Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kroshta/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

All accounts joined few hours ago and basically supporting the undeletion of Articles for deletion/Majhraut. Tagging. Heba Aisha (talk) 13:34, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Comment: These all are surely the socks of as they all were created to vote stack in an AFD. Requesting to immediately block of all them. Regards. Kichu🐘 Need any help? 15:05, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment : I just checked only two user id UnitedYadava and GopatiSahab have been created few hours ago. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kroshta (talk • contribs) 18:04, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * – obvious abusive socking and votestacking; Krishnaut yadavji (who overlaps with the suspected master quite a lot) MightyAbhira are old-ish accounts, so there's reason to believe there might be sleepers. CU, please look for potential other accounts. Blablubbs&#124;talk 18:29, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Bagging and tagging confirmed socks.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   19:12, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Bagging and tagging confirmed socks.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   19:12, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Bagging and tagging confirmed socks.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   19:12, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Bagging and tagging confirmed socks.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   19:12, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Bagging and tagging confirmed socks.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   19:12, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Bagging and tagging confirmed socks.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   19:12, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Bagging and tagging confirmed socks.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   19:12, 11 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Likely is good enough for me given the overlap.  – please indef the remaining one too.  Blablubbs&#124;talk 19:20, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅, and I can also add as ✅ as well., closing. Mz7 (talk) 21:41, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Because of the apparent long-term disregard for our policies and guidelines, and this newly discovered sleeper account, I have extended the master's block to indefinite. I would like to see an acknowledgement of the concerns here before they can return to editing. Mz7 (talk) 21:51, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

All these accounts are editing just few pages, example Majhraut, which were created by Kroshta. It is possible that if not sockpuppet they are WP:MEATPUPPET. One of the blocked sock was sharing an email to all. This is possible that they are involved in off wiki coordination to disrupt Yadav caste related articles. Heba Aisha (talk) 11:46, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , see this too.Heba Aisha (talk) 16:13, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , what could be the purpose of cleaning talk page, which contain warnings about blocking and sockpuppetry notice.? Tagging admin, who earlier dealt with the case . Heba Aisha (talk) 09:39, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Also, I can't understand the purpose of reverting it to that version when someone posted welcome message in December 2020, since, block is temporary, it may be an attempt to clean up past records. Heba Aisha (talk) 09:44, 18 April 2021 (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

 * . They're in a relatively-close geolocation, but the ranges and user agents are different.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:54, 15 April 2021 (UTC)


 * For technical reasons, I'm inclined to say that this is probably a separate person, but I've gone ahead and blocked the account indefinitely for disruptive editing in general. Closing. Mz7 (talk) 01:58, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets

 * 1) The user had initial interest in same page where the sockpuppeteer was involved in content dispute i.e Zamindars of Bihar. And he has done major edits to this page doing same changes that the blocked editor was doing.
 * 2) The editor was blocked while claiming lack of neutrality on the part of old editors and after coming back with new account started targeting the pages of a special caste group.
 * 3) They have flooded my user page with notices for the edits I have done long ago..
 * 4) Further it seems that they are working with another active account as both seems to be collaborating no numerous articles related to caste., and the user are both editing same set of pages and putting numerous notices together on my talk pages and pinging me on various pages, which seems they are not assuming WP: Good faith. Heba Aisha (talk) 16:56, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

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


 * I have added the information in the another case page which should be merged in this case. I want to keep it simple for you to resolve, so not posting the evidence here too. Check that page. Thanks Heba Aisha (talk) 08:50, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, I understand that there is a process in place with regards to this but could the IP match check just be carried out when possible as I don’t feel comfortable with continuing to edit with this looming over me. You don’t need to make evidence public or anything like that. Thank you. RuudVanClerk (talk) 18:00, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Please also see Sockpuppet investigations/RuudVanClerk which should be merged into this SPI.
 * - Can you please provide 2-3 diffs directly comparing the socks  to each other and to the suspected master  using bullet points, with a brief explanation of what clear connection between the accounts the diffs show so that the case can be progressed. Thanks, --Jack Frost (talk) 01:27, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Closing as redundant to the case below. Spicy (talk) 15:17, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets

 * ( originally filed under this user)


