Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ShahabKhanJadoon1/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

ST47 (talk) 11:21, 22 November 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

 * ✅, all blocked and tagged. Notes at cuwiki. ST47 (talk) 11:21, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Similar username and subject matter interest. ST47 (talk) 01:05, 11 December 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

 * ✅, . ST47 (talk) 01:05, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Noticed while rechecking ranges used by this sockmaster. ST47 (talk) 01:13, 19 January 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

 * ShahabKhan2020 is ✅, . Znbbhalli is, particularly to some logged-out editing that I observed around the same time, but the ranges are so busy that I'd like to see more than one edit before blocking. ST47 (talk) 01:13, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Jithyajithu (talk) 12:50, 12 March 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
✅, blocked and tagged. The filer is blocked and tagged as a sock of. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:36, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Those users keep adding emblem to Turkey page while Turkey does not have an official emblem. Also their edits always focus on similar topics. Beshogur (talk) 08:47, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Does not look likely to me (didn't we have someone post a bad sockpuppet report on this same page in the last couple days?). I don't see much evidence of SKJ1 being interested in the topic of Turkey's emblem. Of the four suspected sockpuppets, only Walz.rice has any apparent interest in SKJ1's preferred topic area (Pakistan). The four suspected sockpuppets have very different areas of interest and technical evidence differs between them - SymeonHellas seems interested in Australian and Greek politics and uses Visual Editor, Walz.rice is interested in Pakistan and uses a mix of editors, TonkarLike is interested in East and Southeast Asian historical kingdoms and almost exclusively edits from a phone, and Horope...really doesn't want Russia to be called "Asian" and neither edits mobile nor uses the visual editor. Recommend closure. creffett (talk) 18:32, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
In order to facilitate and expedite your request, please provide diffs to support your case. Please give two or more diffs meeting the following format: Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:20, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) At least one diff is from the sockmaster (or an account already blocked as a confirmed sockpuppet of the sockmaster), showing the behaviour characteristic of the sockmaster.
 * 2) At least one diff per suspected sockpuppet, showing the suspected sockpuppet emulating the behaviour of the sockmaster given in the first diff.
 * 3) In situations where it is not immediately obvious from the diffs what the characteristic behaviour is, a short explanation must be provided. Around one sentence is enough for this.
 * No further evidence presented, closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:47, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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


 * Alishernavoi is a sockpuppet of ShahabKhanJadoon1

Innocent Paki (talk) 01:27, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Alishernavoi was indulged in an edit war on article Karachi on 27 February 2020 . He was insisted to discuss the topic on talk page but he continued with edit war. On 28 February 2020, another account named Pk18916 was created on wikipedia while on the other hand Alishernavoi continued the war of edits on article Karachi until 8 march 2020, then he realized that its impossible to do major edits without any sort of discussion on talk page, so, on the same day (8 March 2020), he left a message on my talk page, by the help of the sockpuppet account Pk18916, in which he wrote that 'If you'll keep on reverting the edits as you did on article Karachi, you'll be blocked from editing' . These types of warnings can only be issued by an administrator. A new user (with 10 to 15 edits) can't issue such warnings. How is it possible that a user (with 10 to 15 edits) issues warning to defend other user who is openly indulged in an edit war? This is only possible in such case that Pk18916 is a sockpuppet of Alishernavoi. To reconfirm, I moved that warning to the talk page of Alishernavoi (whose suspected sockpuppet is Pk18916) and that warning was removed immediately by Pk18916 on the same day . Pk18916 has already been blocked for being a confirmed sockpuppet of ShahabKhanJadoon1. This means Alishernavoi is also a sockpuppet of ShahabKhanJadoon1. I mentioned the account Pk18916 that has been blocked as a sockpuppet of ShahabKhanJadoon1. One more interesting thing that links Alishernavoi with ShahabKhanJadoon1 is that both the accounts were created in October 2018. Both have similar editing style and similar type of edit summaries. In short, I think all three accounts ShahabKhanJadoon1, Pk18916 and Alishernavoi are of same person.

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

This is a retaliatory filing, and is not in good faith. Innocent Paki was recently banned for a week after I filed an investigation that proved he was using a sock. He and that sock were uploading numerous images that he had stolen from facebook, twitter, and skyscrapercity. I was concerned that he was only blocked for a week, but was told by the admin who blocked him that he basically would get a slap on the wrist because too many sockpuppets pop up in South Asian topics.

Anyway, Innocent Paki has gone on a roller coaster of bad logic here. Its somewhat amusing that I'm being accused of starting the edit war while Innocent Paki supposedly asked me to discuss on the talk page for Karachi (He wrote: "then he realized that its impossible to do major edits without any sort of discussion on talk page") In actuality, he can't provide a diff because he never once asked for a discussion. There's actually a long history of him trying to make changes to the infobox montage without bothering to form any consensus, whereas I told him that *he* needed to make consensus first. He's so disruptive that I think there should perhaps be a topic ban on Karachi, Lahore, and other major Pakistani cities since he swaps out montages without any attempt at discussion.. For example:

He first made these changes to the Karachi page in September 12. After, I immediately called him out that day for failing to build consensus before major changes, while using a bogus excuse as his edit summary. He totally ignored this and re-inserted his changes the next day. I reverted that change the next day by again noting he made no attempt at consensus]. He was then quiet for several months.

On Feb 8, he again switched out a long standing montage by including a hodgepodge of photos without any discussion at all. I told him on 15 and 16 February that his major changes needed consensus first (Also note, his old sn was SonofATM). I specifically wrote on the 16 of Feb that "We’ve gone through this before. You need to build consensus before major changes."

