Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Vivekachudamani/Archive

09 June 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Both accounts are SPAs concerned with the BLP article Deepak Chopra and its associated talk page. Editor1 history, Editor2 history. Both are strongly pro- the article subject.

SAS81 is an employee of Dr Chopra while Vivekachudamani is a "connected editor" with a COI relating to Dr Chopra (detailed analysis here and here). Article talk page says:

Vivekachudamani's reputation was seriously damaged on COIN - they seem to have stopped editing at that point, and a few months later SAS81 appeared. SAS81 has been careful to stay within the letter of the COI rules, refraining from directly editing the article, instead limiting themselves to verbose advocacy at the talk page.

Balaenoptera musculus (talk) 16:40, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Comments by other users
I'm deleted the vandalism comment left here - and additionally clarifying that I am not a sockpuppet but any admin is feel free to check with whatever tools they have available. BM, this is the third attempt to find someway to sanction me. Isn't it a waste of admin's time to have them go on these witch hunts, especially when my account is continually being vandalized and certain accounts are SPA's set up to harass me? It would take far less time to just try to collaborate with me and then admins would not have to be bothered at all. I've reached out to you on your talk page, and your response is SPA and COIN noticeboards. Let's be rational - thanks. SAS81 (talk) 20:47, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Vivekachudamani stopped editing in November 2013, while SAS81 started in April 2014. I don't see a particular strong case for how they are avoiding scrutiny, so there is no abuse here. Closing. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 04:13, 10 June 2014 (UTC)