 * 1) The issues started and the linkage between both editors was revealed when one user added this tag of notability, though the Google search gives a fair idea about the notability of topic. Another user restored the tag back.
 * 2) Coming of these editors on my talk page one after another showed that they are working together and interestingly majority of edits from one of the account has been on articles created by me in an unconstructive manner. (As for example, here i reverted the image telling the reason that the article is about a political terminology and should contain image of politicians but he put that image of caste group twice
 * 3) Interest in same set of pages and working in collaboration like WP: Meatpuppets. They are flooding my talk page one after another and infact bringing months old edits to put notices. The edits by users shows interest in pages like Koeri and other Bihar related pages and they are involved specially in unconstructive edits on those pages where i worked for the most of the time.. This seems to be WP:CTDAPE.
 * 4) Here is the set of pages where they are involved in doing similar type of edits and the reference for the same..
 * 5) The users activity has been limited to pages created by me. In violation of WP:NPOV, he is doing unconstructive changes in the articles.
 * 6) There also exists WP:COI issue and lack of WP:NPOV, as the user was involved in edit warring on pages like Koeri. The source he put there don't say anything about shudra rather calls 18 castes as backward castes., earlier it was removed by another editor but this was reverted back again and again by the user. Heba Aisha (talk) 19:49, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

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

Happy for the check to go ahead and would request an IP check to also be carried out although I would have liked to have been notified of the accusations as per the rules. RuudVanClerk (talk) 09:50, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

This is funny for a sockpuppetry investigation, people could have similar interest and i am not a new account. In fact i have even reverted edits of one of the other accounts which i am being associated with here. Also for the tag revert that i am being accused of i clearly mentioned not to just restore to a particular version, since it also removed my edits. I had no interest in the notify tag.Here. As for revenge part, revenge for what exactly? The only reason i was going through edits was i observed you had similar interests in bihar politics and history. In my personal opinion i haven't made any vandalizing edits on any article, i was just improving the pages and trying to get better understanding of how wiki pages could be improved further. This is not against any rule. On the contrary i observed trying to own some pages and reverting to a particular version of some handles which the user interacts often with, which i notified her about too. But i have given similar notices to other users too which one can see in my history. There was no malice here. Another point being, you could see in my user page there was 1 warning and revert from another editor.I thanked him for letting me know the rules and from my history you can see there has been no "revenge" against him :D. Here. Rest i will leave it to the admins and the checkbot which will clearly show this is not a valid accusation. Lord 0f Avernus (talk) 10:34, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Have you ever checked what you have done on the pretext of improving an article. You have introduced same image in three different articles with different context and topic and almost deteriorated many of them. In many edits you have used frivolous references to add frivolous content as suggested by [here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1082744219]


 * 1) Here in the article written on politics related topic you have added image of caste group and engaged in edit warring to keep it anyhow. Heba Aisha (talk) 13:52, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * also looping . I have no words here, both the pages the user has mentioned have 0 edits done by me. Neither have i added any image or reverted or moved or removed any image/word/letter on these pages. Link for user contribution on these pages. Here https://sigma.toolforge.org/usersearch.py?name=Lord+0f+Avernus&page=Luv-Kush_equation&max=500&server=enwiki & https://sigma.toolforge.org/usersearch.py?name=Lord+0f+Avernus&page=Koeri&server=enwiki&max=.
 * I just dont understand does the user have some vendetta against me and somehow trying to drag me in his/her edit warring with someone else and trying to implicate me as well. This is frustrating and feels like attempt to harass a fellow comparatively new contributor. Lord 0f Avernus (talk) 15:32, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * just see this as well, she/he again just reverted an edit done, without discussion or addressing the last edit summary comment.
 * Is this not owning a page and discouraging new editors? Lord 0f Avernus (talk) 15:42, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Want to bring to attention of this change  done by User:Heba Aisha . Now this image has already been discussed multiple times as you can see in the talk page discussion here . Now if i revert user's change it would look like i am reverting  to version of User:RuudVanClerk . Seems like a bait attempt to somehow implicate me as sockpuppet or to discourage me or/and others from improving Bihari Rajput page all together. Lord 0f Avernus (talk) 21:26, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
 * That discussion didn't happened for Bihari Rajput page. It was removed from that page in edit wars by other editors. There is no issues in keeping it on that page. This has nothing to do with this report. Stick to the main point .Heba Aisha (talk) 22:25, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I have put the links to the discussion in my comment above, there are 2 discussions done. Its relevant to this report since seems like you are using this investigation to make your preferred changes on Bihari Rajput again. Anyway i wanted to bring it to attention of Admin beforehand. Lord 0f Avernus (talk) 04:42, 21 April 2022 (UTC)


