Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mani1/Archive

Evidence submitted by Elockid
Mani1 apparently is also. So I created the page based on the that.

All of the accounts and IP's listed there have been deliberately trying to reinstate the same edit without any reason, persistently breaking NPOV policy (adding preferences to which sources they like and don't like) and eliminating any edits in between. The one on top is the first edit made by Mani1:


 * Mani1's edit
 * Passrain
 * Abtinb
 * Professional Assasin

It's also strange how these accounts have also found a liking to an article that they have never edit before and started editing it only after Mani1 edited article. Elockid ( Talk·Contribs ) 20:50, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * If it's not sockpuppetry, it's seems like meatpuppetry at the least. Elockid ( Talk·Contribs ) 20:59, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.


 * This user imports fabricated data on all of the language related articles in favor of his own language, then accuses everyone who reverts his vandalism by sockpuppetary. It is totally ridiculous. He must be banned for vandalism.--Professional Assassin (talk) 20:08, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * PS: I am a totally established user in German, English, Persian Wikipedias and Wikimedia Commons and Wiki-species. You can find links to all those accounts in my user-page. Accusing me of sockpuppetary just made me laugh. Thank you for your joke! :))) --Professional Assassin (talk) 20:12, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Please see what WP:Vandalism is before accusing anyone of vandalism. You haven't reverted a single ounce of vandalism. Furthermore, removing valid references without explanation can be considered as vandalism. Persistently adding "the real numbers", "non-reliable source", "doesn't have a reliable source" is a violation of WP:NPOV policy. This again is not vandalism. I haven't fabricated anything. Elockid ( Talk·Contribs ) 20:13, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I didn't add anything to the article! User:Mani1 did. I saw his edits and his sources were reliable but yours were not. I just simply reverted to the correct version of article.--Professional Assassin (talk) 20:15, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Please address the violations of the NPOV policy I have expressed and the other comments I have left on that page regarding "native speakers in the meanwhile. Elockid ( Talk·Contribs ) 20:21, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * You also didn't revert to Mani1's revision, you actually reverted to Abtinb. Elockid ( Talk·Contribs ) 21:07, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Then you better look at this and this. I am no longer interested to reply to your baseless accusations.--Professional Assassin (talk) 21:32, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * We are different users and are active in the Persian Wikipedia and some in the English one. We were talking about that article in the Persian Wikipedia and got interested in it here. If this is a violation of any rule just tell us that.--ماني a.k.a. &#91;&#91;User:Mani1&#93;&#93; (talk) 20:57, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I would have thought that the edit summaries of POV were good indication that the NPOV policy was being broken. I mean the suspected accounts apparently looked at the history of the article. Elockid ( Talk·Contribs ) 21:07, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * If you look at the history of the edits by each one of us in English Wikipedia you see we are established users with edits in very different ranges of articles. I, myself, am a moderator in the Persian Wikipedia and have been active in the English Wikipedia for more than 5 years with thuasands of edists without any problems. I am the main interwiki-connector between the English and Persian wikis. If your problem is about my edits in that language list I'll leave it alone because I need my access for the numerous interwikis I add every day.--ماني a.k.a. &#91;&#91;User:Mani1&#93;&#93; (talk) 21:16, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * That's not the problem. It's that one account after the other, accounts that have never edited the article before just suddenly came to the article and went on going to the same revision without explanation and have similar "ideas". Elockid ( Talk·Contribs ) 21:44, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * As I told you One of the users in the Persian Wikipedia's village pump wrote about the wrong statistics in that article. It attracted my attention and I made some edits in it and wrote in that village pump that I edited it. This attracted some other user's attention to it. Simple as that.--ماني a.k.a. &#91;&#91;User:Mani1&#93;&#93; (talk) 22:01, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, I think I see where you're coming from. But reinstating the same exact revision (not doing anything different) without any sort of explanations despite concerns and the above stated is what raised me to believe that the users are related or meatpuppetry was involved. Elockid ( Talk·Contribs ) 22:13, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * You were right in doing so. (This is by the way the discussion in that village pump: click on the first blue link there). I'll make no more edits in that article without explanations (I did edit because in my opinion the ethnologue has just used partial statistics of one dialect of Persian instead of a complete one ...). We should ask the other users to explain their edits fully too. Take care.--ماني a.k.a. &#91;&#91;User:Mani1&#93;&#93; (talk) 22:27, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * So there seems to be a misunderstanding. Can a clerk close this? <b style="font-family:papyrus; color:darkred;">Elockid</b> ( Talk·Contribs ) 22:36, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * i am in fa.wikipedia.com .you cas see my history edits in this page and see my activity in this pagePassrain (talk) 12:16, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Conclusions
Closing SPI case upon filer's request. –MuZemike 19:19, 6 January 2010 (UTC)