Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kmzayeem/Archive

15 February 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

There is repeated vandalism on several pages relating to Bangladesh Military and Society. I believe that this is being carried out by one user or one group of users who are trying to push forth their own pro-Bangladesh views. I am providing the following pages as evidence with diffs in the hopes that SPI admins can put a stop to this and ban the puppets & master.

I) repeated vandalism on 2001 Indian–Bangladeshi border conflict

This page is being repeatedly vandalized in the strength and casualty figures in the infobox and other places throughout the article. The provided sources themselves are never changed and on reading through the provided sources a very different picture is presented.

The source presented for the casualty figures is [http://www.tribuneindia.com/2001 /20010422/main1.htm tribune] which states 15 indian casualties. The source presented for the combatant strength figures is hillary which gives 3000 bangladeshi troops and no indian strength numbers.

however these numbers have been repeatedly vandalized over the past year and even further back whenever any attempt is made to correct this.


 * diffs in numbers

1) [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2001_Indian%E2%80%93Bangladeshi_border_conflict&diff=595512679&oldid=595504183 22:48, 14 February 2014] by User:A.Musketeer Appears to be the latest puppet. since creation all articles he has edited have a strong pro-bangladesh and anti india stance. attempts to engage him constructively on talk pages have been met with an edit war which has been reported. 2) [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2001_Indian%E2%80%93Bangladeshi_border_conflict&diff=595120848&oldid=594527403 10:08, 12 February 2014] by User:119.30.38.183 3) [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2001_Indian%E2%80%93Bangladeshi_border_conflict&diff=next&oldid=588999188 Revision as of 13:19, 5 January 2014] User:Kmzayeem infobox numbers changed directly by the suspected puppet master to highlight this behaviour. 4) [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2001_Indian%E2%80%93Bangladeshi_border_conflict&diff=571318802&oldid=565097790 02:12, 3 September 2013] by User:94.76.233.203 5) [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2001_Indian%E2%80%93Bangladeshi_border_conflict&diff=next&oldid=571318802 03:03, 18 September 2013] by User:Poizonbhai 6) [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2001_Indian%E2%80%93Bangladeshi_border_conflict&diff=552916166&oldid=552899416 30 April 2013] by User: 58.97.151.179

The very similar behavior exhibited in all the above diffs where the numbers alone are changed without changing the references. and the similarity in the numbers used leads me to believe that these acts of vandalism are being perpetrated by one user hiding behind a proxy and multiple sock puppet accounts.

II) Attempt to prevent clean up of Battle of Boyra

The previous article Battle of Boyra was heavily biased and used weasel words and did not actually provide an accurate picture of the events that took place and the reason behind its significance, an entire section of the page deceptively titled "THE BATTLE" was devoted to the alleged cowardice of an indian pilot in a previous war who had little or insignificant role in the events of the current article. The page in question attempted to show a pro-bangladeshi bias while promoting an anti pakistani and anti indian bias. Other parts of the article were plagiarized without even attempting to change the tone article. I attempted to clean up the article and provide a neutral perspective and factual evidence while providing sources. My attempts to do so were reverted by User:Kmzayeem arguing that one of my sources was a blog (it was in fact not a blog but a website run by defense analysts and defense journalists, although it had a forum attached to that page) despite the fact i provided other published references with ISBN to verify the all the main facts of the article. after several reverts the user accepted my position on the talk page, which i suspect was motivated by a desire to keep his primary account from being banned rather than a desire to preserve WP:NPOV. i suspect this from his previous edits on that page which i have also included in the following diffs

1) [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Boyra&diff=585978381&oldid=552568560 23:36, 13 December 2013] User:Pvpoodle My attempt to clean up the article from how it was previously maintained by User:Kmzayeem 2) [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Boyra&diff=586039849&oldid=585978381 12:59, 14 December 2013] by User:Kmzayeem revert to copy that was in part plagiarized from the same source that hehad a problem with me using. 3) [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Boyra&diff=552568560&oldid=552476994 14:00, 28 April 2013] by User:Kmzayeem older revert highlighting similar behavior when other users attempted to fix the page. 4) [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Boyra&diff=543439452&oldid=543302159 15:37, 11 March 2013] by User:Kmzayeem another older revert highlighting similar behavior when other users attempted to fix the page. 5) [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Boyra&diff=537543356&oldid=499287319 14:06, 10 February 2013] by User:Kmzayeem making pro-Bangladesh biased statements without any references.
 * Diffs

III) repeated vandalism of Bangladesh military pages.