 * More conclusive evidence of WP: Meatpuppetry
 * Tag team battle with other editors to restore same content on Bihari Rajput.
 * Interest in putting same content on Bihari Rajput
 * Tag team action on Koeri caste related articles.
 * Bombarding my talk page teaming up together simultaneously accusing me of owning an article .Heba Aisha (talk) 13:58, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Engaging me on different talk pages: Earlier, intrest of these users was Bihari Rajput but later they resorted to reversion and at first and later, started reverting only those articles in which i have made recent edits. They infact tracked my activities and their activity can be seen on all the pages where i visited recently. Heba Aisha (talk) 14:14, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
 * This is again an attempt to mislead the admin, in the articles mentioned above i have 0 edits on User_talk:RegentsPark or koeri. Here is the user contribution log for the same &  . Also U|RuudVanClerk has 0 edits on Afsar_massacre, link for the same here  . The only other page mentioned is Bihari Rajput on which i have been active since last year as mentioned earler. All this just seems a hounding mechanism to stop other editors from improving pages which U|Heba Aisha wants to own completely without any counter views put. Lord 0f Avernus (talk) 14:58, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Can you please confirm whether you are accusing me of sock-puppetry or meatpuppetry? Are you also aware that I can report you to the admins for your allegations of “revenge”? Once again, I request for an IP check to be carried out at the earliest for the avoidance of all doubt. RuudVanClerk (talk) 14:03, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * The allegations of me being Kroshta are quite baseless as well. That user from his edit history mainly edited Ahir-related articles. What we have here is a desperate attempting to try and have us suspended by covering as many different umbrellas as possible. These include, allegations of sock puppetry, meat puppetry, and different users with separate edit histories. It is also worth mentioning that Bihar has 100 million people so editing a Bihar-related article isn’t indicative of anything. For the third time, please can someone carry out the IP check. I am using a home broadband and mobile network as well so to avoid any doubt of a VPN being used. RuudVanClerk (talk) 15:29, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok, lets see bihari rajput page if you want. I have been active on this page since last year,Here, the other user is new on this page..
 * I have done similar correction then also which is evident in the link i provided, since silhadi was from malwa he is irrelevant to Bihar rajput page.Similarly for the kolff material i have again and again pointed out exact page that he doesnt mention bihari rajputs as pseudo. Anyways the point being I have been raising this issue since long when the other user was not even in the picture, I even created a section for discussion in the article talk page but you never responded to that, instead just kept reverting to your favorite version which amounts to Owning of the page for which i notified you.User talk:Heba Aisha . Now coming to team tagging, now that i was going through your talk page, is this not team tagging User talk:Heba Aisha, someone approached you to put bihari rajput in watchlist, you go ahead with reverting to the users version without taking part in any talk page discussions. Seems like a reverse investigation needs to be done. Lord 0f Avernus (talk) 15:22, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Earlier i was accused of some image addition on koeri page, when pointed out that i have 0 edits on those pages now the user is desperately trying to stick something or the other .Here i have clearly mentioned the source doesnt contain that term kshatriya reformer, is one not supposed to improve pages now ?For this  does the user not see the edit summary, i have written and i quote "Dont just revert back to a prticular version with incorrect edit summary, there were other edits apart from notability tag which got removed, please assume good faith". One can clearly see i am least bothered about notability tag, i only reverted because the user reverted my changes as well without addressing my edit comment. There are numerous such reverts done by user which reflects owning a page behaviour. Now as for owning of page notice is concerned, notices are sent based on how you behave. Just a cursory look on your talk page shows multiple people in the past too have given you such notices which means the user have been in the past too done similar ownings.links for the same User talk:Heba Aisha#June 2021 User talk:Heba Aisha#Politics in Bihar disruptive reversion User talk:Heba Aisha#April 2022.
 * With more and more accusations that the user is making, seems like the user is on a vendetta hunt because someone pointed out their mistake or tried providing a view different from the user. Lord 0f Avernus (talk) 05:59, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for checking. This process and these frivolous accusations have taken a great mental toll on me and it’s good to be somewhat vindicated (if not entirely yet). I want to further add, as you can see my IP is based on a home broadband in a Western European country. Based on a glance of Kroshtas edits, he had poor English and I can almost guarantee that his IP was based in Asia or wherever. I say this to further add to my defence that these accusations of sock puppetry are frivolous and unfounded.RuudVanClerk (talk) 18:33, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I am not aware if we are supposed to disclose our IP location, but to give an approximate idea all my mobile edits are from my home location broadband or mobile data, and most of my non mobile edits would be from my office location vpn ip, due to work from home situation in covid time, as all of us would be aware. Lord 0f Avernus (talk) 20:05, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
 * There's no rule that says you can't divulge your own location or IP. It's not recommended, but that's entirely up to you.  I do feel the need, however, to clearly state that as a checkuser, I can't and won't make any public comment which could connect a user account to an IP address. -- RoySmith (talk) 20:09, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok, in that case I will have no issues disclosing it to you privately, if the need arises. Also you could easily verify my above statement about mobile/non mobile edits if you have access to my IP data. I can confirm one thing though, none of my edits would be from an ip in western europe. Lord 0f Avernus (talk) 20:15, 21 April 2022 (UTC)


