Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Phindijourno/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets
In all of these accounts (as well as a few others which I have chosen not to add as they are active and continue to edit, though it does seem a bit suspicious) made edits on a singular article, Carlo Grante, starting on 25 July 2022 at 19:10 and a majority ending on 26 July 2022 at 02:22, with a singular edit by two accounts 21 hours later, and 5 days later. Many of these accounts have only a singular edit, that being on this specific page, see Here, here, here, and here. Each account seems to have made edits in a very short timeframe after another, with all of them being on this one specific article.

Phindijourno made the first edit on 19:10, 25 July 2022, and made subsequent edits on the same day and same article at 19:16, 19:29, 19:34, and 19:37, with all of these done using Visual mobile and mobile web edits, and most of them reverted. His edits seem to have all been reverted.

While I wouldn't suspect them at first, a subsequent user, NIRBHAY SINGH RAGHUVANSHI, whose 2 edits out of 4 are on this page, were done 20 minutes after Phindijourno's last edit (though, looking now it seems like it was a weird type of advertising? They put their instagram and a random website.) They do, however, have a similar visual, mobile, and mobile web edit, and I find it very intriguing that it chose that particular article.

A little under three hours later, an account Platinumrecordsllc made their edit on the page attempting to put the composer's website but incorrectly citing it and having it be removed. They also had a visual, mobile, and mobile web edit.

Around four hours later on 02:03, 26 July 2022, user Polits1210, who has a singular edit, added a link to the page.

7 minutes later, 15yaaash1, whose 3 edits are on this one page, seems to have just added wikilinks?

One minute later, user MrButler224 made their singular contribution, removing the previous user's wikilink. 15yaaash1 then makes another edit 3 minutes after.

7 minutes later, Abhinavreddygopu one of their two total edits on the page, adding a wikilink.

1 minute later, Abhimaggo makes their only edit, linking to New York City.

About 21 hours later, Abhinavreddygopu makes their second and last edit of their account, making another wikilink to another city.

Lastly, about 2 hours and 16 minutes later, Abhimaggo001 does the exact same edit that Abhimaggo did, which was already reverted twice.

Many of these user's edits seem to be just linking to other articles, and many of them have been subsequently reverted.

In terms of how they are being used abusively, I find it very weird that so many accounts that only have 1-4 edits, with most of them on the same page editing within 4-5 hours of each other, with most of them doing so mere minutes after each other. I am worried that this may have been done either to draw attention to the article or possibly to increase the number of potential accounts to use later. Just to note, the article had a PEACOCK template added since 2013, so I would also be worried that it may be for advertising purposes as well.

I think personally that CheckUser may be necessary. Given that there have been a number of edits on the same page in a very small timeframe, which I wouldn't expect on a very niche article. Also, since there are a number of accounts here that have very similar names, I would suspect that they are connected and controlled by the same person. To me, it seems that many or all of these accounts were created by the same person or organization given how similar essentially all of these accounts and their edits are.

I hope that the evidence I have provided is efficient. Pacamah (talk) 11:15, 27 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

 * -, none of the listed accounts have edited in almost a year. If you have suspicions about active accounts, please list them, and present evidence on how you see them being connected. It is not worth investing time investigating a bunch of abandoned accounts, we are here to prevent ongoing disruption.  Girth Summit  (blether)  11:49, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Ahh, I had no idea that they had to be active, but it makes sense. Thanks for letting me know, and knowing that, I think I'd be fine with closing this investigation. Sorry about that Pacamah (talk) 11:53, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Closing per above. Spicy (talk) 02:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)