Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sohanpandey/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

Both users edit on cricket articles, each one creating incredibly poor quality new articles. For example, 20 October, Sohan created this. Two days later, Bind created this. These are pretty much the same style in quite a niche area (low-level cricket umpires). Within minutes of the Saman Jayamahamudali ariticle being created by the sock, the sockmaster is editing that same article, swapping back to the other account towards the spell of about 20 minutes.

Both editors have created articles with the summary "creating an article with reliable (re)source" in the same area. This one created on 4th Sept by Bind, and this one created by Sohan on 12th Sept. Sohanpandey also makes edits to the userpage of Bindubimala. Lots of other tag-team editing, such as on this and this article in short spaces of time.  Lugnuts  Precious bodily fluids 10:05, 22 October 2016 (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
✅. Master blocked for two weeks. Puppet blocked and tagged. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:49, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

Previously, the sockmaster created a sock account used to create sub-standard cricket articles. The sockmaster was blocked for two weeks and their sock account blocked indef. They've been quiet for a while, but now they're back with the above account.

First, the new username Vishnu.pandey24 is very similar to the sockmaster's username (Sohanpandey). The new user created a brand-new cricket biography with their second edit, three minutes after their first edit to create their user page. This is an edit on an article the sockmaster created. Note how they make the error on "first class", instead of it's correct term as first-class (with the hypen). They add the ref (without a ref name) from the corresponding bio on Cricinfo. The new sock account made the same mistake + ref formatting on the new article created today. The new article is another below-par stub, with minimal categories and wikilinking, per the sockmaster's style of article creation.

Following the creation of the stub by the sock, they setup a articles created list on their userpage, again, in a similar style of the sockmaster. Note how both lists are prefixed with the hashtag, then the subject area, followed by a link to the page created.

Please can both accounts be blocked, with the sockmaster ideally indef'd for socking straight after a block, and the article for Eon Hooper deleted per WP:G5. Thank you.  Lugnuts  Precious bodily fluids 18:03, 13 November 2016 (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 master now blocked indefinitely). The Eon Hooper article is ineligible for G5 because it was not created when the master was blocked. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:46, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

This IP has been poping up from time to time since about the time the sockmaster (SM) was blocked and has made about a dozen edits. One of their early edits was to blank an old version of this SPI!. More recently, they've edited this article, which was created by a confirmed sock of the SM, this article, which the original SM was involved with editing and then removed a prod on an article started by the SM. This looks like a clear case of WP:DUCK to me. Thanks.  Lugnuts  Precious bodily fluids 13:37, 16 December 2016 (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

 * - OK. Can the IP be blocked for one week based on the history of usage, please? Kevin ( aka L235 ·&#32; t ·&#32; c) 03:35, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ 🎄BethNaught (talk)🎄 13:34, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

Sohanpandey was previously indef'd for socking. This new user has popped up editing the same sort of articles (low-level cricket articles, mainly to do with Nepalese cricketers). Here's the clincher - the new editor's user page is the same as the blocked sock-master, even stating that they had previous accounts on their userpage!  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 07:39, 13 October 2017 (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

 * . GABgab 15:37, 13 October 2017 (UTC)