another new account. Does that change your thinking on what to do next? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:34, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
 * , For sure, two users converging on a third user's talk page is a connection. And, the tone of statements like "I have the right as Wikipedian to correct it" (Ajith) and "You will be banned from editing by the wikipedia" (Kavin) are similar.  On the other hand, it looks like Ajith was recruited to (or at least pointed in the direction of) User talk:Srivatsarcot1 with this edit by, who seems to be trying to connect with people from their community.  The convergence on User talk:Srivatsarcot1  may well be entirely innocent.  I'm still thinking that asking for more specific evidence before proceeding makes sense. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:14, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Might as well and see what else you might get. It's worth considering what you'll do if you don't get more evidence. That is, do you think there's enough here to justify a CU check? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:17, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
 * , I kind of get the feeling you're hoping I'll say "yes", but my gut feeling is "no" based on what I've said above. The fact that Periyarist led Ajith to Srivatsarcot1's talk page dilutes that correlation.  I just looked at the global contributions.  Kahvin has been active on ta, and Ajith, while not "active", has edited there.  If they're both Tamil, they might both simply be interested in the narrow range of Tamil topics. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:51, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
 * as you can see from the above discussion, there's not enough here to move forward with this investigation. If you have some more specific evidence, could you please add it to the top section of this page?  Specifically, what we're looking for are diffs which show that the two users are actually the same person, as opposed to two people who simply share an interest in certain topics.  Thanks.  -- RoySmith (talk) 13:25, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
 * , no response to MoreInfo, so I'm thinking close this. -- RoySmith (talk) 19:21, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
 * , based on the team edit warring at Tuluva Vellala there's definitely sufficient evidence to justify a CU check. That CU check showed that the two accounts are to each other. For me, the behaviour and the result are enough to block. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:57, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * closing -- RoySmith (talk) 15:53, 20 May 2020 (UTC)