Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Padmalakshmisx/Archive

19 January 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

similar: articles edited, ignoring posts from other users about bad edits, repeating bad edits, verbally abusing and accusing other users http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=Babyboy33 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=Padmalakshmisx http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=Charmee3Apples BollyJeff  ||  talk  14:04, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Comment I'd blocked Babyboy33 for 48h, subsequently Charmee3Apples came by with similar behavior although (anti-Bengali POV on film related articles). I think a sleeper check might be helpful as the first two were created together, but the third was identified as a standalone. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  14:32, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Just to point something out, there is technically no overlap in any of these accounts' edit history. Still, I'm fairly sure they're the same based on behavior, but I'd like CU to clarify the accounts' roles so we can act accordingly. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 13:26, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ the following are the same:
 * TN X Man 16:02, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * All accounts have been blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 16:28, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * TN X Man 16:02, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * All accounts have been blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 16:28, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * TN X Man 16:02, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * All accounts have been blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 16:28, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * All accounts have been blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 16:28, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

26 January 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

User:Ppwrong is an old set of sock, but appears to match this more recent SPI collection. Kaverijha23 is current and also similar behavior (edit-warring same types of material on similar set of pages and similar comment-style). As soon as Kaverijha23 was blocked, the .81 IP continued; then moved on to .252 when .81 was blocked (admits to using dynamic IP). DMacks (talk) 22:13, 26 January 2011 (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
✅:



Ppwrong is, but that probably is him, as well. Some IPs and some ranges have been blocked. –MuZemike 22:20, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

31 January 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

Similar: articles edited, ignoring posts from other users about bad edits, repeating bad edits, misleading edit summaries, abusing and accusing other users — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bollyjeff (talk • contribs) 11:34, 31 January 2011

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Comment I'd asked BollyJeff to file the SPI again as this user is prone to creating multiple socks at a time. I've blocked this one, but there might be some sleepers. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  11:48, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
. Previous checks found some other accounts. Let's see if there's others unaccounted for. Elockid (Alternate) ( Talk ) 14:08, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Different ISPs which geolocate to the same locality. -- Avi (talk) 05:26, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * The account was blocked per WP:DUCK and since the technical evidence shows that it's possible I see that there's no reason to change that. In the absence of any other sleepers, this can be closed. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  06:12, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

09 May 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

The same edits on National Awards. The history of this page is full of edits made by his many other accounts. Shahid •  Talk 2 me  18:48, 9 May 2011 (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

 * Blocked and tagged per WP:DUCK. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 01:29, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

18 May 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

Just logging that the two accounts above are ✅ sockpuppets. -- Luk  talk 14:24, 18 May 2011 (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

 * I updated the tag on Veera. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 14:46, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

19 May 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

Very similar edits. Shahid •  Talk 2 me  19:16, 19 May 2011 (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

 * Endorsing for confirmation. And can we get an IP block here? This seems to have increased as of late. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 02:16, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Wikileaks23 is ✅ as Padmalakshmisx. However, Secret of success is as him. –MuZemike 17:35, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

26 May 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

Please block this sock (it's clearly him), he posts some very insulting messages on my talk page. I think a permanent ban is in order now. Shahid •  Talk 2 me  15:48, 26 May 2011 (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

 * Yeah.. blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 17:22, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

31 May 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

Same interests and area of editing. I've blocked this account, but am endorsing for sleepers. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 15:50, 31 May 2011 (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
✅ as being the same as, but no sleepers. TN X Man 16:05, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

4 July 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

Similar edits on Tamil cinema and requests made to add a few content to Cinema of Andhra Pradesh. -- Commander (Ping Me) 12:20, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I've WP:DUCK blocked and subsequently  and also an IP. Padmalakshmisx has used multiple ISPs in the past too. SOP has been to create multiple socks, so a sleeper check would be appreciated. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  12:28, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Two IPs on two different ISPs in the past hour. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  12:40, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
 * And this one too, the way both users comment on talk pages seems quite similar. -- Commander (Ping Me) 12:51, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
 * If possible, could the CU also check to see if the collateral damage on is more than the benefit? The other ISP range that I'm aware of has too much IP editor damage. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  13:40, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - It's been over a month - let's see if there are sleepers. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 13:00, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Also ✅:



Another IP range hardblocked. –MuZemike 21:30, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

07 July 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

I'm not sure, but I suspect, considering the similar obsession on the National Film Awards pages. One thing is sure though, he is a sock, but I don't know whose. Shahid •  Talk 2 me  20:47, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * 165.91.178.178 is the IP sock of user:Rrrajesh -- Commander (Ping Me) 04:49, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Almost certainly a sock; I'll endorse to figure out who. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 02:04, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
 * No obvious connections to anyone. TN X Man  13:46, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. -- DQ  (t)   (e)  00:31, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

05 August 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

After his failure with Telugu cinema he has shifted his focus towards Cinema of India and is making disruptive edits. Similar style of commenting on talk pages Commander  (Ping Me) 17:33, 5 August 2011 (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
I'm sorry, but checkuser does not generally disclose connections between IPs and named accounts. TN X Man 17:58, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * IP blocked 1 month. Also note that this case was originally opened with Sreekar as the master, but they're blocked as a sock of Padma, so I moved it. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 23:00, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

01 September 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

He hasn't gone back to the major problem articles yet, but his editing pattern is the same on other articles, e.g. Akkineni Nagarjuna. Otherwise same edit warring behavior including a couple of blocks for the same. Clerks/CUs will know what I mean, and am not commenting further on beans. Been around a while, this one was created right after 's block of one of the IPs. He's used different ranges in the past, I've blocked one, MuZemike's blocked another and quite a few other IPs have also been blocked. Check for sleepers required please. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  07:21, 1 September 2011 (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 following are the same: All blocked and tagged. I was just going to add Arunashields1 to the CU request when I edit conflicted (for the nth time on this SPI!). &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  13:43, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * All three are matches to previous socks.  TN X Man  13:33, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * All three are matches to previous socks.  TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  13:33, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * All three are matches to previous socks.  TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  13:33, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * All three are matches to previous socks.  TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  13:33, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

13 September 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets



Not a sock:

Reason below:

I did not dominate hyderabad article,

which attempt of mine shows I am into dominating the article, please check hyderabad article page and look at the way I came to Consensus with other aggressive user omer123hussain, may be he is a sock puppet (Eeenadu (talk) 14:35, 13 September 2011 (UTC)). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eeenadu (talk • contribs) 14:24, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

whether i get blocked or not is a secondary issue. the other editor omer123hussain is being very disruptive on this article - Hyderabad check his edit history and my edit history and behavior also again that editor, reverts ur edits, then u will acecpt it??? All my contributions were constructive and neutral I did not demand my way, more agressive was this other user, u see how i made consensus on hyderabad talk page As far as I know I did not dominate Hyderabad article with my views like the other sock puppet. further, this user omer123hussain, anways will revert it. my suggestions to admin MikeWazowski is please protect hyderabad article, after reverting the image from Raj bhavan road to Abids shopping center

the user mikewazowski undid the image i replaced to raj bhavan road he suspects I am a sock, but I reached consensus, the other user omer123hussain was aggressive in his approach and not me.

I wasnt blocked, I was a suspected sock, which I am not, I have no idea who the other user was, u please check the hyderabad article edit history, revision history and discussion page. I am new to wikipedia (Eeenadu (talk) 14:15, 13 September 2011 (UTC)).


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Obvious sock is obvious; specifically compare the edits of Eeenadu and the most recent sock, User:Dragonbooster4. Same attempt to dominate Hyderabad, India; there's also some WP:BEANS stuff that you can probably spot but I can point out off-wiki if needed; look specifically at the edit summaries and the discussion on Talk:Hyderabad, India. Editor also started editing 9 days after DB4 was blocked. Since the last CU turned up several sleepers, I recommend yet another sleeper check here. Qwyrxian (talk) 13:03, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Was on my to-do list by Q beat me to it. We've had a few rangeblocks from prior SPIs, I don't know if they expired (the one that I did expired a while back) or he just jumped ranges. A longer term rangeblock might be helpful if there isn't any significant collateral damage. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  13:08, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Not a Sock

whether i get blocked or not is a secondary issue. the other editor omer123hussain is being very disruptive on this article - Hyderabad check his edit history and my edit history and behavior also again that editor, reverts ur edits, then u will acecpt it??? All my contributions were constructive and neutral I did not demand my way, more agressive was this other user, u see how i made consensus on hyderabad talk page As far as I know I did not dominate Hyderabad article with my views like the other sock puppet. further, this user omer123hussain, anways will revert it. my suggestions to admin MikeWazowski is please protect hyderabad article, after reverting the image from Raj bhavan road to Abids shopping center

(Eeenadu (talk) 13:56, 13 September 2011 (UTC)).
 * You just don't get it: you don't get to form a consensus. You are indefinitely blocked. It means you cannot edit here, period. And, also, pages are never protected and kept in a single way indefinitely; full protection is only a temporary thing to force discussion.  Finally, why won't you understand: if you are blocked, you are blocked.  You cannot edit Wikipedia.  It doesn't matter if your edits are kind, benign, reverting vandalism, or per consensus: blocked means blocked.  Qwyrxian (talk) 14:00, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

I wasnt blocked, I was a suspected sock, which I am not, I have no idea who the other user was, u please check the hyderabad article edit history, revision history and discussion page. I was new to wikipedia (Eeenadu (talk) 14:06, 13 September 2011 (UTC)).
 * You are a suspected sock right now. I'm almost ready just to WP:DUCK block you, but I'm patient enough to wait for a CU.  If it finds you even somewhat likely, then you should definitely be blocked.  And, in fact, checking all of that edit history is what convinces me, completely, that you are the same person as Dragonbooster4.  Are you saying that you are not Dragonbooster4? Qwyrxian (talk) 14:16, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Here's an interesting question--how did you find out about this sockpuppet investigation? How did you know where to look?  I didn't notify you on purpose, which is explicitly allowed per SPI rules.  Qwyrxian (talk) 14:17, 13 September 2011 (UTC) Never mind, I see it was mentioned on the article's talk page.  Qwyrxian (talk) 14:19, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes I am not dragonboosetr for sure, it was user omer123hussain, demanded his own way, not me u check his approach towards fellow editors and speak, I was the one who insisted him not to be disruptive in his edits the revision history page and discussion page of Hyderabad article. I think u should take ur case back. further, I am into editing with neutral statements, you check my other edits and edit summaries in other articles. You also check with user omer123hussain. edit habits and then use judgement. (Eeenadu (talk) 14:29, 13 September 2011 (UTC)).

Not a sock, why because I am actually not resisting to mikewazowski's edits I am just confused (Eeenadu (talk) 14:44, 13 September 2011 (UTC)).
 * to undo my edits, but the edit I undid now was initially not accepted by me
 * the edits of urs I undid was not my view, my view initially was to retain raj bhavan road
 * but after going through consensus, I replaced images as per consensus with omer123hussain

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
✅ the following are the same:
 * They appear to be matches to previous accounts.  TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  15:38, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged.&mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  15:45, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * They appear to be matches to previous accounts.  TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  15:38, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged.&mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  15:45, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged.&mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  15:45, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

02 October 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

This one's a little tricky as it wasn't unearthed in past SPIs, but Padmalakshmi has used many many ranges so it might have been one of those things. I semi'd Cinema of Andhra Pradesh as Padmalakshmisx was IP hopping on that, and suddenly today I find this editor on the talk page and also visiting some of the Padmalakshmisx socks favorite pages. Was created in July, but autoconfirmed only today. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  18:08, 2 October 2011 (UTC) &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  18:08, 2 October 2011 (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

 * - Hmm.. that account dates back to July, so I think it would've come up in previous sweeps. Nevertheless I think it's possible, so I'll endorse for confrimation and sleepers. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 18:47, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
 * . This account uses the same ISP as (confirmed sock from archives), however a different browser. Furthermore, there are no other accounts on the IP addresses used by Revharder, whereas there are several on Eeenadu's IP. I'm relisting this so another checkuser can take a look; while I don't think this can be much more conclusive on Revharder, there are accounts on Eeenadu's IP that could use a second set of eyes. <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:blue">Hers <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:gold">fold  (t/a/c) 00:08, 3 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I would say that and   are technically indistinguishable, and that Projectmilap is ✅ to match .  I can't say anything else about Revharder, however. Courcelles 00:24, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I've blocked and tagged Projectmilap and Tuppingpoint. However, I'll see if HelloAnnyong or one of the other clerks can comment on the behavioral bit for Revharder. FWIW, I've seen Padmalakshmisx on two different ISPs and MuZemike rangeblocked a third one earlier. cheers. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  15:21, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I can't definitively draw a connection between the sock and the master, so I'm going to close. However, I'm not opposed to revisiting this, especially if there's better evidence down the line. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 02:46, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

12 October 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Same POV pushing on Cinema of Andhra Pradesh and related articles. User:Editingsamaraveera is claimed to be an alternate account of. The editing pattern clearly indicates that this might be per WP:DUCK. &mdash;  Abhishek  Talk  06:54, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Comment: Similar style of editing in talk pages, especially the signature. Deleting comments made by me in others talk pages. POV Pushing, verbally abusing and accusing other genuine users of sock puppetry. In the past they made similar attacks in my talk page like this. -- Commander (Ping Me) 08:46, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * ✅ that the named accounts have the same operator. Technically that this operator is Padmalakshmisx, based on data pulled from the most recent socks in the archive.  AGK  [</nowikI>&bull; ] 23:59, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Did a sleeper sweep, and and  are  socks. Clerk Request I've indeffed the accounts but it's late and I need to sign off. Could somebody follow up with tags as normal? Thanks,  AGK  [</nowikI>&bull; ] 00:12, 13 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Tags updated. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 01:10, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

16 October 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Same areas of interest and similar style of language in edit summaries. He has had some problems with me in the past. I think he is trying to get me into some trouble by having a username which is similar to mine. Commander (Ping Me) 17:01, 16 October 2011 (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 following:


 * . Tiptoety  talk 17:20, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Tagged the lot of 'em. - The Bushranger One ping only 18:59, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

20 October 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Similar areas of interest and same style of editing talk pages. Just a suspection, but he has lot of untrue claims in his user page Commander  (Ping Me) 14:09, 20 October 2011 (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

 * ✅, no sleepers. -  Courcelles 14:13, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

25 October 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Same areas of interest. He has re-added the same POV statements which were removed earlier in Cinema of Andhra Pradesh. Commander (Ping Me) 15:01, 25 October 2011 (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 following are the same:
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 15:25, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * blocked and tagged. Alexandria   (talk)  15:59, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 15:25, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * blocked and tagged. Alexandria   (talk)  15:59, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * blocked and tagged. Alexandria   (talk)  15:59, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

26 October 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

He has now shifted his focus towards Tamil cinema after being blocked Commander  (Ping Me) 07:47, 26 October 2011 (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
A match to previous accounts. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 14:15, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
 * user blocked. Evidence stacks up  Alexandria   (talk)  20:05, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

31 October 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Account created only for editing certain(same) articles, just like the other socks. The contributions say everything.  Secret of success  Talk to me  10:38, 31 October 2011 (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

 * Long history of socks and sleepers. CU would help here.  Alexandria   (talk)  11:46, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Secret of Success has already been checked against Padmal and listed as in the past. Ramajogayyasastry blocked indef per WP:DUCK.  Alexandria   (talk)  11:49, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * A very relation to previous accounts. Also  as a sleeper. WilliamH (talk) 12:24, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * sleeper blocked and tagged. Alexandria   (talk)  13:30, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

19 November 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

The user is trying to impersonate me by creating an account name similar to mine. This is definitely not an alternate account of mine as he claims in his user page. The sock has created this account to drag me into some problems. Commander (Ping Me) 11:47, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
The user Secret of success undid and edited user vensatry's talk page on suspected sock puppet notification, straight obvious proof for meat puppetry (Vedanthbasappa (talk) 12:42, 19 November 2011 (UTC)).
 * HelloAnnyong, is the sock of Padmalakmisx. He has a history of POV pushing on Telugu cinema related articles and accusing trusted and experienced editors of sockpuppetry or meat puppetry. Account created today and has edited only this sockpuppet page and Vensatry's and Secret of success' talk pages. &mdash;  Abhishek   Talk 14:22, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * . I've blocked Vensatryy, but am endorsing to find out what's going on here. Confirmation and sleepers, please. And can we see if Vedanthbasappa is also related? —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 13:42, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Technical evidence ✅ that Vensatryy is operated by Vedanthbasappa. I did not expect to be able to make a direct link to the suspected master, because available data for Padmalakshmisx is not very recent; this is borne out by my results, which suggest only that it is the two socks are Padmalakshmisx. Geolocation info suggests all are editing from the same subcontinent, but ISP and other indicators are inconsistent. Behavioural evidence will have to be relied upon in determining the likelihood of a link.  AGK  [</nowikI>&bull; ] 16:15, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * It's Padmal. Same area of focus, impersionation of users involved in the area, and immediately going after the SPI pages.  Blocked, tagged, and closing. Alexandria (chew out) 16:20, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

07 December 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Quite evident from his contributions. He has a strong vengeance against me and intentionally undoing my constructive edits on Akkineni Nagarjuna and other Telugu film-related articles. &mdash; Commander (Ping me) 07:35, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Same areas of interest. Similar style of edits in talk pages and edit summaries. &mdash; Commander (Ping me) 17:55, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It is with no doubt Padmal. I could hear a loud quack seeing the contribs. &mdash;  Abhishek  Talk 01:14, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * This is definitely padmal for sure. See this edit which was exactly made by one of the previous socks in the past. &mdash; Commander (Ping me) 06:17, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

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

For edits, this link might be enough. This one shows that he is bent upon adding specific names of little significance to the article, just like the last couple of socks. Also, another feature we can notice is the wrong edit summaries he uses to mislead others, again, like the last two or three socks. His signature is also very similar to almost all the past socks. (a bracket enclosing the sign like (sign) this)  X.One   SOS  13:17, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * . Please provide diffs of the problematic behaviour showing similarities between the accounts. --(ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 13:41, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I quickly went through the contribs and saw nothing that screams Padmal to me (doesn't mean technical evidence says otherwise). I'm going to echo Deskana's request for more info. Alexandria (chew out) 15:53, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thirded. The evidence given until now has been insufficient. Abhishek, just saying "it is because it is" is circular logic. We need actual evidence rather than just saying it's because of their contributions. Give us something to work on. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 03:02, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The grounds for suspecting Intercell is a sock are clear to me: the account edits exclusively within the subject of Indian cinema. Padmalakshmisx is a prolific socker who also only edits within this topic. The account was created around the time that the last round of socks were blocked, and could very well have been missed by the previous checks: Indian ISPs are notoriously funky with their assignment, and sleepers can easily fall under the radar. and checking now.  AGK   [</nowikI>• ]  11:38, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * From a technical perspective, the link is . Intercell edits from the same country and broad region as Padmal, but geographically the account is not what we expect to see. Behaviourally, the link seems more likely, and it is plausible that Padmal may have travelled or moved, be working in another city, or for some other reason be elsewhere. I'll leave the patrolling admin to make the final decision, and I hope this technical info is helpful. AGK   [</nowikI>• ]  11:44, 8 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I'll call it. Blocked and tagged on behavioral grounds, plus help from the CU results. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 15:25, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

11 December 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

See below. <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:blue">Hers <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:gold">fold  (t/a/c) 01:15, 11 December 2011 (UTC) <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:blue">Hers <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:gold">fold  (t/a/c) 01:15, 11 December 2011 (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
✅ by checkuser when doing a routine check on an unblock request, just reporting here for the record. <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:blue">Hers <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:gold">fold  (t/a/c) 01:15, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

20 December 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Similar areas of interest and same style of editing talk pages. &mdash; Commander (Ping me) 14:39, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I also suspect this account. Both the accounts seem to have a lot of pages in common. &mdash; Commander (Ping me) 10:46, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * for sleepers for hite.  Blocked and tagged as such. Alexandria (chew out) 15:43, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

✅. There are a lot of accounts on the range with the same user agent, but most of them have no edits at all, and many that do are clearly not socks. Some of these might be sleepers, but I am not sure. If another CU wants to give their opinion on the accounts, that would be good. J.delanoy <sup style="color:red;">gabs <sub style="color:blue;">adds 16:39, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

22 December 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Obviously a sock, blocked a couple of days ago is back again &mdash; Commander (Ping me) 14:02, 22 December 2011 (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

 * . Blocked and tagged the sock per WP:DUCK, but I'm endorsing for confirmation, sleepers, and a possible IP block. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 15:13, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * - Nothing left to do here. Tiptoety  talk 23:52, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

01 January 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Same edits on South Indian film industry like User:Hiteccity and others MThekkumthala (talk) 18:02, 1 January 2012 (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

 * I've blocked and tagged the sock per WP:DUCK, but am adding a CU to confirm, sleepers, and if anything can be done in terms of IP blocking. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 19:27, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ straight match plus sleeper . - Mailer Diablo 00:14, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Both blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 01:32, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. -- DQ  (t)   (e)  22:31, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

03 January 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Account created just before a few hours. Same areas of interest. &mdash; Commander (Ping me) 17:42, 3 January 2012 (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
✅, . TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  18:46, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

16 January 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Very likely. Same range of articles, uses wrong edit summaries like this to mislead others and his annoying nature of adding lists of people to the Cinema of Andhra Pradesh article, violating WP:DIRECTORY, in stuff like this, I'd say its worth a try.  X.One   SOS  13:33, 16 January 2012 (UTC)  X.One   SOS  13:33, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, and he also copied an edit summary from an other user, plausibly due to him running out of ideas, and some sight on the history page might raise some hints.  X.One   SOS  13:39, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
 * For a confirmed behavioural account, this is the deadline.  X.One   SOS  17:15, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Comments by accused users
''Accused parties should comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

Mr secret of success, please answer this question:

1. Tell me where I have included list of names??? there are long lists of names of of actors in Tamil cinema and kannada cinema article, u remove them why ru not accusing them?? what annoying behaviour i showed in my edits today???this is just ur personal grudge I have 100 IP addresses, I will see how u will not allow me to edit you lobby with wikipedia admins, you do POV editing in tamil cinema and u accuse me (Redacted)

2. I am not a sock puppet, this user has a personal grudge over me and is using this approach to trap and make me a victim.

3. All my recent edits are constructive

4. I am willing to solve this issue with secret of success, with co-operation from admin

5. I am really frustrated and annoyed with the above users irresponsible abuse, I am feeling provoked

(Aarakshan (talk) 17:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)).

Comments by other users
Yup, it very likely seems to be Padmal. —  Abhishek  Talk 17:38, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Aarakshan: please do not continue to disrupt this case. If you wish to report a user for sockpuppetry please do so in a new case below, not on top of this case. Make sure you provide valid evidence when doing so. SpitfireTally-ho! 17:25, 16 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Self-endorsing. Fairly obvious duck ( don't know if an admin wants to swoop in now before his 24 hour editwarring block expires done by PeterSymonds - cheers ) just based on the mannerisms:
 * Does numbered lists manually, e.g. Aarakshan GarylawyerNFA
 * Signs posts inside brackets, e.g. Aarakshan Hiteccity
 * Already familiar with terms like copyedit and meatpuppet.
 * Also some content stuff:
 * Similar edit here to this edit by Intercell
 * First edit was to Genome Valley, an article edited almost exclusively by Padmalakshmisx socks over the last 100ish edits.
 * Endorsing for a sleeper scan (just in case), but more importantly to see if we can get a block on the underlying IP here, please, as that's worked for a while in the past. Many thanks, SpitfireTally-ho! 18:14, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
 * There are no obvious sleepers that I see. However, there are quite a few accounts that match technically, but have not edited. Since this is such a busy range, I would rather wait until they out themselves instead of preemptively blocking potentially innocent accounts. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  20:03, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
 * right, cheers Tnxman. As the account is now indefinitely blocked and tagged I'm closing this. Best, SpitfireTally-ho! 21:13, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

20 January 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Quite obvious from talk page edits and other behavioral aspects &mdash; Vensatry <sub style="color:indigo;">(Ping me)  19:31, 20 January 2012 (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
✅ as being the same as,. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 20:05, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Vipranarayana blocked. JohnCD (talk) 20:16, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

09 February 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

and the contributions. Nothing more to be said. I'm also expecting more accounts in the same range, and a check would be cool.  X.One   SOS  09:34, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * This is a duck. The style, the canvassing, the protestations etc. - Sitush (talk) 11:21, 9 February 2012 (UTC)


 * It's obvious from the areas of interest, edit summaries, style of commenting in talk pages, ect., &mdash; Vensatry <sub style="color:indigo;">(Ping me)  12:05, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
✅ the following are the same:
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 14:19, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  20:31, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 14:19, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  20:31, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  20:31, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

18 February 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets






 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

WP:DUCK and do not look like new ones.  X.One   SOS  09:03, 18 February 2012 (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

 * I've protected Tamil cinema for two weeks. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 16:35, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

10 March 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Analogous style of addressing someone i.e. the "hiiii...." with more than one "i", signature inside brackets (1) and attaching lists of names to Cinema of Andhra Pradesh, something his previous socks were legendarily known for (2). Secret of success (talk) 08:49, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

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

Quite evident from the contributions, edit summaries, talk page comments and the repeated habit of blanking their own talk page whenever a welcome template is added for no reason. &mdash; Vensatry <sub style="color:indigo;">(Ping me)  14:11, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Well his arrogance in persisting on reverting suggests experience and the likelihood of a repeat offender. He has since stated that I use "kindergarten english level and unprofessional language", "I make wikipedia a hell of a experience with non sense and POV" which, well if you look at my user page... ♦ Dr. Blofeld  14:32, 10 March 2012 (UTC)


 * See the "Hyderabad" section of User talk:Abhishek191288; Abhishek has also accused Moviehub of being a Padmalakshmisx sock. Nyttend (talk) 16:26, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * for a sleeper check, while I block and tag. Per:
 * Consistent talkpage blanking:
 * Very minor changes between socks revision and currently suspected sock:
 * Removing mass amounts of text:
 * -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  19:13, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

✅ and. One of the ranges he operates from has a bit of false positives, so I cannot differentiate amongst the unrelated accounts and whatever socks may be over there. --MuZemike 19:27, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

25 March 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Account created with a username promoting a company or organization, similar to User:Intercell, a past sock. Blocked as of now, and unblock request (1) shows similar behaviour to those given in the past i.e. haphazard mixture of caps and small letters in an odd manner. The article NTR National Award has been edited by some of his previously blocked socks like User:Moviehub and now this guy's doing it again.  Secret of success  ( talk ) 12:07, 25 March 2012 (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
❌. Moreover, the account has been blocked as a, so there's nothing else that can be done. --MuZemike 20:24, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

06 April 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Seemingly new editor, however, sounds quite experienced (not that his edits seem constructive). The history page of Cinema of Andhra Pradesh says enough. Secret of success 13:33, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