Similar behavior has been seen on all the pages edited by Special:Contributions/47.23.166.154 to artificially boost up the strength of the Bangladesh armed forces pages over the last month despite warnings. This is again very similar behavior to those highlighted which leads me to believe that this is another puppet being controlled by the same person(s) Pvpoodle (talk) 02:04, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

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


 * Comment - Though I don't know how my edits match with these users but I would still like to explain my part. In the article 2001 Indian–Bangladeshi border conflict, I had made a revert in this edit which reverted to the revision made by User:Poizonbhai, that's because the edits made by the IPs and new user accounts in between seemed to be dubious to me, even though Poisonbhai was also a new account but I accepted it because it kept the figures of strengths of India and Bangladesh at 215 and 17 respectively which I thought was correct as these figures were previously mostly visible in that article whenever I looked at it (see these revisions -, which was made by experienced users which shows the same strength figures as I mentioned), here I admit that I should have spent some more time in analysing those edits and should have checked the references as well which I didn't.

Now, in the article Battle of Boyra, I just went with the usual perception that Bangladesh Liberation War (26th March 1971-16th December 1971) was mainly fought between Bangladesh/East Pakistan and Pakistan/West Pakistan which was later joined by India on 3rd December 1971. Since Battle of Boyra (22 November 1971) took place in East Pakistan and in the same period as Bangladesh Liberation War, I thought the battle was part of this war and added Bangladesh as one of the combatants in the infobox and changed some contents in the main body accordingly. Here as well I admit I didn't care to check the sources but it was because the article was poorly sourced and even the existing sources were from some blatant POV sites like bharatrakshak.com and some blogs. I kept on keeping my revision in the article until I inteeracted with User:Pvpoodle who added some other sources and after some verbose replies in the article talk page, agreed to replace the bharatrakshak.com and the bolog sites with some reliable sources. Then I just gave him the time to clean up the article and to remove the POV sites and kept myself away. However, the article still contains the same POV sources.

I have just gave my explanations but if the clerks still think there is something fishy in this case, I would wholeheartedly request to make CheckUser. -- Zayeem  (talk) 10:42, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
I don't think it's worth even considering Poizonbhai at all in this case. This editor made a total of 2 edits, only one of which is to an article that any of the other accused parties have edited at, and the edit was done at a time when the other accounts didn't seem interested in the article. CU can't be run against that editor either because their last edit was long ago and it is too stale, there is nothing left to check. As to Kmzayeem and A.Musketeer, yes they do have an overlap in the articles they edit, but not much of one. Neither editor has contributed greatly to any article the other one has, no more than one (or in one case, two) edits. Their communication styles differ dramatically, with A.Musketeer tending to add "Reply" to the beginning of each line in a discussion, while Kmzayeem edits in a more traditional, experienced manner (proper indentations, etc.). Honestly the main thing connecting these users is that both have clashed with Pvpoodle, the person who initiated this SPI. Finally, in looking at the IPs, 119.30.38.183 geolocates to Dhaka, Bangladesh. 94.76.233.203 geolocates to Strasbourg, France. 58.97.151.179 geolocates to Dhaka, Bangladesh. 47.23.166.154 geolocates to Old Bridge, New Jersey. Two of those IPs may be the same editor, but I don't see much significance to that. I don't see that behavioral patterns necessitate a CU be run on any of these editors, and I'm going to close this case with no action taken. --  At am a  頭 18:40, 28 February 2014 (UTC)