Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nvarunk/Archive

26 March 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

I first came across this group via a request at REFUND, where Ananya9537 asked to have Dhananjay Acharya restored. It had been deleted as WP:G11, but the argument was made over notability. While declining the request I noticed that he had re-created the article at Dhananjay acharya, which is currently up for AfD. Just recently I discovered that Madhu9537 had created StudentWisdom in the mainspace, which was tagged as WP:A7 but also had some issues with promotion. The editor has a draft copy here and comparing this to the page for Acharya, the writing styles seem fairly similar. I also note that their usernames are similar, as they both have the same numbers in their names.

This looks like it's a case of either sockpuppety or meatpuppetry. If it's not one person, it's certainly two people working in tandem. I don't think that we need to do a sweep, but if anyone wants to do that then that's fine. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  09:12, 26 March 2016 (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

 * - Please, compare those two accounts.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  21:38, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
 * , and  are ✅ to each other. This SPI should be updated to note Nvarunk as the master account.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots  23:01, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅, case moved. All blocked and tagged. It's time to close!  Vanjagenije  (talk)  13:53, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Reopening - is there any way to check for sleepers? I'm concerned because I just happened upon an editor  adding studentwisdom.com to an article, along with newkannada.com and freshkannada.com. This raises spam concerns, and as I chase around some of these crappy references, I note other uses like Bangwiki (an editor that I don't think I've had a problem with before) adding the same sites. Might be a long shot, but there is a weird intersection with Naveenbt. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:52, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
 * There are too many ranges at play to make a sleeper check feasible. Perhaps the links can be blacklisted? Note that is ✅, blocked and tagged.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots  19:01, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks Ponyo! At least we got another sock... Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:30, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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


 * Most of Supernova's 19 or so edits have been for the purpose of spamming newkannada.com at Wikipedia. including several from 2014
 * Quietdhanu, appears to be here for the same thing:
 * Even their edit summaries are similar: Supernova9537: "Corrected and updated deadlinks." Quietdhanu: "Corrected and updated deadlinks."
 * They've both contested deletion of BhavyaBharat.
 * I suspect that Sinchana99 is part of the same ring, since they were the one who created the BhavyaBharat article. It's odd that two people with spammy histories would show up in support of an article that had been created days before.

Circa April 2016 I found another account, had been spamming newkannada.com.. Ponyo indeffed them after a CU confirmed they were part of the Nvarunk case. That might be the correct sockmaster, but I don't know, and the data for them is probably stale. I'm only including the info in case it's helpful. I have a feeling this is a paid ring. I will also note that is probably the single-largest submitter of newkannada.com as a reference. Many of the additions occurred in 2014 and 2015. I discovered this as I was ridding the encyclopedia of this blog. For instance the link appears in these article creations:. He was also responsible for the introduction of freshkannada.com here and here, which was also spammed by Supernova. I don't know, maybe it's just a coincidence? Maybe there are some popular blogs that all these guys just happen to keep using? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:25, 11 October 2016 (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

 * - Please compare the accounts and check for sleepers. Cyphoidbomb, thanks for the thorough report - it makes life a lot easier. Also pinging to see if she could provide insight here, since she dealt with the Nvarunk case earlier. (CU-logs, maybe?) GABgab 18:58, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
 * The following accounts are ✅ from :


 * All are blocked. Note they are the same promotional sock farm as the Nvarunk case.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots  19:26, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
 * - Could we please merge this to the Nvarunk case? Thanks, GABgab 00:37, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Merges are something only clerks are allowed to do, not admins. What is the administrative action you're requesting? ~ Rob 13 Talk 13:18, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I was thinking of a historymerge, if that's possible/ideal (I may be wrong). Thanks, GABgab 15:38, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
 * You probably should contact an admin clerk directly. A non-clerk admin would be stepping on toes by merging cases, and I don't even know what the procedures are to do so. ~ Rob 13 Talk 16:52, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
 * OK, pinging - sorry for the trouble. GABgab 20:00, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:35, 14 October 2016 (UTC)