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

dear editor, please revert back your sockpuppet case filing on me, because it is quite obvious who is being constructive and who is being destructive, I used wikipedia 10 months back, and now I started using it, the first duty of a responsible wikipedian like secret of success is civility and adherence to wikipedia policies. I have infact largely improve the article. The history page of Cinema of Andhra Pradesh says enough. (Panickroom (talk) 14:04, 6 April 2012 (UTC)).
 * Quite evident from the contributions and last but not the least the signature style is similar to that of the previous socks. &mdash; Vensatry <sub style="color:indigo;">(Ping me)  15:26, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is quite evident indeed. The way he tries to gain attention of other editors against those who have disagreed with him, blanking his talk page frequently to remove warning messages and his signature style says it all! &mdash;  Abhishek  Talk 15:36, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh God! He knows many things in Wikipedia with hardly few hundred edits old. It took atleast 10K edit for me to learn many things in Wikipedia, and still learning the site as a whole. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 15:53, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

yes absolutely, I know many things in wikipedia, that is why I utilized dispute resolution, and I discussed my issues with a wikipedia admin, and I have also discussed on the serious issue of Agenda-driven editing (NPOV, COI, etc) by certain users on south Indian wikipedia articles. I am not a sock puppet. (Panickroom (talk) 18:16, 6 April 2012 (UTC)).
 * For the record, Panickroom did not use any Dispute resolution methods, and instead chose to make things worse for himself over a trivial matter. I have blocked him for civility issues, edit warring, and a general battleground mentality.  Lynch 7  21:36, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Panickroom is now indefinitely blocked and tagged as a sock of Padmalakshmisx. --MuZemike 01:33, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

10 April 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Similar style of addressing. "Hi.." with more than one "i", signature inside brackets (1) and does numbered lists manually (2). Secret of success 05:10, 10 April 2012 (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 following are the same:
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 13:55, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Two newest socks blocked and tagged. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 14:19, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 13:55, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Two newest socks blocked and tagged. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 14:19, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Two newest socks blocked and tagged. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 14:19, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

10 April 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

DRAGON BOOSTER is yet another new account who jumped right in with a similar editing pattern - and the name was used before by a confirmed sock account: see Dragonbooster4. MikeWazowski (talk) 15:21, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

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


 * What? DB has been around for over 2 years. BollyJeff  ||  talk  15:59, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Bollyjeff makes a good point. This account has been around a while- can you provide more concrete evidence of a connection? TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 16:19, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, my mistake - I could have sworn when I looked at the contributions list, it only had a few entries from today - must've been a glitch, or bad page load... you can close this.... MikeWazowski (talk) 17:13, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Marking for close, no worries. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  17:42, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

20 May 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Same range of articles, personal attacks, storming user talks (1), similar to previous sock edits (2). Secret of success ( talk )  10:03, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I have already given diffs above. He edits the same range of articles, appeared soon after his previous socks were blocked, seems very experienced despite being a newbie, and specifically creates a separate section for each comment, even if no other intermediate post exists. I have given a similar diff from one of the latest socks above, User:Moviehub. Secret of success  ( talk )  16:05, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I would also like the closing admin to take a look at a very similar case from the archive, just as a reference to range-jumping by Padmal. Thanks. Secret of success  ( talk )  06:32, 26 May 2012 (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
Could you provide some more specific info/diffs? More specific evidence would help process this case. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 15:42, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
 * - Secret of Sucess' first link, plus this link should make it clear that these two people storm talkpages. It's all through the archive too. He also requests that users stop editing which shows up in previous cases. I almost think there is enough for me to duck him here. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  18:09, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The technical data shows a connection.  TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  19:01, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Possible tech + behavioral = blocked and tagged. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  06:58, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

25 June 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Same areas of interest (Telugu cinema, Hyderabad-related articles, etc.,), disruptive behavior, similar style of commenting on talk pages User talk:Vensatry which is same as that of previous edits made the sock. Given the number of concerns, I strongly suspect the account of sock puppetry. &mdash; Vensatry <sub style="color:indigo;">(Ping me)  13:23, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Behavioral samples as wanted for Checkuser; one from master 1 and one from his puppet 2. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 17:41, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

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


 * Comments by Accused Party : which areas of interest?? Kindly check my edit summaries, and edit behaviour, I am talking about not merging SIIMA and 1st SIIMA and further I never edited Telugu cinema articles, I think you are getting confused, it is funny that u find me disruptive, while you are being disruptive with you Point of view and abusing other editors, let the admin check your talk page and my comments in it Paansing (talk) 13:34, 25 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Comments by User:Animeshkulkarni : The user shows same behaviour of leaving haphazard talk page comments 1, 2, 3. Also check history of this very page to see that behaviour. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 13:37, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. Certainly looks WP:QUACKy to me, with the multiple talk page posts and all (doesn't the guy ever learn?); one point is that the user has over 1000 edits - if indeed a sockpuppet, curious as to how he/she evaded attention for all this time.  Lynch 7  13:55, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I was about to report this user some time back, but due to the same concern raised by MikeLynch, I had to avoid it. The last sleeper check performed for Padmal was on April 10, 2012 here. As the first edit by this one was six days later, it must have been missed out. I am unaware of the technical data of this account, but behaviorally, it matches in almost all aspects. Secret of success  ( talk )  14:24, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
to process a checkuser request as diffs are required as evidence to compare the accounts. <b style="color:#00C">⋙–Ber</b><b style="color:#66f">ean–Hun</b><b style="color:#00C">ter—►</b> 15:40, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * - Based on the diffs provided, the accounts seem linked. Please look for sleepers as well.  <b style="color:#00C">⋙–Ber</b><b style="color:#66f">ean–Hun</b><b style="color:#00C">ter—►</b>  18:08, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ that is a Padmalakshmisx sock. - Mailer Diablo 22:13, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 12:57, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

28 July 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Same range of articles related to Indian cinema and Cinema of Andhra Pradesh. Trying to add POV statements consisting of defamatory content to Tamil cinema, removing text and using misleading edit summaries as per this, a kind of attitude his past socks have tortured us with. He must have broken the three revert rule in multiple pages now, and a recent sock, User:Panickroom, was blocked for the same in the same articles. Also, he is continuously removing warning templates (1, past sock), Storming talk pages and accusing editors of vandalism and disruption, a case of boomerang (2, past sock). All his previous socks have indulged in similar behavior. Secret of success (talk) 11:08, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Accusing other editors of vandalism, misleading edit summaries and storming talk pages, something which is more common to that of the previous socks. This being a four year old account might be a compromised one also. &mdash; Vensatry <sub style="color:indigo;">(Ping me)  11:30, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Blocked and tagged. --MuZemike 03:33, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

29 July 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Storming the Cinema of Andhra Pradesh with the usual POV statements, previous account just blocked today, back again. Secret of success (talk) 15:08, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks AGK. Here you go: 1, 2, previous sock and another one. His style of saying 'hiii..' and "pinging" multiple users in order to bring their attention to this case is all through the archive too. Secret of success (talk) 13:37, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

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

hii buddy there is a situation??? some user named secret of success has reported me of a sock, of user Pavn123 who is blocked, can any user who is blocked as a sock, can edit a semi protected article, the next day?? Head12hunter (talk) 13:21, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Please give diffs showing identical POV statements by the current account and a recent sock. I can't find any correlation between Head12hunter's activity and that of previous socks, it is not my responsibility to establish a connection (I'm completely unfamiliar with this article), and the fact that the account has edited the page is not sufficient evidence in and of itself. No behavioural determination can be made until you give this information. Thank you, AGK  [•] 12:59, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:52, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

28 August 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets

*  *   *


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Same range of articles, Cinema of Andhra Pradesh and specifically the Guinness record section in the article. Addresses users after they revert his edits with an odd heading and multiple question marks and paragraphs (1, 2 3, 4, previous sock) and blanks his own talk page after a welcome template is put up without a summary (5, previous sock). Also uses similar kinds of edit summaries which tend to be misleading (6, previous sock). Secret of success (talk) 14:43, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

the user secret of success again started storming telugu article (promoting himself as experienced editor) and abusive behaviour and edit warring, same range of articles and same edit behaviour Nandhakishore (talk) 04:54, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Certainly a sock based on their editing pattern and obsession with Telugu cinema. I also suspect User:12pavan34 based on similar investigations. &mdash; Vensatry <sub style="color:indigo;">(Ping me)  09:50, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
 * And this one too. &mdash; Vensatry <sub style="color:indigo;">(Ping me)  03:21, 3 September 2012 (UTC)


 * These are quacking socks, but I have limited on-wiki time for a while, so I'm not going to block as I may not be able to provide any explanations if required. However, rather than a duck block, a sleeper check would be beneficial as there are serial accounts now. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  10:02, 3 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I request a sock puppet test be conducted on User:Vensatry and User:Secret of success, as I suspect one of them has written on my talk page using an IP address in reply to my editing. See this diff 1 they use the same title of storming telugu cinema

Please see the latest edits by User:Vensatry clicking here 1 which clearly shows that he has put information which is disputed for nuetrality clearly violates WP:NPOV. This information includes usage of phrasess like Tamil films dominate Telugu Films, they have overtaken Telugu films in the local market. Vensatry and Secret of success both from a Tamil land themselves; they are using their experience on wikipedia to compromise the Telugu cinema article.

The edit i made before Vensatry is this. In User:Vensatry's diff it also clearly shows that he has deleted well cited Guinness records and also tried to write two different records into one sentence trying to make reader not to differentiate them as two different records. He has not spoken anything on the talk page but reverted changes which had POV-statement and POV-section tags.

See my edits that I put immediately after him.

He has tried to accuse User:Dragon Booster who is also from Andhra Pradesh as sock puppet and that user came out clean similarly I request the investigators to investigate me thoroughly and if and when I come out clean I request some desciplinary action be taken against User:Vensatry and User:secret of success

12pavan34 (talk) 08:47, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes I agree on the disciplinary action on the two users (Vensatry and Secret of Success) is definitely needed, they are conspiring on who ever edits Telugu cinema article, it is really frustrating, definitely there is no sock puppet among us. And also another quacking behaviour pattern that these two editors show is, they delete the conversations over constructive edits by other editors in their talk pages. I think this is a kind of meat puppetry by the two users. Nandhakishore (talk) 15:43, 5 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Enough quacking. Could you show us some evidence for the allegations involving myself with the reporting User:DRAGON BOOSTER? We share a good rapport. It was you who tried to get him into trouble by impersonating him. &mdash; Vensatry <sub style="color:indigo;">(Ping me)  17:00, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Could you explain who were you referring to as sock here? &mdash; Vensatry <sub style="color:indigo;">(Ping me)  17:07, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

[User:Nandhakishore] was reffering to me as sock as he believed me to be one as accused by you, you are the first one to accuse me to be a sock puppet click here, it has not been proven that I am a sock but still you call me a sock, seeing which [User:Nandhakishore] innocently believed me to be a sock. Now You have also accused [User:NandhaKishore] as a sock.

12pavan34 (talk) 05:27, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Vensatry, If speaking in defence of one's own self when accused of sock puppetery is commented as QUACKING then I must say your calling it as quacking is not in good faith and you are simply trying not to give me a chance to explain. Remember, I am a suspect only and so are you a suspect.

You have addressed that you have not accused User:DRAGON BOOSTER as a sock puppet fine, but you have not addressed what I reported about your deleting of information from the Guinness Records section clearly visible in this diff and also about your adding information which clearly violates WP:NPOV

Why have you avoided addressing them ?

12pavan34 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:15, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi dear vensatry, why are u deleting my messages on your talk page, without giving proper explanations in reply, and who is impersonating whom, be clear in ur communications, Please note: this is for you and other user secret of success, just because u suspect some one is sock, blindly without checking my edit summaries and other constructively opinionated behavior, doeasnt make u a humble and good editor, you will be liable for disciplinary action by admins, if you ever try to use your experience on wikipedia for your point of view's, vandalism and conspiracy over other editors. Nandhakishore (talk) 03:53, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Enough of this. I believe we have wasted precious time just to listen to quacking. It is pertinent to refrain from responding to the messages of these socks, let them be. Secret of success (talk) 13:09, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

These investigations are of no use, the contributions will be any ways be made by several other editors who are not socks or may be a new sock group will develop, if not me, you just dont waste your time on this article.


 * Enough of your irresponsible accusations on other editors, you secret of success, kindly refrain from this, what kind of a experienced editors u are, creating conspiracy on fellow editors will make u viable for disciplinary action, definitely one of us will not proved as sock, then you will have to make apology Nandhakishore (talk) 13:50, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
✅ as Padmalakshmisx:



Both accounts indefinitely blocked and tagged. Frivolous accusations crossed out. --MuZemike 05:30, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

14 September 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Per WP:DUCK. &mdash; Vensatry <sub style="color:indigo;">(Ping me)  16:35, 14 September 2012 (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
✅: . AGK  [•] 21:12, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * All tagged. Jafeluv (talk) 22:18, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

28 September 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets

Per WP:DUCK &mdash; Vensatry <sub style="color:indigo;">(Ping me)  01:36, 28 September 2012 (UTC)



Quite obvious from their contributions, and the habit of talk page blanking &mdash; Vensatry <sub style="color:indigo;">(Ping me)  01:41, 28 September 2012 (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
— Berean Hunter   (talk)  23:41, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree this is him and the master is known for juggling many socks at once as evidenced by the archives so endorsing so a CU can flush his other accounts.
 * I merged the two cases, Stemsell is ✅ Padmalakshmisx, and there are sleepers, i'm just digging through the other user and sleeper results. --  DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  11:05, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
 * and Previous Padmalakshmisx socks. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  16:53, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
 * and Previous Padmalakshmisx socks. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  16:53, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
 * and Previous Padmalakshmisx socks. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  16:53, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
 * and Previous Padmalakshmisx socks. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  16:53, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
 * and Previous Padmalakshmisx socks. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  16:53, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
 * and Previous Padmalakshmisx socks. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  16:53, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
 * and Previous Padmalakshmisx socks. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  16:53, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
 * and Previous Padmalakshmisx socks. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  16:53, 5 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Checkuser resolved this. NativeForeigner Talk 02:56, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

13 October 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Usual POV in Hyderabad, India and Cinema of Andhra Pradesh and multiple post creation in user talks (1, 2, previous sock). A sleeper check would also be beneficial. Secret of success (talk) 07:48, 13 October 2012 (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
— Berean Hunter   (talk)  15:43, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
 * to flush sleepers as he usually has several socks at once.
 * Obviously ✅, but all the socks I saw were already bagged and tagged. The two ranges they use the most were sufficiently clear of collateral damage that I could apply generous blocks (even hardblocked one); this should help hinder a bit.  &mdash; Coren (talk) 00:12, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged, range blocks done by Coren, so hopefully we don't have to meet again too soon. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  03:36, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

03 November 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

This and this on my talk page show the same objection to other editors "storming" the Hyderabad, India article as did User:Vandevord, already blocked as a sock of Padmalakshmisx, here and in a rather obvious way here. The subject's contributions shows the same interest in Telugu cinema as did Vandevord, too, with substantial edits to Cinema of Andhra Pradesh, Tadepalli Lakshmi Kanta Rao and Daggubati Venkatesh. Stfg (talk) 17:32, 3 November 2012 (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
I have blocked the accused for disruptive editing in this case for 72 hours. Please see the history of this case. — Berean Hunter   (talk)  19:55, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ + + . I have not done an indepth sleeper check (I only pulled the socks off the top), plus I did not go and see if a rangeblock could be done. Please rerequest a CU if you wish these to be done. --  DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  05:12, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅, with being the only one not yet caught.  One of the range is already softblocked, and the others are fairly busy ISP ranges; little else to do than play whack-a-mole.  Sorry.  &mdash; Coren (talk) 19:42, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
 * All accounts blocked and tagged. Jafeluv (talk) 07:55, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

08 November 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

First set of edits to either Cinema of Andhra Pradesh or Genome Valley, two articles edited almost exclusively by his past socks. All 4 suspects are new users, and Wheelwat created DragonSupremo's talk page, confirming his relation. Diffs for the socks: puppet, previous sock. Secret of success ·  talk  14:03, 8 November 2012 (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
— Berean Hunter   (talk)  03:34, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Indeffing socks and giving IPs 1 month.

