Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MUHAMMAD SAFIULLAH/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

This editor started editing around August 2017 and was blocked per WP:NOTHERE. Several obvious ducks were blocked without SPI, but they have returned. They are a big "fan" of the Nawab of Khora Siyal, a BIG fan. Using all-caps for certain words are one of their characteristics, as is starting their edit summaries with "By..." (Sock master's Special:Diff/801013517 has them all in one) Requesting checkuser to identify other's I may have missed, although considering the many mobile edits, this might prove difficult. HyperGaruda (talk) 05:13, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * NAWAB of Hindustan (blocked): Special:Diff/803266375 (editing about the Nawab of Khora Siyal and using all-caps for the title nawab); Special:Diff/803266375 (edit summary: "By correction").
 * Nawab of Khora Sayal (blocked): user name; Special:Diff/804091409 (editing about the Nawab of Khora Sayal, edit summary "By correction").
 * MUHAMMAD SIKANDAR SHAH (blocked): all-caps user name; Special:Diff/804087104 (editing about the Nawab of Khora Sayal, edit summary "By correction").
 * ALXENDAR shah (blocked): All-caps first name; "Alexander" is the western version of the (middle-)eastern "Iskandar" or "Sikandar" (see username above); Special:Diff/804093571 (editing about the Nawab of Khora Sayal, edit summary "By correction").
 * Giveaway285: Special:Diff/804657686 (edit summary "By addition of data"); Special:Diff/805296595 (re-introduction of the Nawab of Khora Siyal).
 * : Transliteration of user name (Nawab Safi Muhammad Allah) is almost the same as the sock master's; created Nawab of Khora Siyal.
 * 182.186.222.16: Special:Diff/805395648 (edited the article Nawab of Khora Siyal minutes after it was created); Special:Diff/805287305 (added a link to Nawab of Khora Siyal).

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


 * Please add to the list (trying to prevent deletion of the article mentioned earlier). --HyperGaruda (talk) 08:55, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - ~ Rob 13 Talk 06:30, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The following editors are ✅:
 * . . ~ Rob 13 Talk 06:48, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * - Please, also check this account: .  Vanjagenije  (talk)  11:42, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ as well. ~ Rob 13 Talk 12:22, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  14:25, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * . . ~ Rob 13 Talk 06:48, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * - Please, also check this account: .  Vanjagenije  (talk)  11:42, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ as well. ~ Rob 13 Talk 12:22, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  14:25, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * . . ~ Rob 13 Talk 06:48, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * - Please, also check this account: .  Vanjagenije  (talk)  11:42, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ as well. ~ Rob 13 Talk 12:22, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  14:25, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ as well. ~ Rob 13 Talk 12:22, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  14:25, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Their very fist edit to New786678's user talk page is mentioning Newblog 32, who was blocked as a sockpuppet of MUHAMMAD SAFIULLAH only two days earlier. According to their page creation log, several pages about Khora Siyal (a favourite subject of the puppet master) were created and even something about Nawab Muhammad Safiullah UmarAli. All those pages were AfD'ed as hoaxy stuff. HyperGaruda (talk) 06:23, 5 February 2018 (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

 * -, especially given their previous block for sockpuppetry. Please block the new sock indefinitely. Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:09, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Sir Sputnik - ✅.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   00:35, 10 February 2018 (UTC)


 * I'm also adding Lkjgfstyugfd to the investigation for posterity's sake. Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:10, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Tagging and closing. Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:20, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

This account was created after the socks was blocked earlier this month.. the account created some bios on some Indian monarchs (Rana Prasad, Nawab Akbar Jahan, Nawab Asif Jahan) which are unreferenced and are dubious - something similar was done by User:New786678, Saqib (talk) 06:41, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Will this ever stop? Nawab Asif Jahan has a reference to "empirekhoraseyal" and so do many of their other creations. Duckduckduck... Is it by the way possible to trigger a filter when a reference is made to URLs containing Khora Seyal/Khoraseyal/etc.; blacklist 'm maybe? --HyperGaruda (talk) 16:39, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
✅ to. . Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

This account was created after the latest sock was blocked early March. The editing pattern is very similar. Creating dubious bios on Mughal's era monarchs some. Saqib (talk) 07:20, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

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

What is meant by same writing pattern? and I think that the editing about the monarchs of Mughal era is not sin.More ever, a lot of accounts created daily on wikipedia and I am one of them who created his account in starting of March.