 * @Tamzin Hi, is there any sanctions in place for the personal attacks that the reporting user made against myself. These include accusing me of being dishonest, being motivated by “revenge”, of secretly coordinating with others among other slanderous accusations. How can I take this forward because ultimately this entire process has been waste of time for everyone involved and zero evidence has been provided. RuudVanClerk (talk) 14:37, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Can you please provide 2-3 diffs directly comparing the socks to each other and to the suspected master  using bullet points, with a brief explanation of what clear connection between the accounts the diffs are showing so that the case can be progressed. Thanks, --Jack Frost (talk) 01:22, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Sure, Kroshta was blocked after an edit war and had developed serious disagreement with me. These users are mostly editing pages created by me and that looks like they are engaged in what we call WP:CTDAPE. Now, when i reverted some pages back to original both came one after another on my talk page and bombarded it with notices.. The user has interest in Zamindars of Bihar, blocked editor also had . We can see from the edits of lord of Avernus that he is mostly disrupting articles created by me . Some kind of revenge. Heba Aisha (talk) 08:41, 19 April 2022 (UTC)


 * - Could an adminclerk please merge this into Sockpuppet investigations/Kroshta, as it appears the reporter believes ==  == . --Jack Frost (talk) 00:17, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I've carried out the merge (which doesn't require an admin clerk). I've also moved some extended discussion out of this section and into the "comments by other users" section. I don't think further back-and-forth discussion between the participants here is likely to be helpful in resolving this SPI. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 15:32, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
 * - -- RoySmith (talk) 17:43, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
 * RuudVanClerk is ❌ to Lord 0f Avernus, although there is indication of proxy use, so  might also apply.  I have very little historical data in this case, but what I've got indicates these two are probably not Kroshta. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:50, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
 * There is a very high burden of proof to show that two editors active in the same topic area are engaged in meatpuppetry, rather than simply showing up on pages they both have an interest in. I don't see any evidence presented above that would distinguish this case from many other editorial conflicts. If the allegation is that these editors are working together to harass you, Heba Aisha, that seems more like a matter for WP:AN/I. I would remind everyone that general sanctions are in effect for the South Asian social groups topic area and discretionary sanctions for the broader India/Pakistan/Afghanistan topic area, and to be on their best behavior. . --  Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she/they) 21:37, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
 * No, there is not. Acknowledging the uncomfortableness of being brought to SPI, the matter has been closed without action and it would seem wise for all parties to go back to building an encyclopaedia. I will also echo 's reminder that general sanctions are in effect for the South Asian social groups topic area and discretionary sanctions for the broader India/Pakistan/Afghanistan topic area. --Jack Frost (talk) 16:00, 22 April 2022 (UTC)