03 January 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Large interest towards Cinema of Andhra Pradesh as soon as the creation of account consisting mainly POV edits. Consistent talkpage blanking similar to previous socks. &mdash; Vensatry <sub style="color:indigo;">(Ping me)  06:06, 3 January 2013 (UTC)


 * User:Kondakotaiah
 * RTPking claims that also edits under this account in his user page. &mdash; Vensatry <sub style="color:indigo;">(Ping me)  06:08, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the delay in responding. His idea to remove the "Dubbed films" section was tried out by different socks in the past., . Also see his problematic edits and compare with those made by the previous socks. Above all the habit of constantly blanking the talk page is very common among all the socks. See Prev sock and edit made by RTPking. &mdash; Vensatry <sub style="color:indigo;">(Ping me)  05:55, 9 January 2013 (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 provide diffs to support the case. Basa lisk  inspect damage⁄berate 22:27, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

If Kondakotaiah is RTPking, then edits like this and this make me doubtful. Note that is a CU confirmed sock. <b style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:14px; color:#4682B4;">Elockid</b>  ( Talk ) 04:44, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * This doesn't look like the same user. Closing. Reaper Eternal (talk) 04:51, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Closing, again. The users are in different countries. Reaper Eternal (talk) 13:24, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

13 July 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Storming talk pages, abusive behaviour, POV pushing in Telugu cinema article. &mdash; Vensatry <sub style="color:indigo;">(Ping me)  09:10, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Similar habit of spamming talk pages often in a harsh way abusing others . The same can be seen at Talk:Cinema of Andhra Pradesh/GA1 also, something that is highly common with that of the previous socks. &mdash; Vensatry <sub style="color:indigo;">(Ping me)  17:56, 16 July 2013 (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 provide diffs to support the case. Basa lisk  inspect damage⁄berate 11:03, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't think this is actionable on behavioural evidence alone, and all the accounts are too stale for CheckUser. Closing. Basa lisk  inspect damage⁄berate 18:42, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

27 August 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

First, I know that Murralllli was earlier listed here, but new evidence has arisen. Next, a clarification: the IP all but admited that they are Murrallli. Muralli reverted a sequence of edits I made on Cinema of Andhra Pradesh (the article the problems are occurring on, and one of Padmalkrishmisx's long term targets). Then, I reverted, with a note in the edit summary recommending logging in, and I left this message on User Talk: Murrallli. After I did so, the IP responded on my talk page with [en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Qwyrxian&diff=570349752&oldid=570316209 this edit], where he states explicitly that it "doesn't matter whether he logs in or not"--this, to me, is tacit admission of being the same user. Furthermore later, Murrallli did log in to remove my warning/explanation from his talk page. Lastly, if you look at the numerous sections at the bottom of my talk page, you'll see comments from both Murrallli and the IP, and the writing style is exactly the same, with the same types of errors and formatting. As such, they are clearly the same user.

So, how do I connect them to the Sockmaster? The writing styles are practically identical, along with the obvious goal of trying to preserve every single piece of text on Cinema of Andhra Pradesh, even that which is unimportant, unsourced, non-neutral, or non-RS. To compare the writing styles, the easiest is to look at the edits of User: Wheelwat, already a confirmed Padmalkrishmisx sock. For example, look at Wheelwat's comments on User talk: 2001:420:4:EA02:4DAE:3835:E2C3:C76F. Compare those to the entire bottom of my talk page, where the IP has been ranting, threatening, and being generally insulting. Furthermore, take a look at the following diffs where he tries to canvas other users to revert my article improvements:, , and. Note that there are some fairly distinct formatting/word choices, which I won't WP:BEANS out, but should make the connection clear.

If possible I think a sweeper check should be made. I'm not sure if any of the prior socks are not stale, but if we at least confirm Murrallli and the IP on behavioral grounds, we could then look for other socks compared to those. Qwyrxian (talk) 09:40, 27 August 2013 (UTC) Qwyrxian (talk) 09:40, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

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


 * Quick comment: I saw this first a few hours ago as Cinema of AP has been on my watchlist since the Padmalakshmisx drawer was opened. I've been away for WP about six months, so I haven't kept up with this set, but behaviorally this looks to be part of the same set, geolocation is also the same. There are some very obscure common pages too. I'm convinced enough to do a suspected sock block, but I'd rather wait to see if anyone else has another opinion. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  11:43, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Update, req for sleeper sweep: On checking further through the SPI archives, I think there's sufficient technical evidence to warrant a block. However, there's a /23 range, and we ought to check for sleepers, there's a distinct possibility of at least one more account that's active on the same page and other articles currently, so a sleeper check would be beneficial.&mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  14:11, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * This is clearly a sock of Padma. I even reported this once, but the CU turned down saying that the accounts are no way connected to each other geography-wise. &mdash; Vensatry <sub style="color:indigo;">(Ping me)  12:37, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually, Murallli was declined due to lack of behavioral evidence; subsequent edits (including the angry outbursts on my talk page) I think clear up the connection. It was RTPKing who was declined as being on a different continent. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:57, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Murrallli is a match to Padmalakshmisx. The following are ✅ matches to Murrallli.



on the IP address. However, there was a request on my talk page for a possibility of a hardblock on the /23 range of the IP listed here. There is significant collateral at this point and I would not advise any hardblocks if an admin decides to implement any new blocks. Just as a note, Indian IP ranges tend to have a lot of collateral. <b style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:14px; color:#4682B4;">Elockid</b>  ( Talk ) 12:35, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Blocked and tagged the four named accounts. Marking for close&mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  15:22, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

08 March 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Constant POV pushing in Telugu cinema and Cinema of India articles. Rude behaviour, and consistent talkpage blanking. &mdash; Vensatry (Ping) 10:44, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Comment – This account was created shortly after the previous sock (User:Murrallli) was blocked, something that was very commons with the previous socks. A look at the edit summaries of Gnyan1's early contributions makes it quite obvious that he isn't new to this project. It's unlikely for a new user to quoting our policies in edit summaries with in days after creating an account. While comparing this account with Murrallli, the previous sock, common edit summaries with the usage of words like "cohesion" "references" and "original research" (inappropriate in most cases) raises my doubts: Murrallli and Gnyan1. Besides, the way in which both of them used reflinks is quite similar: and . &mdash; Vensatry  (Ping) 18:19, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
All past SPI history for Padmalakshmisx is stale (over 3 months old) and is therefore gone; thus, nothing remains for a CU to compare with this user. Any SPI allegation would need to be established via a comparison of behaviour — and in order to do this, we need more specifics; please supply diffs explicitly showing close similarities between Gnyan1's editing and that of Padmalakshmisx and her previously established sockpuppets. — Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 19:19, 8 March 2014 (UTC)


 * New information (including diffs) has been provided; see above. —  Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 22:04, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

You guys could've have pinged me :). I'm very familiar with his MO and such and still have his technical details on hand. That account is ✅ to Murralli. Also confirmed are, , and . <b style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:14px; color:#4682B4;">Elockid</b>  ( Talk ) 20:55, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks Elockid! A lot of CUs/admins who were earlier involved in this case seem to be less active now. &mdash; Vensatry (Ping) 05:00, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I've gone ahead and blocked the accounts. <b style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:14px; color:#4682B4;">Elockid</b>  ( Talk ) 11:40, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

12 June 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * - added here for comparison purposes
 * - added here for comparison purposes


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

WP:DUCK. Similar patterns of abuse and badgering on user talk-pages (Bioasia2013 here, Vgnome here). Let me know if more evidence is needed. Requesting a checkuser to smoke out any socks. —indopug (talk) 04:53, 12 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Yep. I've been going through a lot of the edits and there's no doubt in my mind. Huge DUCK, almost a SWAN. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:56, 12 June 2014 (UTC)


 * No doubt. A clear case! &mdash; Vensatry (ping) 12:17, 12 June 2014 (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

 * - Endorsed based on the username and the content and style of writing and the diff. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:26, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
 * The following are technically indistinguishable:
 * All of the above accounts are now blocked. PhilKnight (talk) 11:56, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
 * All of the above accounts are now blocked. PhilKnight (talk) 11:56, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
 * All of the above accounts are now blocked. PhilKnight (talk) 11:56, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
 * All of the above accounts are now blocked. PhilKnight (talk) 11:56, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
 * All of the above accounts are now blocked. PhilKnight (talk) 11:56, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
 * All of the above accounts are now blocked. PhilKnight (talk) 11:56, 12 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Now tagged, closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:48, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Just checking this after a message on my talk page. Is Bioasia2013 unrelated. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:56, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi Callanecc, no idea how that happened, but is ✅ as a sock, and is now blocked. PhilKnight (talk) 11:21, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks Phil. All blocked and tagged. Closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:29, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

26 August 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Interest in Tamil and Telugu cinema, and bombarding talk pages with multiple sections, as well as his style of talking. Moreover, he seems familiar with many of Wikipedia's policies despite making his first edit on 28 July 2014. Kailash29792 (talk) 15:17, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
 * This comment is very similar to this comment by Padma's blocked sock Murallli, both in style of talking as well as content. Kailash29792 (talk) 11:08, 1 September 2014 (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

 * I checked based on my own behavioural investigation, in the future it would be helpful if you could provide diffs of the reported sock and a blocked sock doing the same thing, have a look at the last one in the archive for an example. The results:
 * Based on technical data only I'd say this is but behaviour will be the clincher here. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:22, 27 August 2014 (UTC)


 * - Please hold this case. -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  02:35, 29 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Discount the above and go with this, thanks :
 * The following are ✅ to the archive and each other:
 * The following are to the archive, but ✅ to each other:
 * Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 14:17, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
 * The following are to the archive, but ✅ to each other:
 * Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 14:17, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 14:17, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 14:17, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 14:17, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 14:17, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

— Berean Hunter   (talk)  03:48, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Indeffing socks with tags and closing.

21 September 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Pretty obvious duck. Same areas of interest, a penchant for edit warring, and a rude tone on other's talk pages. Kailash29792 (talk) 05:27, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Hello, has anyone yet investigated into this? If you check Bewakoofian's contributions page and compare the edits to those of Padmalakshmisx, he should be dismissed as a golden duck. Kailash29792 (talk) 14:49, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * and, I believe you both know how Padmalakshmisx edited. Can you please help me prove Bewakoofian guilty, by presenting evidence which proves him a sock? Kailash29792 (talk) 07:41, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.'' — Berean Hunter   (talk)  20:01, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
 * , The request was made here for evidence as seen below. Your response above leads me to believe that you must have missed it.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:40, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Case is without evidence presented. --  DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  23:22, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

12 October 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Same area of interest - mainly Telugu cinema, and he shows a penchant for bombarding other user's talk pages with multiple sections. Kailash29792 (talk) 07:37, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

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

This user Kailash29792 is wasting his time on these sock puppet investigation(s) on multiple users every few weeks. Some of your investigation(s) are not moving and some have turned out to be not a sock puppett. sock puppetry applies to abusing articles and not protecting them. I have been protecting articles. a sock puppet is never interested in creating new articles or adding additional info. I have contributed to almost all articles on Tamil cinema. Could you stop it. My advise to you is you please dont worry about wikipedia. If anything is going wrong here in wikipedia the admins are there to take care of it. Bhishek (talk) 09:19, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - A lot of people edit in the same area as sockpuppets, that doesn't make them socks. I have looked through the Telugu cinema to compare the edits, but nothing obvious stands out. Please add diffs comparing past socks and the currently accused to proceed with this investigation. Futhermore, if you wish to use the 'bombarding other user's talk' you must demonstrate how this relates to the previous socks. The burden of evidence is on the filer, not the accused or the administration. --  DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  17:11, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
 * This is the edit of a blocked sock, which is similar to this edit by Bhishek Both have the editor adding multiple sections to the page in imprecise English, and talking rudely. Kailash29792 (talk) 15:08, 14 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Previous socks Discoslip, Mardaani and Arabindu
 * Previous socks Discoslip, Mardaani and Arabindu
 * Previous socks Discoslip, Mardaani and Arabindu
 * Previous socks Discoslip, Mardaani and Arabindu
 * Previous socks Discoslip, Mardaani and Arabindu
 * Previous socks Discoslip, Mardaani and Arabindu


 * Highly :
 * -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  15:56, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
 * All accounts indeffed and tagged. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 10:27, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
 * -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  15:56, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
 * All accounts indeffed and tagged. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 10:27, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