However, my work about nobles and states of Bengal, Bhopal, Arhamkot, Hyderabad Cutch and Baroda is good, meets with the criteria of wikipedia and necessary of wikipedia because before my editing, they lack articles and not in proper sequence but now they are in proper sequence. Nowadays, I am editing about the rulers of Gwalior because the same problem is present here and in future, I will create proper articles and make proper edits about the rulers of all sub-states of Indian subcontinent. Because many of the articles of India and Pakistan are in bad condition as compare to the articles of Western side. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dueep Eik (talk • contribs) 09:58, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Some of the bios you've created does not cite reliable sources and Google searched does not yield anything solid about those personalities therefore they appears dubious. --Saqib (talk) 10:11, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Dubious articles created by are still undeleted. --Saqib (talk) 16:40, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
 * They are fairly old by now. You'd have to look at their history to see if they meet WP:CSD. If so, tag them.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:45, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
✅ to previous socks. Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:58, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

This account was created after the latest sock was blocked early April. The editing pattern is very similar. Creating dubious bios on Mughal's era monarchs. Saqib (talk) 09:45, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

I have come up with the following evidence: --HyperGaruda (talk) 16:30, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Jamm boy, Wiki.Olyer6 and John Gell are the sole editors of the article Nawabs of Punjab (created July 2018). Sock master was also particularly interested in nawabs, a South Asian rank of nobility. Hakim Shah Jahan is another page where the sock puppets--Sir Sher, Wiki.Olyer6 and John Gell in this case--converged. Note that the only source where Hakim's name is featured, is a blog created in September 2018. Previous sock puppets also made up their own blogs to make it look like there were sources to support articles on Wikipedia.
 * After making a new account, they first start editing a handful of low-profile articles. Except for Wiki.Olyer6, a considerable amount of time passes between day 1 of editing and subsequent days, suggesting they are only interested in reaching autoconfirmed status at first. Once reached after 10 days, they move on to stuff about (South Asian) nobility and begin creating redirects and articles about it.
 * Except for Jamm boy, they are all mobile editors.
 * Their rather general edit summaries (see user contributions page) usually follow the pattern "[Verb]ed [object]", e.g. "Added content", "Made link", "Removed red link". Note the consistently capitalised first word.
 * All accounts were created after the previous was blocked in April 2018: Sir Sher on 9 May 2018, Jamm boy on 7 June 2018, John Gell on 14 July 2018 and Wiki.Olyer6 on 22 July 2018.

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Of course, it was only a matter of time... added two more based on their edit summary style and work on related pages. --HyperGaruda (talk) 12:44, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Guys, please read WPI SPI rules again. giving evidence is not optional. -- D Big X ray ᗙ  14:01, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

So, its mean that anyone who make articles on Pre-Pakistani nobility is a sockpuppet.... Great! I created almost 20 articles out of which mostly have sources. It is right that the given citations in "reference section" of my articles are not taken from books and newspaper but to websites, self-published and others etc.... But it doesn't mean that they are hoax. It is also right that we not find their names on "Google books" because the mostly books related to lower royalty of South Asia are not available on google. But it's doesn't mean that they are not notable and their names are not present on pages of history... And my articles on Wikipedia are not frist with these websites... If you see list of Nawabs of Bengal and Nawabs of Murshidabad, then you realized that most of these articles are not cited with any references and have only single self-published website in external link section. Similarly if you list Nawab of Banganapalle, Rajas of Kolhapur, Nawabs of Mamdot and many other list of Nawabs and Rajas, you find that there is no high verified source is cited with them. So, at last,  I request to you,  please remove my name from this nomination. I will beware in future during creating articles. Thanks! John Gell (talk) 09:50, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
 * For someone who supposedly started editing only 2 months ago, I find his wikinotability vocabulary quite advanced. Especially considering that the current SPI made no mention at all about notability, Google Books, self-publishing etc. Heck, even the AfDs ([1], [2]) in which he is involved were only started a few days ago. It is hard to believe he caught up on such terminology in those AfDs, where "self-publishing" has not been discussed so far. To me it is clear this user has had experience with Wikipedia before User:John Gell was created. --HyperGaruda (talk) 11:24, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

