Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sadeeqzaria/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets

 * ( original case name)


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

this interaction report shows that both accounts have 'latched on' to and I, with for example both writing on GB's talk page and editing Yusuf Sulaiman on 17 July. Then both accounts interacted with on 17-18 July. Both were in touch with me on 21 July. The style of the talk page questions is similar with both editors repeatedly asking reviewers for help to submit their drafts and not following the basic instruction on how they can do so themselves. While this is plausibly a coincidence, a checkuser would determine for sure. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 19:55, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Sadeeqzaria created Draft:Professor Charles Egbu on 18 July. Abbas Kwarbai created Draft:Professor Charles Egbu (2) 19 July. Up until 6 August all the activity on the article was by Sadeeqzaria, then on 6 August we get a full day's editing of it by Kwarbai, they have a day off (Saturday) and then Sadeeqzaria picks up again on 9 August.

I have added Abubakar Zaria as they show a similar pattern of editing. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 20:04, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * . Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 15:42, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Update having seen the checkuser outcome, I don't think either Abubakar Zaria or Sadeeqzaria could be said to be abusing their dual accounts, and Abubakar Zaria seems to have stopped editing. While coaching Sadeeqzaria has been tedious, I haven't seen signs yet that they are not here to build an encyclopedia (I think they may have sights on being paid in future as a side hustle based on something I found offwiki) - so perhaps a warning (per WP:BEFOREBLOCK) rather than block is warranted? Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 13:54, 12 August 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

 * Abubakar Zaria and Sadeeqzaria are ✅. Abbas Kwarbai is probably, despite some technical similarities, I think it's more likely that they are a coworker or other real world acquaintance. ST47 (talk) 06:10, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Unless someobody has a better plan, I'm going to move this case to Sadeeqzaria, indef/tag the two who were confirmed, and uw-agf-sock Abbas Kwarbai. -- RoySmith (talk) 21:00, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * the two confirmed users -- RoySmith (talk) 21:52, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * closing -- RoySmith (talk) 21:53, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets

 * ( original case name)


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

Abbas Kwarbai is the creator of a great many articles of low standard, often pppulated with pictures uploaded to Commons by. Gwanki's commons talk page indicates the fate of these. Kwarbai has ignored UPE warnings on their talk page

Abubakar A Gwanki has moved at least one Draft by another to main space: log and this was created initially by (though I do understand that MW software can sometines confuse us over who created an article)

Abubakar Balarabe's creations log shows a couple of less than stellar drafts, and a great deal of activity, a lot of it useful. I have not included Balarabe on my list of suspected socks for this reason.

This feels very like a PR sock farm creating UPE. It will be hard to unravel without CU, hence my request, and I think CU will identify others associated with the group. I have not notified the editors concerned Fiddle   Faddle  06:18, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I apologise for opening this in the incorrect location. Twinkle does not show what is present here. While I could move it I do not want to cause behind the scenes chaos. I'm sorry for inadvertently placing the burden on a clerk Fiddle   Faddle  06:21, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Your analysis, below, seems to me to be sound. It may well be that this is a tag team of meat puppets. There is a swathe of material to go to AfD here. I'm tempted to go through it once this investigation reaches its end point. While there may be a shortage of Nigeria articles on Wikipedia there is no reason to lower the projects standards Fiddle   Faddle  11:15, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I have read your thoughts below. I understand that this type of investigation can be upsetting. Every one of us can expect at some point in our Wikipedia career to be subject to some sort of investigation. We will all feel upset until an investigation comes to an end. There are two outcomes. Either the case is proven and the rules then apply for sockpuppetry, or the case shows no wrongdoing and nothing is required to be done, and the parties walk forward with no stain on their characters.
 * If you are simply editing using only one single account then the investigation will indicate that. So please be unafraid, and please take no offence. These matters require community scrutiny which is why they take place in public.
 * There is no hierarchy of seniority on Wikipedia. Every editor has precisely the same input as every other editor, from the news to the oldest. Our admins are simply editors we trust to administer the community's wishes. They have no higher rank than any other editor.  Fiddle   Faddle  15:16, 24 September 2020 (UTC)


 * in view of your statement below, and mindful that CU is a tool to be used with care and at the discretion of the SPI expert team, I am content that you and others work from WP:DUCK though other editors here may have different views. Against that is the strong objection to this investigation by, something that suggests that CU might be useful to that editor in order to prove their assertion that no linkage exists. Are you able to consider this from their viewpoint, or would that be deemed invalid under the rules? Fiddle   Faddle  10:31, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Comment I have been keeping a close eye on these accounts and am not surprised to see this investigation.
 * , the accused puppet has been around since December 2013
 * was created in May 2020
 * was created in June 2020
 * was created in June 2020
 * was created in September 2020
 * So if there was socking, Gwanki would be the sockmaster.


