Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/VisionHawk/Archive

27 March 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

DelusionMBT seems to me an apparent sock of TalhaZubairButt. DelusionMBT Account was created on 25 March 2016 right after a day when TalhaZubairButt was subjected to ARBIPA sanctions that "he will not make more than one revert every 24 hours to a page within the India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan topic area for a period of 1 month.'' He has only made some 16 edits so far and most of them on Talk Pages of same users to whom TalhaZubairButt used to contact. He can add refrence in an article from his very first edit Out of those 16 edits he had made so far, He has mainly edited Talk pages of User:SheriffIsInTown, User:TripWire ‎ and can be seen here. Some more evidences given below:

TalhaZubairButt contacted users like sherrif in recent past asking them to intervene on those article covered by ARBIPA where he was reverted, can be seen here and in the same tone, same way DelusionMBT also asked Sherrif to intervene against particular users like me to whom he had content disputes on ARBIPA covered articles. He also contacted other pakistani users to whom TalhaZubairButt has received support on talk pages on Indo-Pak related articles in recent past can be seen here. TalhaZubairButt usually only edit articles covered by ARBIPA. He was mainly editing Indo-Pakistani War of 1965, Indo-Pakistani War of 1971, Bangladesh Liberation War articles right from his first edit. Even though Delusion MBT has not edited any article related to Indo-Pakistani wars and related articles yet, his interests and willingness to do so is roaming around it only. For ex: [Https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring&diff=prev&oldid=712208126 this], [Https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SheriffIsInTown&diff=prev&oldid=712208545 this], [Https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TripWire&diff=prev&oldid=712209079 this]Admin/Check Users please note the behaviour evidence in this case. Thank you. MBlaze Lightning  -  talk!   18:51, 27 March 2016 (UTC)   MBlaze Lightning   -  talk!   18:51, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

