Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Masoom shafi/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets

 * ( original case name)


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

Amazonia777 reinstating Tanha777's unsourced and unexplained edit at Dogra dynasty. Same pattern of editing, including marking edits as "minor". Kautilya3 (talk) 14:49, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
 * It is possible that both the accounts are socks of some other master. I can't tell. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:56, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Another account called showed up, which seems suspiciously like the others. Removing/corrupting sourced content and marking them as "minor". -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:40, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Why my name has been added? Just because I have "777" in my username and I have edited articles related to Jammu and Kashmir in the recent past doesn't mean I am a sockpuppet or whatever. You may investigate if you want. I have been on Wiki since Jan 2017, while Tanha777 seems to have created the account in Sept 2021. But, is this how Wikipedia trusts its editors? FlyJet777 (talk) 19:02, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not involved, but as someone who's been suspected as a sockpuppet myself, it happens. I wouldn't take it personally. Coincidences can look suspicious. And the checkuser has found you innocent (or at least uninvolved), so this shouldn't trouble you further. – Anon423 (talk) 04:57, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Adding for CU consideration as well, as the Interaction Analyzer shows a relationship between this set of accounts. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 18:24, 5 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you FlyJet777 for your response. In that case, it appears that you have a follower who is registering similarly named accounts and editing the same articles.  I agree that this is circumstantial and does not necessitate foul play, but is worthy of note for the purposes of this investigation.  Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 18:45, 6 October 2021 (UTC)


 * - There are sleepers here, but I don't have the energy to make sure I'm getting them all, so I'll leave this for another CU or when I come back to it next. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 04:02, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I set the case status to endorse – it seems like cuendorse doesn't work. --Blablubbs (talk) 10:13, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * - ~TNT (she/her • talk) 23:53, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Group 1:
 * are all ✅ to each other
 * are all ✅ to each other
 * are all ✅ to each other
 * are all ✅ to each other
 * are all ✅ to each other
 * are all ✅ to each other


 * Group 2:
 * are all ✅ to each other
 * ∴ are ✅ to  ~TNT (she/her • talk) 00:07, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
 * is ❌ (they did not appear in any of the checks above, though I have not checked them directly) ~TNT (she/her • talk) 14:51, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Moved case to oldest confirmed account. - please indef the confirmed accounts. They're all behaviourally related and editing disruptively, overlapping with each other, etc. Since FlyJet777 didn't appear in the check, is a much more tenured account and seems to make constructive edits, I don't think they have anything to do with this. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 15:06, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
 * , closing. --Blablubbs (talk) 10:19, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
 * ∴ are ✅ to  ~TNT (she/her • talk) 00:07, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
 * is ❌ (they did not appear in any of the checks above, though I have not checked them directly) ~TNT (she/her • talk) 14:51, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Moved case to oldest confirmed account. - please indef the confirmed accounts. They're all behaviourally related and editing disruptively, overlapping with each other, etc. Since FlyJet777 didn't appear in the check, is a much more tenured account and seems to make constructive edits, I don't think they have anything to do with this. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 15:06, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
 * , closing. --Blablubbs (talk) 10:19, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Reinsertion of the exact same edits by the master and past socks. . Asking for CU to check for other socks. Gotitbro (talk) 10:15, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

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

Compare Amazonia777 and Citizen9077. Kautilya3 (talk) 18:50, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
 
 * - yes, looks like them based on edits like and, and I also noticed  making the same edits to the same articles,  so I've added them to the list. Please CU and check for sleepers given the number of accounts found last time.  Thanks, Spicy (talk) 04:59, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Both as ducks in the meantime.  --Blablubbs (talk) 11:53, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
 * - -- RoySmith (talk) 02:41, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
 * . I poked around a bit for sleepers and didn't see any. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:31, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Tagged as suspected based on behaviour, closing. Spicy (talk) 14:37, 17 October 2021 (UTC)