 * For what its worth, I agree with the conclusion of the checkuser carried out here (at my instigation) which was 'more likely that they are a coworker or other real world acquaintance'. If you look at Gwanki's profile at the Hausa language Wikipedia you'll see a series of photos of him at a Hausa Wikimedians User Group meeting. I think our other editors are probably in those photos. So they are unlikely to be socks but editors working in concert with each other. The real issue I think is their prolific production of poor quality drafts, some of which have then moved into mainspace by Gwanki where they have had to have extensive cleanup or have been nominated for deletion. Gwanki is not an AfC reviewer and doesn't have the experience in what makes a draft suitable for mainspace. That said, a number of such drafts are indeed on notable subjects. Is there WP:UPE here? Possibly. While I have my suspicions, I've found no hard evidence of that. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 10:43, 24 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment The behavior I have seen may be characterised as WP:ECA and WP:COPYCAT but falls well short of WP:MEAT or WP:TAGTEAM because I've not seen these editors participate together in talk page discussions or deletion discussions. The nearest to evidence I have on UPE is, where Kwarbai appeared to remove the WP:BLPBALANCE of Bindu Babu, whitewashing the fact that the subject's PhDs were from a 'university' that gives degrees based on multi-choice online tests that can be sat multiple times until the person passes! That is the kind of thing that someone who'd paid for the article would want removed. If it was a paid piece, it is certainly a case of WP:LUC. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 11:37, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
 * might be able to help here - meta:User:M-Mustapha, but would have to avoid WP:OUTING and send any helpful info to oversight. Curb Safe Charmer (talk)

Hello good afternoon everyone. It is my great pleasure and honor to be here in this discussion about what some senior editor are denouncing me. Well I don't know any senior editor in Wikipedia much less to talk about connection. I joined Wikipedia four months ago with the sole aim of contribution to academia, and other paramount source information globally.The first draft I created on Wikipedia is for Prof Tyler A Adams where one senior editor called M-Mustapha declined the draft and since then when I decided talked on talk page of numerous senior editors but few of them replied me. One xeno senior editor whom I can't remember his/her name said to me that,I might be possibly paid for creation the article since I have been spoken on talk page.I was even invited to tea room for questions but I couldn't understand anything there. That unknown senior editor whom I can't remember his/her name really exasperated me which stopped me from editing on Wikipedia for two weeks.

Moreover, all what I learned in Wikipedia is a self learn, I have no connection with anyone whom I wrote article about them. More 40% of whom I wrote an article about them are not from my country. I think I'm buoyant enough to manage my life effectively as I need nothing from someone to paid in creating Wikipedia page. I expunged Dr Bindu Babu's PhD university link on Wikipedia because one senior editor @Curb edited it to unaccredited university, whilst I'm hoping to enroll in one program there in the university. After some series of conversation with him, I noticed that the university is really note less university, and from that I halted from editing the page completely. The real issue is that was a freelance writer, Ghost writer, and I participated in media and mass communication. And these make me to have fashion on Wikipedia.

Nonetheless, I align with any decision that the Wikipedia senior editor label on me which could be blocking me from using Wikipedia completely and deleting all the articles I contributed on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abbas Kwarbai (talk • contribs) 14:47, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - I'm not going to consider a check until I can see some diffs or article links that show the connection to previous users. We do not act on potential UPEs and check their IP for the heck of it, that would violate the privacy policy. Beyond that, this account is from 2013, and accounts that old give me pause, because they most likely would have been caught already. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 23:19, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
 * No, in fact, policy speaks expressly and clearly against using CU to apply pressure to a user and from running "innocence" checks. Please see CheckUser. There is no way this rises to the level of WP:DUCK otherwise I would be blocking and/or running the check already. Evidence is always a requirement for SPI (as noted in the edit notice), and this case is extremely lacking and only provides potential problematic edits on other wikis or minor local concerns about UPE. None of these are sockpuppetry issues. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 14:28, 25 September 2020 (UTC)