05 December 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

The last group of Padmalakshmisx sockpuppets was blocked on 2 November 2014, and new account User:Danice thrall was created the very same day. On 2 December, a group of articles created by Padmalakshmisx sockpuppets was speedily deleted as WP:G5 cases. On 5 December, many of those articles were re-created by Danice thrall (K. S. Prasad, Erra Sainyam, Taram Marindi). I am not sure if those recreated articles are identical to the deleted articles, because I can't see deleted edits. But, they look like being identical, as I remember. Vanjagenije (talk) 15:02, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * While this sock is an obvious duck, I request that the article K. S. Prasad not be deleted; the subject won a National Award, which is India's Oscar. Kailash29792 (talk) 15:08, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - The behavior here suggests the account is a sock of Padmalakshmisx and past checks have shown additional accounts.  Mike V  •  Talk  03:20, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅ is a Padmalakshmisx sock. No sleepers. - Mailer Diablo 11:02, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. Closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:32, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

28 December 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Same area of interest (mainly Telugu and Hindi cinema), and recreated K. S. Prasad just as it was before deletion. Kailash29792 (talk) 10:39, 28 December 2014 (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

 * Reported sock is ✅, blocked and tagged. Can another CU take a look at the range please, there are a few other accounts on the range which are suspicious but I'm not sure. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:06, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅ to previous socks:
 * -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  17:25, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  17:25, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  17:25, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  17:25, 29 December 2014 (UTC)


 * I've blocked and tagged the other two accounts as well. Mike V  •  Talk  22:50, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

28 January 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Shows many similarities, including editing Telugu film articles, and pages on Indian film awards. Kailash29792 (talk) 10:51, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * This shows that he has a similar style of communicating. Kailash29792 (talk) 10:46, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Before we can proceed with the SPI case, we will need you to provide diffs that connects the suspected account to the master account or confirmed socks through behavioral evidence. <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 23:46, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm going to need more evidence than that. You'll need to provide an additional diff that illustrates the same tone as the one you've provided. Also, I need more evidence in general that will tie them together. <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 21:00, 2 February 2015 (UTC)


 * As I am familiar with this user, I believe there are enough behavioral similarities for me to run a check. However, again please note that the lack of additional will delay any future cases and may lead to them being . Anyways is a ✅ sock along with the following:


 * <b style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:14px; color:#4682B4;">Elockid</b>  ( Talk ) 03:20, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
 * <b style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:14px; color:#4682B4;">Elockid</b>  ( Talk ) 03:20, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
 * <b style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:14px; color:#4682B4;">Elockid</b>  ( Talk ) 03:20, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
 * <b style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:14px; color:#4682B4;">Elockid</b>  ( Talk ) 03:20, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
 * <b style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:14px; color:#4682B4;">Elockid</b>  ( Talk ) 03:20, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
 * <b style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:14px; color:#4682B4;">Elockid</b>  ( Talk ) 03:20, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
 * <b style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:14px; color:#4682B4;">Elockid</b>  ( Talk ) 03:20, 4 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Accounts are blocked and tagged. <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 03:25, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

11 February 2015

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

Shows many similarities, including editing Telugu film articles, pages on Indian film awards and communicating with users in multiple sections using improper English. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 03:32, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Seems like an obvious duck. Kailash29792 (talk) 03:35, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
 * , I actually did plan on showing some diffs, but you came too soon. Moreover I did not open this SPI. Kailash29792 (talk) 03:23, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - Please provide diffs which prove the link, or a link to a page history which obviously shows it. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:12, 12 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Again, I am going stress that diffs NEED to be provided for a CU request to be fulfilled. I or perhaps another CU who is familiar with the case may not be around in the future and this case will be stalled. Guys, please be sure to submit more evidence in the future. Anyways, is ✅ along with:


 * . <b style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:14px; color:#4682B4;">Elockid</b>  ( Talk ) 02:54, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * . <b style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:14px; color:#4682B4;">Elockid</b>  ( Talk ) 02:54, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * . <b style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:14px; color:#4682B4;">Elockid</b>  ( Talk ) 02:54, 12 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Accounts blocked and tagged. <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 16:31, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

27 February 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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



Simply documenting. NativeForeigner Talk 15:44, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

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

08 May 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Recreating articles created by the sock puppets Wgolf (talk) 18:25, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Originally I put this guy as a sock puppet here Sockpuppet investigations/Vamsiraj though it was this guy that I should of put it as-recreating sock puppet pages Wgolf (talk) 19:12, 8 May 2015 (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

 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 14:25, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 14:25, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 14:25, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 14:25, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 14:25, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 14:25, 10 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Blocked & tagged. Tiptoety  talk 04:32, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

12 May 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

with the recreation of the Akkineni Akhil article just spelled as Akhil Akkineni (actor) instead. Wgolf (talk) 17:24, 12 May 2015 (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

 * Seeing Entrabagondhi's editing, I strongly suspected sockpuppetry, and while investigating I discovered this page, which shows that I am not alone, as Wgolf has independently formed the same impression. I have checked Entrabagondhi's editing against that of a number of known sockpuppets, and there are enough similarities to put it beyond reasonable doubt, so I have blocked the account. However, in view of the history of multiple socks and sleepers, I am requesting a CheckUser in case there are more socks in the drawer. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 23:10, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
 * ✅ along with and . Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:20, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

19 May 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Editing similarities, and adds the names of the articles he edits, like his past socks. Kailash29792 (talk) 13:59, 19 May 2015 (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, provide WP:diffs to illustrate similarity between the sock and the master (or previous socks).  Vanjagenije   (talk)  23:21, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
 * No diffs have been provided for 10 days since I requested them. Closing this.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  22:39, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

01 July 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Boudhafaq is a new (3 days old) user who in the time-span of less than 30 minutes created 22 new articles. Many of those articles were previously created by Padmalakshmisx and than deleted as G5. Articles previously created by Padmalakshmisx and now recreated by Boudhafaq are: Thriloka Sundhari, Jai Gantalu, Sangeetha Samrat, Chinni Chinni Aasa, Make-up (Kannada film), Raja Hamsa, Vijayam, Madam (1993 film), Andame Anandam, Raamachilaka, Tharam Marindhi, Welcome Obama. All are about Indian films. It is highly improbable that a new user is able to recreate all those articles.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  14:21, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I have put up tons of db-banned right now for this-found this earlier today but I couldn't remember the sock masters name for the life of me so I didn't do that till now. Wgolf (talk) 23:11, 1 July 2015 (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

 * Since I'm already a clerk, I'm calling an admin to review this case.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  08:26, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
 * The following accounts are ✅:
 * The following accounts are ✅ but . Although you opened this case, nothing precludes you from doing the behavioral evaluation if you wish.
 * Blocked the two confirmed accounts.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:42, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
 * The remaining two have been evaluated for behavioral evidence and blocked, marking for close. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  04:13, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Blocked the two confirmed accounts.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:42, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
 * The remaining two have been evaluated for behavioral evidence and blocked, marking for close. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  04:13, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Blocked the two confirmed accounts.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:42, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
 * The remaining two have been evaluated for behavioral evidence and blocked, marking for close. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  04:13, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

29 November 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

He shows many of Padma's barely concealed traits: disruptive editing style, rude attitude, bombarding talk pages with multiple sections, all beginning in small-case letters and him being familiar with Wikipedia despite his account being created this year. He will certainly confess. Kailash29792 (talk) 13:40, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

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

An obvious WP:DUCK case. One can check my talk page's history to understand it better. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 14:00, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
 * A series of attacks by Prabvb on Pavan's page which have since been removed by User:Ssven2. His language in them and his communicating style is strongly similar to that of Padma's, especially the fact that he accuses me of POV pushing, which is actually what he does. Kailash29792 (talk) 14:43, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Anthimpag (Padma's sock blocked in February 2015) : "Kailash you please go on file SPI's daily on other users and dont contribute to wikipedia, but please waste your time on filing SPI's. I think you are obsessed with padmalakshmisx and soon need a psychiatrist" (source: contributions) and a message by Pravbv reads "dont waste your time, internet, and man hours on sock puppet investigations, no one is interested in SPI investigations now-a-days, unsourced content cannot be accepted" (source: Kailash29792's talk page). This is something suspicious. Also the way these two communicate are very similar to that of Padmalakshmisx and his previous socks. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 13:16, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

I am not a sock puppet, user Kailash has the habit of tagging every other editor he encounters as a sock puppet of padmalakshmisx. On the other hand, sock puppet allegations have to be made on some one, if he is into damaging wikipedia articles, but I am actually contributing to wikipedia constructively. Kindly check my edit history, and see what exactly I did. Pravbv (talk) 07:00, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - In order to facilitate and expedite your request, please provide diffs to support your case. Please give two or more diffs meeting the following format:
 * 1) At least one diff is from the sockmaster (or an account already blocked as a confirmed sockpuppet of the sockmaster), showing the behaviour characteristic of the sockmaster.
 * 2) At least one diff per suspected sockpuppet, showing the suspected sockpuppet emulating the behaviour of the sockmaster given in the first diff.
 * 3) In situations where it is not immediately obvious from the diffs what the characteristic behaviour is, a short explanation must be provided. Around one sentence is enough for this.  Vanjagenije   (talk)  14:20, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
 * - Can we use the data from the July check to compare Pravbv to previous socks. His edits are very similar, but I'm not 100% sure.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  23:15, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * As I don't have UAs to check the best I can do is but I have no doubt that this is Padmalakshmisx when combining behaviour and technical evidence. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 23:41, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

20 January 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Recreated an article (K. Raghava) that was previously created by.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  16:24, 20 January 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

 * - Endorsing my own request.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  16:24, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Nksammeta is ❌.
 * and are ✅ from each other and ✅ to.
 * Two related accounts blocked and tagged.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:25, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Closing the case.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  22:26, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

11 February 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Submission of Draft:Indian Cinema and Cannes Film Festival, an attempted recreation of an article that's been repeatedly deleted from mainspace in the past, at several different titles, because its creation and recreation and rerecreation has always been at the hands of known socks of this user. Bearcat (talk) 07:54, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * That's definitely a quacking WP:DUCK we just heard. This user's edit to another user's talk page at User_talk:Maharshi_chelukala also follows a writing-style pattern noted several times in the archived investigations: no capitals, "do not" spelled as "dont". I know the master's stale, but can probably be checked against some of the recent socks. Bearcat (talk) 08:17, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

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

For other related ANI threads, I have a note of them in my sandbox. Def. case of a sock account IMO.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 08:10, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * The following accounts are ✅ to each other and to puppets in the archives:
 * Blocked and tagged.
 * I'd like a clerk to retag the blocked accounts to connect them only to Padmalakshmisx, not Luxpapa. I realize some of the confusion is of my own making, but based on the latest CU, there's little doubt in my mind that there's only one master. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:03, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  15:32, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I'd like a clerk to retag the blocked accounts to connect them only to Padmalakshmisx, not Luxpapa. I realize some of the confusion is of my own making, but based on the latest CU, there's little doubt in my mind that there's only one master. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:03, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  15:32, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

22 February 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Account created Feb 12 2016, which is a day after Favari was blocked. Manepally has been editing a lot of Telugu-language Indian film articles, like Kanche, Raithu Bidda, Sardar Papa Rayudu, Alluri Seetarama Raju (film), etc., but has also edited articles about Kannada films like Killing Veerappan and Malayalam films like Kaalapani. This tendency to focus on Telugu, but drift to other areas is documented in the archive.
 * General

Also documented in the archive, is a complaint by Vensatry (labeled as Commander), "Quite evident from his contributions. He has a strong vengeance against me and intentionally undoing my constructive edits on Akkineni Nagarjuna and other Telugu film-related articles." I experienced a similar instance where Manepally made a huge blanket revert that restored all sorts of problematic content to the article.

By Manepally's 11th edit he had created a category, which is not an intuitive place to start editing. By Feb 19, he's making changes, citing "peacok terms", a concept new users would not necessarily know about. An earlier sock from 2011, Sreekar akkineni was also familiar with peacock terms.

By Feb 20, Manepally is tossing around "POV" in edit summaries

Manepally tends to use one-word, or otherwise brief edit summaries, including here where he adds a reference using the shorthand "rf". Favari did this a bunch of times. as did Kangarupadaku. (I think if you look at the edit histories of all three accounts, the similarity in their edit summaries looks a bit more consistent.)

At Sardar Papa Rayudu, an article that has been edited 16 times since April 2014, the edit history shows that two other CU confirmed socks of Padmalakshmisx have edited there, Discoslip and Mathsraja, along with Manepally.
 * Intersections

Manepally has recently edited this article, which also contains edits by Pad socks Bhishek, Mardaani, Discoslip, Murrallli, and GarylawyerNFA.

Manepally has also edited this article, which contains edits by Murrallli.

Manepally has edited this article, which has a lot of edits in Jan 2016 by Arichuvadi, a sock of Pad.

