Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ksweith/Archive

Evidence submitted by Syncategoremata

 * Ksweith, Kngwa83 and 67.176.205.162 have been engaged in a running dispute with AnonMoos on the Naskh (tafsir) article, with each making the same edits (or reverting back to the same version).
 * 67.176.205.162 deleted an item on the Talk:Anthropomorphism page (reverted here), and a day later, Ksweith added a comment there to complain about the same item (here).
 * 67.176.205.162 makes this edit at Dungan people which is reverted by another editor, and then redone by Kngwa83 two days later (here).
 * All three edit mostly on Islamic articles, and some on Buddhism; see, , and for the intersections, including some to low activity articles.

This user appears to have created two fresh accounts, Illbased and Blackken, to redo edits that had been done by 67.176.205.162, and that had been reverted by myself and another editor. (Note that the IP is a Chicago, Illinois IP, which might explain the name "Illbased".)
 * I had reverted an edit by 67.176.205.162 from Islamic_Golden_Age (here).
 * The same change had been made at Science in medieval Islam by 67.176.205.162 and was reverted by CambridgeBayWeather (here).
 * Illbased, a freshly created account, repeats both edits (here and here).
 * Blackken, yet another freshly created account, repeats one of these edits. (This edit is very late at night for Chicago, but 67.176.205.162 has edited at about that time of night before now.)

Note that on 28 June, Illbased makes 3 edits at at about 22:00, then 67.176.205.162 makes a few edits, then Kngwa83 makes one, then Ksweith and then comes another from the IP address.

List of low level vandalism from all these accounts: All of these accounts have warnings on their talk pages for unexplained deletion of content from a similar range of articles. They also have a habit of deleting other people's material from article talk pages:, , , and.
 * deletion of referenced content with the edit summary "the statement didn't appear in the writing" (it does);
 * deletion of referenced content with the edit summary "the statement did not appear in book" (it does);
 * deletion of a reference with the edit summary "mistake in spacing";
 * deletion of content with the edit summary "font issues".

None of these accounts has responded to any of the notices or requests on their talk pages.

–Syncategoremata (talk) 22:18, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
The types of articles, edit summaries, and edits (as noted in the evidence above) are too similar to conclude otherwise. All accounts indefinitely blocked and tagged, IP blocked 1 month. –MuZemike 20:07, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Syncategoremata
Ksweith has just been blocked as a sock puppet (Sockpuppet_investigations/Ksweith/Archive) but a new account has appeared, Yoice95, created 2 days before the other account was blocked, but after they had been warned that an SPI was under way.

These edits to the Sufi philosophy article by the previously blocked IP match these edits to the Sufi psychology article by this new account (and were done within a few minutes of each other). They have also repeated the edit that some of their previous accounts had repeatedly made at Naskh (tafsir).

I've requested a checkuser as there may be other accounts around: this user has created throwaway accounts for particular edits before now (see the previous case).

–Syncategoremata (talk) 22:09, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - Ksweith blocked, but a sleeper check would be useful. NW ( Talk ) 22:28, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅. Nothing else new there. --jpgordon:==( o ) 04:55, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Syncategoremata
This account has repeated several edits made by the previous Ksweith socks, with similar edit summaries:
 * repeating this edit to Naskh (tafsir) (matches these edits:, , , amongst many more by this operator);
 * repeating this edit to Islamic Golden Age (matches this edit and this edit);
 * repeating this edit to Alevi history (matches this edit).

Checkuser requested again: one was run on Yoice95, finding no other accounts, but this account is a sleeper (last edit before now was back in April, when the account was created).

–Syncategoremata (talk) 10:15, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
– Behavioral evidence clearly indicates that this is Ksweith, no CU necessary. Since this was created before the relevant IPs were blocked, I don't think CU will come up with much else, especially given the last CU that Jpgordon run. –MuZemike 19:09, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Kencom indefinitely blocked and tagged. –MuZemike 19:09, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by J8079s
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Ksweith/Archive Blocked for one month now back making the same edits J8079s (talk) 21:14, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Back on August 6 and 8 making the same edits []

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users
Moved from Sockpuppet investigations/67.176.205.162. wiooiw (talk) 04:15, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 * Obvious, blocked for a week as these were the only edits coming out of this ip for the time being. NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 17:06, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Supertouch

 * Each username's most recent edits to Abu al-Hasan al-Ash'ari Supertouch (talk) 00:04, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The following was posted on the talk page for Abu al-Hasan al-Ash'ari:
 * Ksweith (talk) 19:22, 12 September 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.176.205.162 (talk)  --

Supertouch (talk) 00:32, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

I am not any of tags mentioned below. My younger brother, however, is Ksweith. Supertouch in "bad faith" was merely reflecting a very ideology-charge bias in his edits on the Al-Ashari page, despite the fact that I had added links that refuted his edits. He takes Salafi propaganda for historical truth, add ruthlessly deletes anything that proves it false. Anyone knowledgeable on the subject on Asharism will know that Supertouch's edits are no more than Salafi revisionism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.176.205.162 (talk) 02:33, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
✅ TN X Man  00:38, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Indefinitely blocked all but SMA1989, as they have no edits. Admittedly I'm brand new to this, so I'm seeking help from NativeForeigner on how to proceed from here. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 03:40, 13 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Unsure on the IP, although I blocked/tagged the zero edit user. NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 03:51, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Everything looks done. TN X Man  18:55, 13 September 2010 (UTC)