Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/RukshanaNewa/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

RukshanaNewa has a disclosed alias Rukshana Kapali.1 EkniBhattaKhas created the article Rukshana Kapali, which was speedily deleted, 2, which they then recreated 3 and was deleted via AfD 4. They also made edits where they added a spam link to rukshanakapali(.)com diff1 diff2, the second one within ten minutes of edits by RukshanaNewa to the same page. RukshanaNewa moved page to change a patriotic narrative to nationalistic one diff3 and EkniBhattaKhas did the exact same thing on another page diff4 and another.diff00 Both of them add links to blogs on articles, usually by author "suppressednarratives" whose writing prominently features Rukshana Kapali. diff5 diff6 diff7 diff8 Despite the fact that these three users are always online one at a time, with weeks of breaks in between activity, all three showed up for vote stacking here within a space of 25 minutes. RukshanaNewa was editing before the voting and stopped editing one minute after voting, then the other two came and voted in quick succession after a while but neither made any other edits. All three users have an overlap of interests in LGBTQIQ... and Newar nationalism, and exclusively edit to push their POV often in disruptive ways, and always citing blogs, mostly of RukshanaNewa, Rukshana Kapali or suppressednarratives. I haven't looked at नेपालीमुक्ती closely, but EkniBhattaKhas created an article for Rukshana Kapali in Nepali wikipedia ne(.)wiki as well and नेपालीमुक्ती has devoted a lot of time to that one. Plus the votestacking that I mentioned above. So, I thought may be a checkuser will see something in there. Cross-wiki checking is recommended. Usedtobecool ✉️ ✨ 21:30, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Found an IP older than the master; only has contributions definitely from the master. It is stale and doesn't require further action as of now. Adding here to aid in tracking their activities in the future.  Usedtobecool  ✉️ ✨ 08:21, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Adding BDSnepal to the list. User was voluntarily retired, after being notified of username violation. Didn't add it before even though it had similar pattern of editing because it didn't have the same level of disruptive behaviour, not to mention that it was retired. It came online today to give the exact same kind of retirement to RukshanaNewa, by editing the latter's userpage. Hasn't made any further edits.
 * Also, note that EkniBhattaKhas has come back, and is editing since around the same time that BDSnepal edited RukshanaNewa's page., am I correct in assuming that that solves the IPstale problem? Anyway, thought you'd wanna know, in case it does. At the very least, BDSnepal and EkniBhattaKhas's sudden close appearance might have left some clue as to whether they're connected? No spamming yet, so no urgency  Usedtobecool  ✉️ ✨ 17:17, 18 July 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
RukshanaNewa and नेपालीमुक्ती are ✅, blocked and tagged. EkniBhattaKhas is .--Bbb23 (talk) 23:15, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
 * IPs cannot be "older" than named accounts. The oldest account is based on when the account is created at Wikipedia, not on who edits first. IPs are never registered and in that sense are not even accounts.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:40, 14 July 2019 (UTC)


 * - Please, check and  to the master.  Vanjagenije   (talk)  19:04, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
 * EkniBhattaKhas and BDSnepal are ✅ from each other. Compared to the others, they are . Salvio Let's talk about it! 21:13, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
 * New socks indeffed and tagged. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  00:40, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

User contributions: Similar pattern, same set of articles (including one which has almost exclusive contributions from the farm), similar ideology, POV being pushed. Choice of username as interesting as one of the previous socks. If we could just have a quick CU check, we wouldn't need to waste hours cleaning up, which we'll have to do if we wait for more evidence. If CU check is negative, I could start engaging them as a good faith novice editor, because their edits are as problematic as that of this farm. Usedtobecool ✉ ✨ 17:33, 13 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

 * - This should be evaluated on behaviour. I am familiar with the range that the previous socks use having dealt with a few other cases. CU is rarely useful beyond what a clerk or patrolling admin can provide and this should be reviewed by them. If a block is made, turning off autoblock would also be something to consider. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:12, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * , closing. Kevin ( aka L235 ·&#32; t ·&#32; c) 03:23, 16 August 2019 (UTC)