So, I think there's certainly enough info to warrant a CU, and given how prolific and unapologetic the operator has been, a sleeper check might be wise. Thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:41, 22 February 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
✅, blocked and tagged. . Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:03, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

29 March 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

WP:DUCK; this includes the fact that he is abusive towards other editors, bombards their talk pages with multiple sections, begins all his sentences with small letters, already knows how to edit well despite making his first edit on 24 February 2016, and tries to prove that he is not a sockpuppet, but futilely. Kailash29792 (talk) 14:38, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

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

Since I don't want this to get CU declined for lack of evidence, here is some:
 * This comment by the suspected sock is odd: this Kailash is obsessed with padmalakshmi, and he accuses every one with that Vakthruthva has been editing since 23 February 2016. How would he know anything about Kailash's prior accusations?
 * Wait, did I say he made his first edit on 23 February 2016? That was a day after Bbb23 indeffed Manepally after a CU check confirmed that he was a sock of Padmalakshmisx. What a coincidence!
 * Several articles of intersection between Vakthruthva and a couple of recent socks, Manepally and Farvari.
 * This article, Kanche, which Vakthruthva has edited, has edits by two other Padmala socks, Manepally and Arichuvadi.
 * This comment, which was left on Kailash's talk page looks an awful lot like an admission. [Subject] i am willing to work alongside with u, let us end this padmalaskhmi [Body] you never understood wikipedia, i hate the word sock puppet, who is some on who spoils articles, I did every edit as per wikipedia guidelines. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:12, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

I amen't sure who he/she is. But i find few things very suspicious in this case.
 * This user's account was created on 24 February, two days after Padmalakshmisx's sock Manepally was blocked.
 * This user has posted "I may have to report your behavior to arbitration committee, give respect and take respect, do you think i dont know basics of wikipedia, do you think only u know everything" on Cyphoidbomb's talkpage. I amen't sure that a relatively new user would speak like that.
 * How does this "new" editor know that Kailash29792 has abused "every" editor as Padmalakshmisx's sockpuppet? This was evident in the user's first in a series of messages "No matter how many times you do this, constructive edits cannot be stopped". Looking at the contributions, until Kailash29792 messaged to Cyphoidbomb, these two didn't even interact with each other in anyway. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:13, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

I don't know why the user in question had brought up my name here. I'm not even remotely connected with them. My association with Padma's SPs ended almost two years ago. Given this behaviour (the ethnic slurs on Kaliash29792's talk page and their attempt to drag me into this issue), this is obviously a sock of Padma. &mdash; Vensatry (Talk) 17:54, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * ✅. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 17:56, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 18:19, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Closing the case.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  22:17, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

17 April 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Edit summaries like "references", "clean up" and "banner", his habit of reverting to older versions of the article, and messages like "stop removing, articles, and dont remove references"; all these are traits of Padmalakshmi and his other socks. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:51, 17 April 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

 * The following accounts are ✅:
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:55, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:55, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:55, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:55, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

17 May 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Brief (often single-word) comments in edit summaries such as "references", "info", "clean up", "‎ " and "rv" (meaning revert), as well as the fact that he edits mainly Telugu cinema-related articles (often deleting chunks of material and reverting to older versions of the article) are all already seen in Padmalakshmi's past socks. Kailash29792 (talk) 08:24, 17 May 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

 * - In order to facilitate and expedite your request, please provide diffs to support your case. Please give two or more diffs meeting the following format:
 * 1) At least one diff is from the sockmaster (or an account already blocked as a confirmed sockpuppet of the sockmaster), showing the behaviour characteristic of the sockmaster.
 * 2) At least one diff per suspected sockpuppet, showing the suspected sockpuppet emulating the behaviour of the sockmaster given in the first diff.
 * 3) In situations where it is not immediately obvious from the diffs what the characteristic behaviour is, a short explanation must be provided. Around one sentence is enough for this.  Vanjagenije   (talk)  21:29, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
 * After waiting for 8 days, I see no diffs provided, so I'm closing this. Next time you open an investigation, provide some diffs.  Vanjagenije   (talk)  09:35, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

01 June 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

I'm re-opening case, because I think there's sufficient evidence to warrant a CU. I do, however, wish Kailash would have performed some due diligence and dug up some more diffs, because it would have saved me some needless back-and-forth explaining guidelines to Lamppost3.

Kailash's original case: "Brief (often single-word) comments in edit summaries such as "references", "info", "clean up", "‎ " and "rv" (meaning revert), as well as the fact that he edits mainly Telugu cinema-related articles (often deleting chunks of material and reverting to older versions of the article) are all already seen in Padmalakshmi's past socks. Kailash29792 (talk) 08:24, 17 May 2016 (UTC)"

To that, I'd add this:


 * Lamppost3 first created his account in 2013, then it went dormant until April 2016. His first two edits were to his user page. His second edit here was to add "*my IP address is 144.36.184.43". Well that's an interesting behavior for a brand new user. Log an IP somewhere, perhaps as a reminder so you don't mess up your sock farm, then go dormant for a few years? Doesn't matter. Could be red herring. What does matter is Duloxitine, a CU confirmed sock, also logged an IP on his talk page. Awardgadu another CU confirmed sock did the same thing.
 * Running an edit interaction report on the last few socks there is significant intersection with Ram Gopal Varma being a noteworthy standout. That's definitely one of his favorite articles. In fact, Lamppost3's first edit after his 3 year dormancy was to Ram Gopal Varma
 * Not coincidentally, closed the last sock report on 17 April 2016. Lamppost3 jumped out of dormancy 2 days later.
 * Looking at the edit history of Ram Gopal Varma you can also find Farvari, Arichuvadi, Luxpapa, and I'm sure others that haven't even been discovered yet.
 * Kailash was correct that the short edit summaries seem similar. Most of the edit summaries are in lowercase, not alternating case, and there are numerous stylistic similarities:
 * Lamppost3
 * (copy edit)
 * (para)
 * (spel fix)
 * Vakthruthva
 * (copy edit)
 * (para)
 * (spel)

This should be enough to warrant CU. Thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:20, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

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


 * For what it is worth, I am endorsing this CU request due in part to the obvious similarities at hand, and the likelihood of additional sleepers being saved for the purpose of future block evasion. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 21:32, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * The following accounts are ✅:
 * Blocked and tagged.
 * Although I understand your point, in some cases we simply can't block sleepers because some of the technical characteristics are too common, creating the risk that I'll block an innocent user who simply hasn't started editing yet. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:35, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged.
 * Although I understand your point, in some cases we simply can't block sleepers because some of the technical characteristics are too common, creating the risk that I'll block an innocent user who simply hasn't started editing yet. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:35, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Although I understand your point, in some cases we simply can't block sleepers because some of the technical characteristics are too common, creating the risk that I'll block an innocent user who simply hasn't started editing yet. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:35, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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


 * Standard short edit summaries, typically one or two words, typically in lower case. "st venky", "st venky", "minor fixes", "copy edit"
 * Intersection with sock Thagavalvarle at Jeans (film)
 * Intersection with sock Luxpapa at Indian (1996 film)
 * Intersection with sock Lamppost3 at Veerappan
 * User's first edit was in 2012 at Lagaan. Lamppost3 has edited Lagaan
 * Badgering Kailash on Kailash's talk page: which he has done in a different form here.
 * Although this account was created in 2012, he suddenly starts editing 9 June 2016, one week after the last batch of socks were uncovered.
 * Other sock-type behavior, like creating a meaningless user page to avoid the redlink. And somehow he's confident enough to create an article and flesh out references, having fewer than 30 edits to his name.

It all warrants a closer look by CheckUser professionals. Thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:52, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

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


 * One coincidence i would like to present here: Langarhouse made an edit on Dookudu here. A similar edit was made by the sockmaster's previous sock Lamppost3 on Brahmotsavam (film) here. Strangely, both the films feature Mahesh Babu in the lead role, whose article was massively edited by one of the sockmaster's socks Pravbv and the edit summary for both the edits is "copy edit". Pavanjandhyala (talk) 16:50, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
 * The fact that he got rid of "Indian" and changed the wikilink from Telugu language to Telugu cinema is interesting, and I did explain in detail why this was problematic on his talk page as Lamppost3. That's pretty telling. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:20, 11 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Before we archive, user page tics:
 * Rajanalakala:
 * *vikram 3
 * Langarhouse:
 * *bhole daaku
 * Dhaund
 * *Dhaund junction
 * End note. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:08, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * The following accounts are ✅:
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:49, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:49, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:49, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:49, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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


 * Account was created 14 June 2016, three days after the last Padmalakshmisx socks were blocked.
 * Perfunctory, but meaningless user page
 * Mostly one and two-word edit summaries in lowercase
 * Numerous intersections with Padmala socks

Please check for other accounts as well, as they typically have other ones cooking. Thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:56, 18 June 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

 * The following accounts are ✅:
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:01, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:01, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:01, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:01, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:01, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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


 * User page Perfunctory, but meaningless user page. This early edit to user page is presumably to avoid suspicion brought by user name redlink.
 * The user page contains alleged IP address (24.130.148.194), which is similar behavior to other Padmala socks like here and here. (Might just be red herring, though the IP did edit the same article Dhnk edited.
 * So far has only edited one article, but it's an Indian film article edited by other socks, Rangasthal, Dhaund and Awardgadu.
 * One word, lowercase summary (containing typo in this case).

I'm going to indef on duck behavior, but Padmala often creates multiple accounts, so a CU will be necessary, please. Thank you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:33, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I blocked as a suspected sock.
 * I also think which was created after the last CU merits a check based on all edits, but this in particular. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  16:51, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * The following accounts are ✅:
 * is ✅ to.
 * Blocked the unblocked accounts and tagged all of the accounts according to my findings. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:24, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
 * is ✅ to.
 * Blocked the unblocked accounts and tagged all of the accounts according to my findings. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:24, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked the unblocked accounts and tagged all of the accounts according to my findings. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:24, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Duck: first edit was creation of Karanvir sharma, repost of Karanvir Sharma OnionRing (talk) 07:37, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

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

Comment With the page deleted, I can't see edits from this user. The page was originally created by TJK several years ago, but since then TJK has gotten generally better at editing. I *think* his current account is D'SuperHero, but an SPI was inconclusive. This new page doesn't have the capitalization correct and I think TJK would have been better at that. So it's perhaps TJK but I don't have a feel for it. <b style="color:darkred;">Ravensfire</b> ( talk ) 19:38, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, from Talk:Karanvir sharma:
 * This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... (your reason here) --JayaJohri (talk) 07:26, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
 * It provides an introduction to a well renowned media personality "Karanvir Sharma". He's the blue eyed boy of the tinsel town and has gathered appreciation over years by being a part of over 200 advertisement campaigns, movies also he is going to be a part of upcoming series 24 season 2. Therefore I believe more people must have an access to his bio, likes/dislikes and his upcoming ventures.
 * I can't reprint the content from the article, because it looks like all if it was copied from here. Was this guy known for irritatingly blatant copyvios? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:42, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Based on the content and style, I think this is a sock of Sockpuppet investigations/TekkenJinKazama and not Padmalakshmisx. Pinging for their opinion. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  07:50, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
 * The account is to be Padmalakshmisx. I'm not familiar with TekkenJinKazama and the last archived case was in November of 2015 so it's .-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots  23:16, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Closing with no action.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:02, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Apart from this user's interest on Telugu cinema related articles, short one or two word edit summaries in lower case, and a rather meaningless user page, these are a few observations:
 * Basedverna created its talkpage by signing there simply, a trait observed in few of the sockmaster's previous socks Dhnk, Lamppost3, Gridhalur, and Rangasthal (user page) to name a few.
 * Creating new pages with the summary references, another similar trait observed in the case of the sockmaster's previous socks.
 * Intersection with sock Pravbv at Mahesh Babu: 1
 * Intersection with sock Vakthruthva at Narasimha Nandi: 1
 * One strange coincidence with other socks is presented below:
 * Basedverna's edit on 1: Nenokkadine: 1 (a) and 1 (b)
 * Langarhouse's edit on Dookudu: 2
 * Lamppost3's edit on Brahmotsavam (film): 3

The summary of all these edits is "copy edit" and all the three films feature Mahesh Babu as their protagonist, whose article has been massively edited by the sockmaster's previous sock Pravbv. But, this does extend to other Telugu films as well, with the same or other edit summaries. For example:
 * Vakthruthva's edit on Kanche: 1
 * Awardgadu's edit on Nenu Sailaja: 1

The sockmaster is known to create multiple accounts at one go, and hence a CU shall be helpful. Regards, Pavanjandhyala (talk) 09:35, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Definitely a duck. I was suspicious ever since his first edit, but now I am convinced. Kailash29792 (talk) 10:10, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * The swapping of 2014 Indian Telugu-language to 2014 Telugu as noted above does remind me of Padma. I had to admonish him for questionable changes to the lead. The edit summaries are consistent with previous socks. I think a CU is in order because he often has numerous litterbug accounts open at once. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:19, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
 * The following accounts are ✅:
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:59, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:59, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:59, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:59, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:59, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

This edit was to revert 's reversal of the prior sock edits. I'm comfortable doing a duck block here, but there are usually a few socks active and it wouldn't hurt to have this as a CU confirmed block along with the rest. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  18:21, 26 July 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

 * Also created an article previously created by, a CU confirmed sock and created a pointless user page along with a pointless talk page to avoid scrutiny. (It didn't work.) Creating both the bogus user page and talk page were previously done by Neruppuda and Prophetkrish and Basedverna and Prarabdham along with some of his other socks, I'm sure. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:40, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅, blocked and tagged.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 20:44, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

This report is about the interaction between User:Thandrapaparayudu and User:Basedverna, a sockpuppet of User:Padmalakshmisx that can be found in the archive section dated 22 July 2016. At first I believed the new editor to be making basically the same edit as the previous sockpuppet, vs.  before I realized what the new editor was doing was reverting back to the previous sockpuppet version,. This might be okay, but each of the similar edits was done to a film article under the guise of an edit summary, "category," when they were reverting other changes made to the article in the process. This only might be okay if it happened a couple of times, but Thandrapaparayudu made these reversions back to Basedverna's version on 48 film articles, that are listed at the Editor Interaction Analyser,.

For some history, I did notice this on last month and started a discussion at a User:SpacemanSpiff talk page, a sysop who had blocked a previous sockpuppet to get their opinion on the matter, User talk:SpacemanSpiff/Archives/2016/September, where another editor, User:Cyphoidbomb also joined in. Thandrapaparayudu left me a message,, but since I had not yet decided what I was going to do, I let the previous discussion continue without responding on my talk page. Since I was going on vacation shortly, I did not want to open this without being around to respond and while on vacation Thandrapaparayudu deleted his comment from my talk page. The discussion ended thinking that the due to being four months apart, that this might be considered stale, but I thought I would present evidence for it anyways. Aspects (talk) 18:20, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

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

kindly take your case back. There is nothing wrong in reverting constructive edits of an editor as per wikipedia policy, the concerned sock has messaged me to revert his edits, as they were constructive. Thandrapaparayudu (talk) 09:57, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * It's stale, but the circumstances Aspects describes are highly suspicious and User:Thandrapaparayudu's reply here and on several userpages is even more so. Thandrapaparayudu says Basedverna has messaged them to revert [back to] their edits since they were constructive. Messaged how? They have not left any messages for Thandrapaparayudu on Wikipedia, and neither of the accounts has e-mail enabled. At the very, very least, this is a meatpuppet situation. Thandrapaparayudu, if you have a convincing explanation, you may request unblock on your own page. Blocked and tagged. Bishonen &#124; talk 10:21, 12 October 2016 (UTC).