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


 * Facetious use of CU: Response: I have no connection what so ever with TalhaZubairButt whoever he may be. I hope the poor guy knows that you have started this investigation against him. Though I still stick with my viewpoint that MBlaze Lightning being a POV pusher should be banned from the Wikipedia or atleast should be warned for his POV pushing not to mention bullying harrasing new wikipedia users/editors. All I can say is shame on MBlaze Lightning, I am all set for investigation though if no relation is proved between me and TalhaZubairButt (who ever he may be) then it would surely prove one thing that MBlaze Lightening is a bigot and surely deserves to be banned.DelusionMBT (talk) 19:32, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Please refrain from making personal attacks. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. And you do not need to worry, Leave it to check user.  MBlaze Lightning   -  talk!   19:36, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Please do not make personal attacks on other users. The question of socking will be handled by a CU shortly. GABHello! 19:48, 27 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Facetious use of CU: Response: @MBlaze Lighning Please also refrain from starting investigations without any evidence or proof especially against beginner/new wikipedia users. It would be nice if you could help them to be a constuctive and integrated part of the wiki community instead of harassing/bullying them. This allegation of your is no different than the one you made recently against SheriffIsInTown which you were later forced to apologize for, it would be much more considerate of you to next time take such issues directly with the editors themselves. DelusionMBT (talk) 19:56, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment: This request should be declined due to poor evidence. The requestor claimed that DelusionMBT is able to add references from his first edit thus he is not a new user. I would like to point out that being a previous user for any reason could not be a reason to start an investigation as a person can be an IP editor for 30 years and then decide to start editing under a username or there could be many valid reasons for learning how to add references. Actually ref tags are displayed at the bottom of editing window to make easier for editors to add them so not a valid reason to blame someone for sock-puppeting.The other evidences provided by requestor are rather lame as well. TalhaZubairButt asked my help on Rape during the Bangladesh Liberation War article which I declined citing WP:CANVASS but DelusionMBT asked my help regarding some content on Husain Haqqani which according to my investigation TalhaZubairButt never edited. DelusionMBT reached Kautilya3 from Husain Haqqani as well since Kautilya has been a major contributor to that page while It seems DelusionMBT picked up trace of TripWire from my talk page since there was a message by TripWire there so it seems like that we three editors (myself, Kautilya3 and TripWire) have crossed paths with TalhaZubairButt and DelusionMBT from different pages. It's important to decline this request and discourage the requestor from filing requests with little to no evidence. Entertaining this request would encourage the requestor to file such requests in future and waste CheckUsers time which already have such a backlog and less resources to entertain these requests.  Sh eri ff  |  ☎ 911  | 23:36, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Frivolous use of CU is being requested I do not see any evidence of socking here. All I see is that one user is agreeing with another, which is quite common in these high view pages. For example, Me, Sheriff and a lot of other users have made similar edits as are being presented as evidence of socking, this does not mean that we are socks. This merely points to the fact that we share a similar view of the article in general. Therefore this is just a request to "go fishing". Deny as per {insert any number of policies here}. FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 06:36, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Further observations: I would also like to point out that the requester did not serve the notice to TalhaZubairButt so that he can defend himself against this. Overall, this request does not meet basic filing requirements such as proper evidence, explanation how the users might have been disruptive etc. etc. The evidence should not be just about how the accounts are tied to one person but how they were abused. While evidence is very very weak about accounts belonging to one person, its rather non-existent when we look for abusive behavior of the accounts. Comparing two user accounts, we find that both users do not share edits on any main space page, not a single page to begin-with. They only share edits on Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring and User talk:SheriffIsInTown and those edits were also made regarding completely different subjects/reports. Considering all this, the investigation should not go through because there is no point, in connecting the accounts together while they did not violate a policy to begin-with and encouraging the requester to continue with this malicious behavior. I will also like to point out that this report was filed in rage and revenge as MBlaze Lightning have been harassing and wikihounding TalhaZubairButt and he is basically throwing every thing and anything at him since he has no other way to get rid of Talha's edits which are mostly sourced but do not appease his pro-Indian and anti-Pakistan editing behavior. After getting tired of following his edits and fighting edit-wars with him needlessly, he has finally resorted to this.  Sh eri ff  |  ☎ 911  | 13:09, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Re: MBlaze Lightning's recent edit, first of all he should have started a new message instead of modifying his original one because there have been many responses to his original evidence already and modifying his original evidence this late puts a lot of things out of context but new message would have new time stamp. Secondly, my calculated response to his recent modification would be that "interests and willingness to edit" a page does not constitute a "violation" because when investigating any violation we cannot presume and assume things. As far as i am concerned, i do not see an actual sock-puppetry incidence committed by these accounts.  Sh eri ff  |  ☎ 911  | 13:31, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Reply: Well, sheriff We may have content disputes but I have nothing personal against you nor against TBZ so being an experienced editor, you should refrain from making false allegations of WP:HOUNDING and etc. And, FYKI most of the pages TBZ edits are on my watchlist from long time. Some of them are even on pending changes list. Beside, sock puppetry is a violation of Wikipedia policy. Creating new accounts to avoid detection also comes under Sock Puppetry! I have presented my evidences and If Delusion MBT thinks he is not a sock, he should welcome getting cleared of such suspicions. A CU will shortly handle this case so you really do not need to worry, Leave it to CU. Cheers.  MBlaze Lightning   -  talk!   14:10, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * You tried to tie Talha with Wikibaba1977 and LanguageXpert here (Sockpuppet investigations/TripWire). Why don't you make up your mind? As i said before, you are basically throwing everything at him on your quest to get him blocked. As about wikihounding, there are considerable number of pages which you did not edit before Talha's edits. And honestly, if we are following the policies then there should not be a CU here as basic requirements for CU were not fulfilled.  Sh eri ff  |  ☎ 911  | 14:39, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * That SPI was not filled by me! The user who started SPI provided evidence of suspected sock-puppetry between WikiBaba1977 and TBZ and few other users, I only gave suggestions after thoroughly checking the contributions of WikiBaba and LanguageXpert and nothing else. Beside, You really don't need to copy/paste same thing again and again here. I have provided evidences which I believe are sufficient for a check. A CU will shortly handle this case. And if you believe I have hounded any user, please go and take the matter to WP:ANI and provide evidence there instead of yelling empty slogans here. Thank you!  MBlaze Lightning   -  talk!   15:11, 28 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Reply: User:SheriffIsInTown is right, the proper procedure as per the Wiki policies was not adopted. Niether TalhaZubairButt nor I were served any notice to defend our selves on our talk pages. I am glad that I came to know about this malicious attempt to malign me thus this request does not meet the basic filing requirements and should be disposed off with immediate effect. There is no evidence what so ever of how I or TalhaZubairButt might have been linked or for that matter how either of us have been disruptive. Allowing this request to be processed will only serve to further inflate MBlaze Lightening inflated ego who have made it a habit to report other editors on flimsy grounds. He has been misusing his editor rights to bully and harrass other editors and seems to have some sort of a problem with other editors, be it me, User:SheriffIsInTown, User:TripWire, User:TalhaZubairButt,User:FreeatlastChitchat or others. DelusionMBT (talk) 16:29, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * After reviewing this case, I grew suspicious of DelusionMBT's edits and the similarities to GreenBeret65 on the Husain Haqqani article. My checks revealed that the following accounts are ✅ to each other:


 * A check made by a different checkuser shows that the account below is confirmed as well:


 * TalhaZubairButt is ❌ to these accounts. Could a clerk assist with setting up a case for the accounts above? Mike V • Talk 17:17, 28 March 2016 (UTC)


 * ✅, moved. All blocked and tagged. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  00:50, 29 March 2016 (UTC)