First point is that, I am on Wikipedia from 3 months not from 2 months. Second point is that, my wikinotability vocabulary is not much advanced (I hope it become true) but little advanced and it is because when anyone join Wikipedia, a welcome notification and link to some useful pages come to his talk page which help him for editing Wikipedia, creating articles and much more. I read most of pages from them at that time and that's why my editing percentage is low in starting and till now when I find any page relating to Wikipedia, I like to read it. And also at once during adding my name to Pakistani Members page, I searched some "users pages" of editors to get help to edit my "user page". While this, I found that some users are blocked and then I saw reasons of their blocking, which also helps me to know about Wikipedia, wikiprojects, wikiterms and wikirules. My friend also helps me about it as he was also blocked. So from here I knew about process of reviewing, term of references, term of self-publishing, reasons of deletion process and much more. According to which, if any page has 2 references, then it is reviewed and if it has less than two references or self-published or blogs or other websites sources then it is deleted or not-deleted according to situation and article. I hope that now you will understand my view in my "weak english".
 * Just over 2½ month to be precise. Your welcome notification was posted at 02:10 on 17 August 2018, a month after you started editing, so the initially low editing frequency could not have been because you were studying your welcome message. In fact, you've edited for four days straight right after the welcome message. Searched for help from other users? You have not asked anyone for any help, if I take a look at your contributions to talk pages, user talk pages (1 reply to a post on you own TP), wikipedia namespace, wikipedia talk pages (0 edits), help pages (0 edits), and help talk pages (0 edits). Your blocked friend? Which account was that? --HyperGaruda (talk) 19:52, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

I think that you not understand my point of view. As a beginner, no one know anything about Wikipedia, I also. Before creating my account, I searched some article (not remember name of article now) on Wikipedia and at bottom of page I saw name of someone and time from last edit. I clicked this name and from there (by clicking and jumping from one page to another) I knew that anyone can edit Wikipedia and knew much about Wikipedia. And intersting point is that this "some unknown editor" is also blocked. So, I also knew that any senior editor can block anyone due to wrong editing. It is right that my welcome notification arrived on August 17, 2018 but I knew many things about deletion due to studying user pages of blocked person before this but not knew about editing and creating. But after this notification I also knew about editing, etc and you will also see that my editing percentage is low after this notification because due to studying wiki related articles.

I not said that I asked anyone for help. I said that I searched the user pages of editor to take template (which is used in user page) from their user pages. While during this, I know deeply about blocking as told in previous answer. And name of my friend is Faizan but not know name of its account.

(I got frustrated with this answering and questioning. Is it for any job....??? 🤔)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * John Gell & Wiki.Olyer6 are to each other (based only on technical evidence). Those two plus Jamm boy are  to MUHAMMAD SAFIULLAH. CU won't be much help here so . Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:56, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I've left a message on User talk:John Gell asking for comments on this SPI. I'm placing this SPI on hold to allow time for a response. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:01, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I've blocked John Gell and Wiki.Olyer6 based on the behavioural evidence as, at least, socks of each other (though I suspect they are MUHAMMAD SAFIULLAH) combined with the non-exclusionary CU finding. The explanation provided does not adequately explain the connection between John Gell and Wiki.Olyer6 nor is it believable enough to explain the knowledge John Gell had of the project in their initial edits. I'm not convinced on the other accounts. Closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:15, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

One more for the record: while trying to google Hakim Shah Jahan in relation to its AfD, I stumbled upon House of Hakim, which was edited last month by blocked socks John Gell and Wiki.Olyer6. However, its creator Nicola Paek was active in mid-April, just after sock Dueep Eik's block. As in the case of John Gell, Nicola Paek started editing a few seemingly unrelated articles (12-17 April), then a hiatus of a few days followed and then, upon reaching autoconfirmed status after 10 days (22 April), the floodgates opened with new redirects and major article expansions about South Asian royalty (e.g. List of Mughal empresses). Something even more interesting I just realised: the editors are particularly fond of the word "required" and derivatives in their edit summaries: compare Nicola Paek, John Gell and Wiki.Olyer6. In particular, Nicola Peak's "Removed unreferenced and unrequired content. Not meets with standards of Wiikipedia" is very similar to John Gell's "Removed unreferenced and unrequired content that does not meet with Wikipedia rules". Duck? HyperGaruda (talk) 18:25, 4 October 2018 (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
The user hasn't edited in over five months. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:39, 4 October 2018 (UTC)