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Since the sock operator tends to use multiple accounts, it would be appreciated if a CU could look into it. Thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:51, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Typical 1 and 2-word edit summaries. Note Arichuvadi's summaries here. "(copy edit)", "(references)". Or this edit and this edit by Thandrapaparayudu, which introduces the odd "(edit)" as an edit summary. Compare with Bhishoom here and here. And
 * Intersection at Dil Se, which has seen numerous Padma socks including Thandrapaparayudu, Luxpapa, Arichuvadi, etc.
 * Intersection at Operation Cocoon where we see Farvari has edited.
 * Akasa Veedhilo is not a heavily-edited article, which makes intersections stand out as peculiar. Bhishoom edited it recently, and in February 2016, Manepally did, as did Vikasbal the year prior. (Obviously these are Padma socks.)
 * Same thing here at Mission Istaanbul. Fewer than 20 edits since July 2016, but two confirmed Padma socks (Basedverna and Thandrapaparayudu) + Bhishoom.
 * First few edits are category additions, which is a bit of a weird place to start. Most people start with typo fixes and stuff, I'm pretty sure. By his eighth edit, he's formatting references like a champ.
 * Obligatory meaningless user page creation on day 2, no doubt to throw off the redlinked user name. This is typical of experienced sock operators.

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

 * They're editing exclusively from webhosts and open proxies. That being said, the following accounts are ✅ to each other:


 * All have been blocked and, based on behaviour and technical info, Padmalakshmisx. They've been extremely prolific so some clean-up will likely be required. I also came across  on the same webhost but with a different UA.  to see if there is a connection.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots  22:24, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Hey, could you take a look at and see whether a CU might be a good idea? The edit summaries are similar in some cases, and there's an intersection at this lightly-edited article and also at Ram Gopal Varma, which is stuffed to the gills with Padma activity. (Hmm, Ram Gopal Varma, Varmapak...) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:56, 29 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure there's enough for a check. The account has been around since 2007 and has a very large range of interests with only a minor overlap with the Padma group. -- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 00:02, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
 * You da boss! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:40, 30 November 2016 (UTC)


 * as far as Hseenigpg I think it could be linked to the original three of the Kichappan socks (the ones that were working with Padmalakshmi) as behaviorally there's a greater linkage there (multi language films from South India) though there are some of the usual Padma tells too. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  15:22, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Are you going to block that account?  Vanjagenije  (talk)  22:51, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked now, referring this SPI but I've tagged as a proven sock of Kichappan which has a significant amount of overlap here. Closing. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  03:39, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Same exact edits and new page creation as U:Bhishoom, particularly on Dil Se..  Chrissymad  ❯❯❯  Talk   15:00, 13 December 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

 * , and  are ✅ and blocked.
 * Information orange.svg A note to checkusers reviewing the logs - this sock master is editing almost exclusively from open proxies and webhosts, so that in itself is a technical connection.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 17:30, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Similar style of edit summaries. One-word, use of "spel". Has edited Nartanasala, which is crawling in Padma socks. His first edit was to restore content that had previously been removed for block evasion. That's pretty ducky. Also, the "look at me, I'm not a sock, socks have redlinked usernames" edit is telling. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:47, 27 December 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

 * Blocking, tagging, reverting. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:47, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Duck. Has been indeffed. I'm opening and closing this case primarily to note that I've been attempting to explain to Padma that the only option available to them is the standard option. The discussion is taking place at User talk:Reddytrivikram. Since there have been over 200 suspected and confirmed accounts, I didn't want to forget which one I was having the discussion with. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:12, 2 January 2017 (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

 * as noted above. Quack. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:14, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Created Vijayam (film). Vijayam was was deleted/salted for G5 violations, so they moved it to the alternate name from the draft space. Primefac (talk) 00:51, 16 January 2017 (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

 * as the geolocation is off and I see no evidence of proxy/webhost use, though there is other technical overlap. -- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 22:19, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Close. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 04:55, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Overlap with several past sockpuppets. Same short-style edit summaries. Sro23 (talk) 01:40, 8 March 2017 (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

 * I'm curious to see if it is him, since I went through a laborious discussion process with him at User talk:Reddytrivikram, explaining the standard offer, and so on. Here the user has emerged at an article that was previously edited by a Padma sock. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:32, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The following are ✅ to the Padmalakshmisx sock :


 * Sorry, it appears your explanations and efforts have all fallen on deaf ears.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 23:23, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
 * ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:26, 9 March 2017 (UTC)


 * All tagged, closing. GABgab 01:40, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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


 * Checkuser blocked. Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots  16:21, 25 April 2017 (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

 * This is the latest round up of socks who are ✅ to each other and ✅ to be part of the Padmalakshmisx promotional sockfest. As usual, they've been very profilic, so there will likely be some extensive clean-up and review required.
 * ✅ and closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  17:50, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Usual: And so on. Indeffing as suspected sock, but need CU to check for others, since he often creates more accounts. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:00, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Perfunctory user page establishment
 * Makes massive changes comfortably
 * Typical edit summary style.
 * Claims to have 4 years experience as an IP editor. Mm-hm.
 * Recent edits at Telugu cinema as Kannadigey.

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

 * ✅, along with User:Lelakongo. Blocked and tagged.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 15:32, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Duck, but CU is typically necessary for undiscovered accounts.
 * Standard edit summaries.
 * Recreation of List of awards and nominations received by Ram Gopal Varma, previously created by Naiana gomes, a CU confirmed sock. First edit is obviously a copy/paste, given the size of the edit, and is basically identical to this. Bollywood is lower-case, and "Godfather-esque" and "super-hit thriller" bullshit.
 * Perfunctory user page establishment here.

Also, just to really hammer home why he should probably never be unblocked, is this. He's been editing here for years and still doesn't understand that you can't cherrypick film reviews and then summarise that obviously biased selection as "positive". (I mean, let's not even get into whether two 3 star reviews plus a 4 star review = mostly positive...) Or maybe he does understand but has no ethical standard. Anyway, persistently disruptive, and either incompetent or deliberately here to inject bias into articles.

Indeffing, but CU still needed, please. Thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:38, 13 May 2017 (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

 * ✅. I don't see any obvious sleepers, but they'll certainly be back.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 19:32, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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


 * Standard Padma-style edit summaries.
 * Reported user intersects with Padma socks here (Lamppost3 and Awardgadu and Vakthruthva are Padma socks), here (Fimfar and a few others are Padma socks), and here (Poreleeds is a Padma sock)
 * Perfunctory user page creation.
 * Brand new user, but is a master of the tools.

Would appreciate a check for undiscovered socks and sleepers, please. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:21, 27 May 2017 (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

 * , and  are ✅ to each other and  .-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots  18:12, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
 * All done, closing. GABgab 20:33, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Both users have been adding the same content as previous socks on Kasinathuni Viswanath. Ulsd intersects with socks on other pages too:   ). Sro23 (talk) 23:08, 17 July 2017 (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

 * - Both blocked, but pinging before we tag to confirm that they are related to this master. Thanks,  GABgab 23:27, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
 * , and  are ✅ and blocked.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots  23:28, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Awesome, thanks. Retagged and closing. GABgab 23:29, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Typical indicators including perfunctory user page hastily created with four tildes, and standard edit summaries. Also active in Indian film articles. It would be appreciated if you'd please check for other accounts as per usual. Here, he adds POV garbage about a subject appearing in a "super hit" and receiving "rave reviews", and here, where Padma notes that the subject is the son of a "mantinee idol". More evidence that Padma lacks the appropriate judgment to edit here constructively. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:41, 31 July 2017 (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

 * and ✅, blocked and tagged.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots  22:17, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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


 * as below. Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots  19:51, 7 September 2017 (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

 * All named editors are ✅ to each other and also to recently blocked socks from this same sock farm (e.g. ).-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 19:51, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * All accounts . Primefac (talk) 20:03, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

See User talk:Cyphoidbomb.As clean evidence, as one could acquire.CU sought, in-case, this is some imposter.But, regardless, the block could be executed as this UAC is of no use to WP in any possible manner. Winged Blades Godric 14:09, 15 November 2017 (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

 * -, but endorsing for a sleeper check. Thanks, GABgab 15:59, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: I also blocked a few hours back. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  16:11, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * . ~ Rob 13 <sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">Talk 01:37, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

pretty evident from his one-word edit summaries in articles related to Telugu cinema, and the fact that he shows experience on editing in Wiki despite opening his account today (16 Nov). Kailash29792  (talk)  17:52, 16 November 2017 (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

 * - In order to facilitate and expedite your request, please provide diffs to support your case. Please give two or more diffs meeting the following format:
 * 1) At least one diff is from the sockmaster (or an account already blocked as a confirmed sockpuppet of the sockmaster), showing the behaviour characteristic of the sockmaster.
 * 2) At least one diff per suspected sockpuppet, showing the suspected sockpuppet emulating the behaviour of the sockmaster given in the first diff.
 * 3) In situations where it is not immediately obvious from the diffs what the characteristic behaviour is, a short explanation must be provided. Around one sentence is enough for this.  Vanjagenije   (talk)  22:51, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm very familiar with this sock farm and the edits are textbook examples of their recent activities. Also, ✅.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 23:09, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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


 * Has the same feel as most other Padma socks. Same edit summaries, being a big indicator.
 * Perfunctory user page creation, done in the standard manner, signing with four tildes. He's done this countless times.
 * Is allegedly a brand-new user, but appears to be using reFill, has familiarity with INRConvert template, etc.
 * Padma, despite his experience and familiarity in some areas, historically drops the ball of competence in other areas. Here he uses the deprecated "2" switch in the Reflist template. Here he submits an unsourced DOB. These are things he should know better than to do, but that's Padma.

Interestingly enough, I don't believe that this suspected sock has any intersections with Padma socks, but the typical shape of their edits has Padma written all over it. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:38, 29 December 2017 (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

 * ✅ plus:
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:44, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:44, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:44, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:44, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:44, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:44, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:44, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:44, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:44, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:44, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:44, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Same overlapping interests and edit summaries (ie: clean up, references) in rapid succession and same user page creation, see also here. I know they often operate multiple accounts at once, so requesting cu for sleepers. CHRISSY MAD ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  15:09, 11 January 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

 * Quack. Indeffed. Still should check for other accounts. The last time he pleaded to be unblocked he wrote a self-absorbed chest thump about being the only experienced Indian editor, so here are some of the problems with his last spate of edits, for instance here. He removes the Romanized film title from the name parameter and replaces it with Indic script, contravening WP:NOINDICSCRIPT. Also, where the Indic script was properly formatted before, he's brought it out of that formatting. He capitalised "program" for some reason, though it's not a proper noun or the beginning of a sentence. He used the contraction "doesn't", contravening our tone guidelines, and he's added about three useless parentheticals to the plot section. Who wants to unblock him? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:27, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
 * - Shady history, endorsing. <span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS',Geneva,sans-serif"> QEDK ( 桜  ❄  伴 ) 17:10, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ plus:
 * Blocked the unblocked accounts and tagged all. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:30, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Blocked the unblocked accounts and tagged all. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:30, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Blocked the unblocked accounts and tagged all. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:30, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Blocked the unblocked accounts and tagged all. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:30, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Quack. The same stuff. Perfunctory user page signed ~, restoration of the stuff [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nandamuri_Balakrishna&action=history I reverted the last time he edited. Blocking. Please check for other accounts. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 09:27, 13 January 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

 * ✅, plus the sleeper . Courcelles (talk) 04:21, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Same old, same old. Same style of edit summaries, same perfunctory user page, intersections with Padma socks at S. S. Rajamouli. Brand new user familiar with "POV pushing" and our BLP policies. This edit is interesting, as he pastes an IP address in his user page. Geolocates to College Park, Maryland. Wonder why he did that. Mistake? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:25, 19 January 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

 * Group 1 – the following accounts are ✅:
 * Group 2 – the following accounts are ✅ to each other and ❌ to Group 1:
 * . Please create a new case with TheCorageone1 as the master.
 * Two things that I found remarkable. First, to my knowledge, Padmalakshmisx has never used proxies before. He used four different proxies in this check and no legitimate ISPs. Second, TheCorageone1 and socks, whose behavior is obviously the same within the group but obviously different from Group 1, intersected on three of the four proxies. That said, the two groups' user agents are consistent within each group but different from the other group. As for 's question, I can't explain the University of Maryland IP. Maybe he'd like to go there. --Bbb23 (talk) 21:51, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ closing. Sro23 (talk) 04:06, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * . Please create a new case with TheCorageone1 as the master.
 * Two things that I found remarkable. First, to my knowledge, Padmalakshmisx has never used proxies before. He used four different proxies in this check and no legitimate ISPs. Second, TheCorageone1 and socks, whose behavior is obviously the same within the group but obviously different from Group 1, intersected on three of the four proxies. That said, the two groups' user agents are consistent within each group but different from the other group. As for 's question, I can't explain the University of Maryland IP. Maybe he'd like to go there. --Bbb23 (talk) 21:51, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ closing. Sro23 (talk) 04:06, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * . Please create a new case with TheCorageone1 as the master.
 * Two things that I found remarkable. First, to my knowledge, Padmalakshmisx has never used proxies before. He used four different proxies in this check and no legitimate ISPs. Second, TheCorageone1 and socks, whose behavior is obviously the same within the group but obviously different from Group 1, intersected on three of the four proxies. That said, the two groups' user agents are consistent within each group but different from the other group. As for 's question, I can't explain the University of Maryland IP. Maybe he'd like to go there. --Bbb23 (talk) 21:51, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ closing. Sro23 (talk) 04:06, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ closing. Sro23 (talk) 04:06, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Same recreation of 's Film Festival articles, same rapid succession of "references" in ES on several articles, reverted Cyphoid's removal of block evasion of a previous padma sock on Picket 43...and then there's the username. Asking CU for sleeper check again. CHRISSY MAD ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  13:40, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * As for the second name, without spilling the WP:BEANS the ES similarities are identical and there is significant overlap. CHRISSY MAD  ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  13:45, 30 January 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

 * for sleeper check, the above account is a ducky as they get, unless we're talking NCIS - TNT❤ 13:46, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * , though they're ✅ - TNT❤ 13:50, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Tagged and closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  15:12, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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


 * Admitted here.