He was then quiet for a few more months until April when he started this again. This time he was extremely aggressive and would obnoxiously edit war until in hopes that he could just get it his way. It was really quite exhausting. He kept arguing that pictures were "blurry" (when they were not), and kept forcefully trying to include a mundane image of a random interchange which he subjectively thought was "beautiful".

He did the same to the Lahore page here, where he didnt even leave an edit summary, much less any attempt at consensus building. While he was blocked, he edited while logged out to re-instate his changes as here, and again here.

He did the same thing at the Faisalabad page, and his former mentor tried to get him to build consensus and work by collaboration, but unsuprisingly, Innocent Paki did not. She then resigned being his mentor because he makes edits without any consensus.

If this is not the right place for this, please direct me to the right forum so I can post it.

Also, should I make a separate page to report him for editing logged-out while he was blocked? His IP was used to make other changes on the page that were similar to Innocent Paki's other edits, but I haven't gone into detail here regarding that.

Alishernavoi (talk) 06:29, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

I have given all the evidences with diffs. Your language and inappropriate words like roller coaster of bad logic is just a false attempt to dilute the evidences and trying to change the topic. You are discussing irrelevant topic here (about the edit war) but you haven't answer about those evidences that proof you are a sockpuppet of ShahabKhanJadoon1. You issued a warning on my talk page by a sockpuppet account and then I moved that warning to your talk page for reconfirmation and you removed the same warning by the similar sockpuppet account (that issued warning on my talk page). I am not making bad logics but giving evidences. This is a serious issue that one person has created more than 6 accounts out of which 5 have already been blocked as confirmed sockpuppetry. Anyways, let the administrator decide what to do now. Innocent Paki (talk) 11:29, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

One more evidence you left today is that you are following this article and it is in your watchlist. Because you have immediately answered after the complaint has filed against you. How you came to know that there is also an article named as Sockpuppet investigations/ShahabKhanJadoon1?. This is only possible in such a way that you are keeping an eye on this article. Now evidences are increased. Innocent Paki (talk) 11:54, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Pk18916 is already blocked. There is not sufficient evidence as to Alishernavoi. ST47 (talk) 15:12, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

In May 2020, I was restructuring the article for the Pakistan Air Force, and this user reverted all my edits there, went on other articles I had contributed to (Pakistan Army, Pakistan Navy) and promptly removed my edits there with no explanation (← can be verified by checking in the edit histories for both the Pakistan Army and Pakistan Navy articles). When I attempted multiple times to start a discussion with the user via talk pages on the articles as well as their user talk page, I had no success as this user either did not respond or accused me of vandalism with no evidence. I reported this user and they were warned by an administrator (User:EdJohnston) appropriately for edit warring with me and baselessly accusing me of vandalism. A while later, they were warned by yet another administrator as well as various senior users for edit warring or vandalizing articles (by adding massive unsourced edits and/or reverting articles maliciously with no explanations and refusal to discuss with other editors) and has a history of disputes with other users, usually stemming from the same reason(s) that they also had started disputes with me. Recently, I restructured, updated and detailed the article for the Afghanistan–Pakistan barrier, and this user once again came onto that article and reverted all my edits with no explanation, similarly to what he did before. Following this, I consulted an administrator (EdJohnston, who is the same administrator that warned this user for edit warring with me when I reported him back in May 2020) to notify them and subsequently began to scour the edit history on the article for the Pakistan Army. On the edit history of the Pakistan Army article, I noticed that a user, (User:Pk18916) had an eerily similar name to this user that I am reporting right now (User:Ytpks896). Upon further investigation of Pk18916's page and contributions history, I realized that not only are they banned for being a sockpuppet of the sockpuppeteer (User:ShahabKhanJadoon1), but that the nature and style of edits and their communication are all EXACTLY the same. Furthermore, this user's edits started very shortly after the user Pk18916 was banned for the offence of sockpuppetry and consequently stopped editing. As further proof, you can look at User:Pk18916's contribution history and User:Ytpks896's contribution history side-by-side, and you will immediately notice the very similar nature of edits, communication (broken English that follows a similar pattern) as well as the exact same areas of interest (primarily Pakistan-based articles) for editing. I request that this user be investigated and promptly banned due to the outstanding evidence showing their sockpuppetry and disruptive edits. Xeed.rice (talk) 08:07, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I will comb through the edits of both Ytpks896 and Pk18916 some more soon and see if I can identify and pull a certain POV pattern out from both accounts to add on top of the previous report. Xeed.rice (talk) 20:22, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , I notice you put most of this in the archive (i.e. Sockpuppet investigations/ShahabKhanJadoon1/Archive). Please note that the archives are for the exclusive use of the SPI team.  I'm sure you meant no harm, but please don't edit the archives again.  This page is the correct place to add any evidence.  Thanks. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:28, 2 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
Hello User:Xeed.rice. I would like to see more behavioral evidence. My own observation is that Ytpks and Pk18916 both use the mobile web interface, and I agree that both have limited English. But if Ytpks and Pk18916 have both edited a lot of the same defence-related articles, you should be willing to check the histories of those articles to see if the edits are similar. I did look at Twitter while researching this, and let's just say there is a lot of nationalism on Twitter. You did not mention the POV of the two reported editors, but it is fair game to check whether either of these people edits Wikipedia articles in support of a particular political POV. Anyway, I am unclear on whether the edits of Pk18916 are stale, thus limiting the value of any checkuser findings. EdJohnston (talk) 17:01, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Requested additional evidence not supplied, and Ytpks896 hasn't edited in almost a month anyway, so closing with no action taken at this time. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:25, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets


Logging post-check -- TNT (talk • she/her) 00:51, 10 March 2022 (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

 * is ✅ to -- TNT (talk • she/her) 00:52, 10 March 2022 (UTC)