 * This is obviously not going anywhere, so closing. There's a hierarchy of levels of suspicion based on available evidence.  This feels very like a PR sock farm creating UPE, while legitimate, is pretty low on the hierarchy.  My suggestion is to keep an eye on things, add affected pages to your watchlist, perhaps bookmark the contribution lists of suspected socks to review them periodically, and if more specific evidence emerges, re-open the SPI.  The best evidence will be pairs of diffs, showing one user making exactly the same edits as another user (presumably with somebody else reverting the first edit in between). -- RoySmith (talk) 13:14, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets

 * ( originally filed under this user)


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

has made a series of attempts to upload copyrighted images of Shirley Ze Yu to Commons and then to add them to the Wikipedia article about her. See, ,. Onez1990, a new user, had uploaded (since speedily deleted) which was a derivative work created by cutting her out of a copyright image and superimposing her on another background (see the deletion reason on that image), and then. This fits the MO of Kwarbai in their previous attempts and. I believe this is part of UPE on this article. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 13:59, 5 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment Well spotted. The image used in the article has also been manipulated, changing the colour of the background and Mofor's jacket and tie. The only reason I can think of why Kwarbai, Onez1990 and the confirmed sock  would go to the effort of manipulating these images is to avoid the copyvio checks that are done by patrollers at Commons. I can see no bona fide reason - it has to be to a form of evasion.
 * Is there sufficient behavioral evidence here for a CU? Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 16:17, 7 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Added Harun Zaria. They have recreated Draft:Daniel Mofor which had previously been created by and deleted as G5, then recreated by Abbas Kwarbai and deleted as G11, G12. For it to be recreated so soon suggests either sockpuppetry, or meat in a UPE ring. Can we get a CU on Zaria? Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 21:26, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

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

this is very likely a case of undisclosed paid editing based on their most recent creation Draft:Daniel Mofor which was last created by a sock of user LaurelWest. GSS &#x202F;&#128172; 06:11, 7 November 2020 (UTC)


 * If not direct socking Harun Zaria can be treated as meat. The account was inactive since July 2020 and suddenly returned after 3 months just to repost the same promo piece. GSS &#x202F;&#128172; 08:54, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * .  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   07:47, 10 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Abbas and Onez. I think Harun Zaria is a different UPE (their version of the article in question is pretty different) and have blocked them as a suspected UPE but not as a sock of this group. Closing. GeneralNotability (talk) 22:26, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Gamed for AC, as soon as they got it, immediately moved 's draft into mainspace. Praxidicae (talk) 18:24, 14 December 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

 * - Limited history, but what there is sure looks like a Sadeeqzaria sock based on the draft move, the AC gaming, and some other behavioral clues (BEANS). It might also be worth comparing to some of the recent socks in Sockpuppet investigations/Harun Zaria/Archive which  split off from this. -- RoySmith (talk) 18:45, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * . Same country and blocked range. Different user agents.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   19:18, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Taking into account both the "likely" and 's comments in the related Harun Zaria case ("be liberal with the blocks"), calling this proven. -- RoySmith (talk) 20:48, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets

 * ( original case name)


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

Coxyl1958 account was created in November; has edited Jon Fortt, created by Kwarbai, Santia Deck created by Kwarbai and tried again to get Draft:Malia Obama published after Kwarbai's last attempt in August was declined. After the new account had clocked up enough edits to become autoconfirmed they reverted to type, editing in the same areas of interest: journalists and TV anchors, blockchain experts, models. Similarities in grammar and spelling mistakes, edit summaries, many consecutive small edits and adding references that don't verify the statement that they relate to. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 11:35, 21 December 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

 * ✅. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:41, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets

 * ( original case name)


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

Al "koxy" 1992 registered last month a few days before "Coxy" l1958 was created. The master account was inactive since they were registered and returned today to recreate Draft:Daniel Mofor after Draft:Danial Mfor was deleted per Coxyl1958's request. No doubt this is the same person as per their usernames, but I'm requesting CU for sleepers. GSS &#x202F;&#128172; 16:24, 19 December 2020 (UTC)


 * I also noticed that user CoxyI1958 was registered a day after was blocked and today they submitted Draft:Celai West for a review so this could be someone from the Sadeeqzaria sockfarm. GSS &#x202F;&#128172; 16:50, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Both have very similiar editing interests (Science), both have virtually the same name format. Seems highly likely that its a sock.Kieran207 (talk) 21:17, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * . Same country, but different wide ranges and different user agents. This will need a behavioral investigation.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   02:23, 22 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Alkoxy1992 blocked and tagged. Closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:03, 1 January 2021 (UTC)