I've indeffed him, but am requesting CU. Usually when he goes through his "OK look, let's make a deal, I'll demonstrate zero self-control, and you unblock me" routine, he typically keeps his hands clean, so I don't think there will be any obvious accounts found, but he deserves zero trust.

The post above is yet another example of his inflated ego "Show me one editor who is competent enough to recreate that article", his persecution complex "Because of the damage you guys did to me, even standard offer is not guranteed.", his lack of awareness of irony "Wikipedia is wasting lot of resources and time on checkuser." and general incoherence "Why dont you communicate to arbitration committe, and bring changes to sock puppet policy using new software programs." As usual, the user wants other people to move pieces around. We're supposed to contact Arbitration Committee for him, because he's soooo valuable, as is evident here, where he introduces poor references like nettv4u.com, idlebrain.com, IMDb.com, mio.to. Total disingenuous nonsense. Oh wait, I also forgot about "This is the problem with you Tamil people. You always indulge in damaging your competetor." Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:34, 7 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

 * Checked and found the following ✅ to :
 * Blocked, and tagged - TNT❤ 19:35, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Blocked, and tagged - TNT❤ 19:35, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Blocked, and tagged - TNT❤ 19:35, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Quack. Previous sock Volvoteach added this content, which was reverted. (Competence check: Please note the ridiculous statement that people "worked hard" on the project and sometimes "in the rain".) Anyway, Hulatroy, a brand new editor, who should have no awareness of article edit history restored the content.

Similar content restoration here and here. Intersection with other socks here. The bulk of edits at Meher Mount (an article about a spiritual center in Ojai, California of all places) are by Padma socks.

Anyway, per the usual, CU would be beneficial to sniff out his other accounts. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:23, 14 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
✅ + . . Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:06, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Ducky, and I'm blocking him, but given that he often has duplicate accounts set up, I'm requesting a CU. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:04, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
 * First edit was to user page for "four tildes" post, to remove redlink. We have this behavior well documented in the archive.
 * Padma sock edits at Chiranjeevi
 * Suspected sock edits at same article. (Apparently he thinks that modifying, but keeping "MegaStar" in the infobox is an appropriate decision for someone with as many years of alleged expertise as he claims.)
 * Padma sock edit at rarely-edited Chaitanya (film).
 * Suspected sock edits at same article.
 * Lots of edits here and here at Harish Shankar from two different puppets. Note that as recently as January 2018, this guy still thinks that adding unsourced birthdates is OK.
 * Suspected sock edit here at Harish Shankar.
 * Padma sock edits at Savitri (actress) in 2016.
 * Suspected sock edits same article.
 * Lots of edits by Padma sock here at S. S. Rajamouli.
 * Big surprise, suspected sock edits the same article. Note the failure to adhere to MOS:HEAD in "Personal Life" (vs. "Personal life"). Still demonstrating lack of capacity for editing basics, despite his chest-thumping in previous unblock requests.

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

 * - Unless I'm mistaken, all other socks are stale. There would be nothing to compare the user to. Sro23 (talk) 00:45, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Nothing more to do here. Closing. Bbb23 (talk) 00:57, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

exactly as  at S. S. Rajamouli. <span style="font-family:monospace;font-weight:bold;font-size:16px;color:hsl(205, 98%, 55%);">GSS (talk |c|em ) 13:06, 29 August 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

 * - Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:20, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

User edits multiple articles recently edited by socks of this master, inquires after I revert edits by socks, goes silent after I explain socking policy to them on my Talk page. WP:DUCK. Possible coincidence; CU requested. <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 18:52, 30 November 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

 * ✅, blocked, tagged, closing. Courcelles (talk) 21:14, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Sakura6977 and Crusader90


 * Sandbox edits:
 * Sakura6977 edited the sandbox of Crusader90 with the content "?" on 29 December 2018 at 18:02. Until this point, the two users had never crossed paths - it's inexplicable how Sakura6977 landed on Crusader90's sandbox.
 * Sakura6977 edited own sandbox with the exact same content a minute later.
 * The edit summary used by Sakura6977 on Crusader90's sandbox was "chk" - a few days earlier, Sakura6977 had used the exact same edit summary while editing own sandbox.
 * Edit warring
 * A few days later, Sakura6977 had an edit dispute with User:Pinkbeast at the article Nizam of Hyderabad. Crusader90, who had never edited this page earlier, appeared out of nowhere and restored the article to Sakura6977's favored version.
 * Sakura6977 undid Pinkbeast's edits later that day.
 * When User:Kautilya3 undid Sakura6977's edit, Crusader90 restored Sakura6977's version.

Sakura6977 and Dhadhush


 * Dadhush is a confirmed sock of Padmalakshmisx, and was active on the Nizam-related pages. After Dadhush was blocked on 28 November 2018, multiple new accounts - including Sakura6977, Pandya34, and Crusader90 appeared in the next month, and started editing Nizam-related articles.
 * On hiwiki, Dadhush had translated the enwiki article Nizam Ali Khan, Asaf Jah II, creating a draft in user namespace, a day before being blocked. Sakura6977's first edit to hiwki was creating this article in the article namespace, with the exact same edit summary. Both the versions included HTML code <font style="vertical-align: inherit;"> etc.
 * Both Dhadhush and Sakura6977 have made 100+ edits to hiwiki, 28+ edits to tewiki, and 10+ edits to mrwiki.
 * On hiwiki, Sakura6977 has edited pages created by now-blocked socks of Padmalakshmisx, such as Abby313 utcursch &#124; talk 03:00, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Those two were always pretty quacky. It might also be worth revisiting Sockpuppet_investigations/Quadirsaab/Archive - another socker who was a tremendous fan of the Nizam. I dunno what checkuser might turn up. Pinkbeast (talk) 11:55, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Possible, although Quadirsaab and socks seem to have been last active in April 2018. On a sidenote, User:Sarvarkar is another Nizam-focused account that appeared in December 2018. utcursch &#124; talk 16:16, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I dunno about Sarvarkar. As I understand it, the legacy of the Nizams - Muslim rulers of a predominantly Hindu state - is a bit of a vexed subject in India at the moment and it seems more than plausible that multiple Indian editors might independently be interested in the subject. Sarvarkar is less specifically obsessed, makes some perfectly good edits, and doesn't operate in close tandem with Sakura et al. Pinkbeast (talk) 16:29, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * ✅ plus:
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:28, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:28, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:28, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:28, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:28, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:28, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:28, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Pretty ducky based on most regular editing habit markers and I would block him myself, but I think we should have a CU look into other accounts. I also wanted to publish something here so that we know how long this issue has been going on.

He's still having problems with basic concepts like copying within Wikipedia, image uploading, and plagiarism. I mention this, because every time he pleas for an unblock, he boasts about how nobody else can do what he does.

Thanks Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:24, 28 August 2019 (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
. Blocked and tagged. No other accounts seen.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:55, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
 * too —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 03:46, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Restoring the same exact rewrites the last couple of socks Rvls, Dunkoclump, Jabbulakonda, and Layercorey were trying to accomplish at Telugu cinema, Malayalam cinema, Aditya 369, Marana Simhasanam, S. S. Rajamouli and numerous other articles in last few months. Since persistent, I request a mass rollback of all edits if possible. May be please use a check user too as the user have the habit of creating backup accounts. 2409:4073:40F:E567:44C7:2AA1:B3C8:10E6 (talk) 15:19, 10 January 2020 (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

 * ✅ plus:
 * . Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:24, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
 * . Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:24, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
 * . Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:24, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Reinstating edits of previous sock Karnakamalam at K. N. T. Sastry, Maa Ooru, B. Narsing Rao, Daasi, etc. Applying a rangeblock may be more useful than blocking accounts. 2409:4073:21E:9B5B:E1A8:2775:B71E:7940 (talk) 09:10, 16 January 2020 (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 following accounts are :
 * Tagged and blocked. PhilKnight (talk) 10:20, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Tagged and blocked. PhilKnight (talk) 10:20, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Tagged and blocked. PhilKnight (talk) 10:20, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Tagged and blocked. PhilKnight (talk) 10:20, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Tagged and blocked. PhilKnight (talk) 10:20, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Tagged and blocked. PhilKnight (talk) 10:20, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Back again reverting to his versions. Can anyone apply a range block. This has become a headache. 2409:4073:2098:9975:F581:DAB2:C105:4BAA (talk) 15:37, 21 January 2020 (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

 * Sock indeffed. Nothing more to do. Closing. Cabayi (talk) 16:40, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Again, reverting back to his version on Telugu cinema. 2409:4073:293:4040:79F1:4C4:9F64:869A (talk) 07:22, 25 January 2020 (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
'''This case is being reviewed by JJMC89 as part of the clerk training process. Please allow him to process the entire case without interference, and pose any questions or concerns either on his talk page or on this page if more appropriate.'''
 * . for sleepers —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 08:36, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ + . Salvio 10:58, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 11:02, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

The edits from both Nixesdrive and this user are very similar. I'd also recommend protecting that page due to the sockpuppetry. ミラP 14:52, 27 January 2020 (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

 * ✅ as User:Nixesdrive = User:Susigourd = User:Bagdheera = User:Aapadh = User:Miffsmires = User:Dayavaan.  Maxim (talk)  16:57, 27 January 2020 (UTC)


 * restating names with checkuser template to work with tools... Cabayi (talk) 17:43, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * restating names with checkuser template to work with tools... Cabayi (talk) 17:43, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * restating names with checkuser template to work with tools... Cabayi (talk) 17:43, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * restating names with checkuser template to work with tools... Cabayi (talk) 17:43, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * restating names with checkuser template to work with tools... Cabayi (talk) 17:43, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * restating names with checkuser template to work with tools... Cabayi (talk) 17:43, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * restating names with checkuser template to work with tools... Cabayi (talk) 17:43, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Account is fresh, plus the iconic edit in Malayalam cinema, restoring his version. 137.97.102.68 (talk) 14:24, 12 May 2020 (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
<span style="color:;"> 
 * Previous accounts are, so I'm working on incomplete information. Vendssweat is to Padmalakshmisx. Vendssweat is also  to the following two accounts:
 * ST47 (talk) 15:01, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * ST47 (talk) 15:01, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * ST47 (talk) 15:01, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Krishanath is easy; they haven't barely edited anything yet. I ran some spot checks against previous socks and drew a blank there too. Pinkymama touches (old sock) Lagaanlineup at Sathya Sai Baba, but the feel of the edits is very different, so I can't make anything of that.  Not seeing anything with Vendssweat either.  So unless we're going with the theory that "If they're editing bollywood articles, they must be a sock", I don't see that there's anything to do there lacking stronger CU evidence.  -- RoySmith (talk) 01:19, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah I agree, I'm not convinced that there's enough here at this point. But if more evidence comes to light a new case should be filed. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:17, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I disagree with your analysis. To me, it's pretty clear these are all Padma. The same style edit summaries are all hallmark of this sockmaster - (references , [[  ) and I'm seeing high intersection with socks by all three users . Perhaps  Would like to weigh in? Also, , I noticed non-stale sock User:Telguelgu, maybe these accounts could be compared to that account?  Sro23 (talk) 14:21, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
 * also appears to be a sock -    Sro23 (talk) 14:24, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
 * With a quick look, it has the general stink of Padma socking to me. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:58, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
 * given the addition evidence presented above, I've changed my mind. It's partly the hard evidence (i.e. diffs shown), but I think we should also give a lot of weight to the judgement calls of people who have been familiar with this sockfarm over the long run.  So, I'd block all of them now. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:50, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it's a good example of where familiarity with what you're looking for can be what's necessary. It's also interesting that a need to supply evidence is consistently brought up in the archive. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 22:52, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Noting that "familiarity with what you're looking for" might just be another way of saying Confirmation bias, but blocked and tagged. Closing -- RoySmith (talk) 01:02, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

He is accusing me of having an agenda as with his previous socks. In case he comes back, he must be reported. <b style="color: black;">Kailash29792</b> (talk)  04:07, 14 September 2020 (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

 * GeneralNotability (talk) 20:17, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
 * No additional information given in over a week. Closing as stale. GeneralNotability (talk) 22:38, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
For the record. --Blablubbs (talk) 10:52, 28 February 2023 (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

 * ✅ to each other and to confirmed sock . --Blablubbs (talk) 10:53, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Post-archiving note: too. --Blablubbs (talk) 11:14, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
In September 2022, I reverted one of the disruptive POV edits of User:Iamsanatani, a sock of Padmalakshmisx. Today, a user named "Jewishblood", who conveniently only edits Muslim-related, mostly Indian/Pakistan articles (just like Iamsanatani ) reverted me, saying "let it be". How do they know of this edit I wonder. --HistoryofIran (talk) 13:31, 29 July 2023 (UTC) HistoryofIran (talk) 13:31, 29 July 2023 (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

 * is stale. While is ✅ to  who is a sock of . PhilKnight (talk) 06:11, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Already blocked and tagged. Closing. PhilKnight (talk) 06:13, 9 August 2023 (UTC)