Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/President26/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets

 * ( original case name)


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

Like the suspected sock puppeteer Wiltcurry, the socks are also making the same changes. ; ; ;; ;  ;; ; ;. The modus is to disregard WP:COMMONAME, WP:NOINDICSCRIPT and being generally disruptive. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:30, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Editor interaction here. Would liek to request CU since tehre are a lot of IPs also and may be some accounts are lurking. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:33, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Found another, created today only. See the same kind of edits to Mumbai related articles and addition of Indic Scripts diff.
 * They are using multiple IPs. This one for example. And this one here. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:11, 1 October 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 is weird (why create a half-dozen throwaway accounts for this?) but there's enough overlap that I think it's worth taking a closer look. CU endorsed. GeneralNotability (talk) 13:30, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Same major cities, same UA, but sometimes different ranges and ISPs. Bhakti Parker = Byjuses though at minimum. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 00:43, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Moved to President26 as the oldest account. I'll go though the rest of these in a few chunks. -- RoySmith (talk) 18:19, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
 * President26, Wiltcurry, and Potphode based on behavior shown by the three diffs linked.
 * Byjuses and Bhakti Parker from the CU result.
 * Mitreuk, Byjeses and Wiltcurry are the same on behavior.
 * Rashtraa and Wiltcurry are the same on behavior.
 * I'm not sure where that leaves Prabharashtra; I'll double back and take another look at that in a moment. -- RoySmith (talk) 18:32, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure where that leaves Prabharashtra; I'll double back and take another look at that in a moment. -- RoySmith (talk) 18:32, 2 October 2020 (UTC)


 * I'm not seeing anything that ties Prabharashtra into this group, so taking no action there and closing this for now. -- RoySmith (talk) 18:35, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Same type of vandalism, that is addition of IndicScript, chnaging WP:COMMONNAME, addition of template in infobox and being generally disruptive as in the diffs. Similar behavior shown by confirmed socks here,, here. Looks like a WP:DUCK. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:34, 4 October 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
based on behavioural evidence. Agree that the diffs provided are pretty clearly the same disruptive user, including at least one of the accounts that was CU-confirmed last time - the renaming, overuse of Indic script, and incompetent capitalisation are pretty unambiguous. Marking for close, I don't think this one's complicated enough to necessarily need a checkuser. ~ mazca  talk 16:50, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Simialr changes by this new user and the sock Tiswadi. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:29, 8 October 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
- Same article, almost identical behaviour to the previous confirmed sock - as a WP:DUCK. I'd also note that attempted to blank this SPI but was caught in the edit filter, I've also blocked that for a week - though unclear if it was the same guy or just some other disruptor, the other edits seem to be different unhelpful edits to unrelated Indian topics to the rest of these. ~ mazca  talk 19:35, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Usual POV edits and addition of Indic text in the articles, like older socks. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:22, 10 October 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
- - exactly the same behaviour and almost exactly the same name as the last sock. Marking for close. ~ mazca  talk 01:15, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Similar disruptive edits, removal of old British time names of settlement, addition of IndicScripts despite WP:INDICSCRIPT. , and diff by confirmed sock. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:52, 17 October 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

 * What makes this user identifiable to the sock master is the fact that they both have similar edit summary patterns. They both capitalize the word "Name", "Legal", and other words that don't usually merit it, and their edit summaries are structured in the same way (see 1, 2). Indef'd and tagged; closing SPI report...  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   08:47, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Again similar POV addtion of WP:INDICSCRIPT, removing the British Era names of places as well changing WP:COMMONNAMEs,. Comparison with previous socks,. looks like a WP:DUCK to me. Since the sockmaster had used multiple users and IPs, I have requested CU. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:21, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * - Noting the above comment; requesting CU. Jack Frost (talk) 09:08, 12 February 2021 (UTC) Bollocks. I missed the staleness of the accounts. Apologies. Jack Frost (talk) 11:09, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * The previous accounts are too for me to run a checkuser and compare to. There are also no recent logs from the blocked accounts either. This will need a behavioral investigation...  ~Oshwah~  (talk)  (contribs)   09:20, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
 * It's certainly possible, but not enough here for me to block on behavior alone. Using historical vs colonial names for places is a topic of wide interest.  As far as the more technical indicators go, everybody's in the same time zone and using mobile, but that describes most people in India.  Closing with no action taken. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:40, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Usage of this template in the infobox as well as changing of WP:COMMONNAMES, removal of British era similar to old socks. Here, they changed the commonname in the infobox to 'Sridevi Kapoor' and use usedd the template Big. Here, they replaced the common in the caption to "Mahatma Phule Market". Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:57, 27 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Well I found a diff displaying the third notable common trait of the sockfarm, addition of Indic Script in the infobox, replacing the English common name . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:33, 7 March 2021 (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 not too sure here, beyond the Big template usage I'm not seeing a huge behavioural overlap. The editing method revealed by the tags is different, and a skim of the contributions doesn't seem that compelling. This is a disruptive editor, currently blocked, but so far I'm not sure it's this one. ~ mazca  talk 23:58, 27 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks, recent edits seem definitely more suggestive of this user. Already blocked indef by for general disruptive editing, tagging as suspected and marking for close. ~  mazca  talk 23:54, 7 March 2021 (UTC)