Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PashtoGrammar1/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

-- Amanda  (aka DQ) 22:31, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I was surprised to see these blocked. I've been watching these accounts' numerous edits to Pashto and it was obvious they were the same person because of the almost identical user names – I reckoned the poor fellow lost their password and had to register a different account each time. They were editing consecutively, without overlap, so I don't see any actions in bad faith. Am I missing anything? Of course, if they're the same person as Objective001, then of course, that would be a different matter – but I'm not acquainted with that other case, so I can't comment on that. – Uanfala (talk) 22:47, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
 * as far as I was able to see each new account started editing only after the previous one had stopped. They weren't trying to evade scrutiny – if they had been, then they wouldn't have used near-identical usernames, and they wouldn't have edited exactly the same article, with each new account picking up exactly where the previous one had left off. To anyone watching that article it was obvious that: a) these are the same person, and b) they weren't trying to do anything fishy. Again, I'm commenting only on these accounts here. I don't know the Objective001 case. – Uanfala (talk) 23:09, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * All confirmed. Please see if this behaviorally links to Sockpuppet investigations/Objective001/Archive as there is technical evidence to back this. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 22:32, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
 * These accounts were all created in three days time (that's a ton of passwords to lose, and puts me in ABF territory) and they tried to create more on WP:ACC along with asking (via IRC) why they were hitting the account creation limit safeguard in the software. Beyond that, splitting their edits in the same topic area is prohibited by WP:SCRUTINY. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 23:00, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I've gone back and reviewed their original request for unblock on IRC. What they mentioned was they couldn't decide if they wished to stay at Wikipedia, and then scrambled the password for each account. Knowingly scrambling and then doing a cleanstart many times within 3 days is suspicious and I still assert that creating accounts every single day makes it hard for people to review contributions, especially if and when they start editing other articles. It's something i've seen done multiple times. Given their ability to edit via that last account for a period of time, I have unblocked the single account and given an AGF sock warning. That said, they may still be blocked depending on if the concluding admin decides its part of the other SPI. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 23:41, 3 November 2020 (UTC)


 * , I don't see enough overlap with Objective001 to link the two - both are clearly interested in the Pashtun and Pashto, but this group seems mostly interested in theories of their origins and the language's pronunciation and grammar (as the username suggests) while Objective seems to be more of a POV-pusher, also Objective uses annoyed edit summaries while this group rarely uses edit summaries. Closing without further action. GeneralNotability (talk) 15:42, 4 November 2020 (UTC)