Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Writeindia/Archive

31 March 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

The intention of these users is to prevent a certain article at AfD from being deleted. See Articles for deletion/INSZoom (2nd nomination). account was created on 30 March and was created on 31 March. Both users' contributions are to the entry at AfD and the article. Moreover, both users' first contribution is to a random article and then to the INSZoom article and AfD entry, which matches a pattern. The reason why I think is a sockpuppeteer is because, INSZoom was created by User:Writeindia. I have chosen the IP as a sockpuppet because the only contribution is to the AfD and location is India. User:Writeindia's userpage states that the user is from the same country. Ushau97 talk 11:25, 31 March 2013 (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

 * - CU may help determine if these are socks or meats, and might possibly also identify sleepers. — Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 00:44, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

The accounts are ✅ matches to each other. . Didn't find any obvious sleepers. Elockid  ( Talk ) 00:13, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Blocking master for 1 week and socks indef. I'm also going to go strike the socks from the AFD. Someguy1221 (talk) 02:11, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

09 April 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Writeindia was blocked for socking at Articles for deletion/INSZoom (2nd nomination). However, the AfD was held open so he could comment before it closed. When his block came to an end guess what, the RFA again became plagued with newly created SPA voting keep.  Spinning Spark  21:57, 9 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Although I haven't named it as a possible sock, I also find the keep !vote of User:PriyankaLewis suspicious as the account is relatively new and has few other edits. Confusingly, the account has been renamed to User:S.D.WIKI but the user is still editing from the original name.  Spinning  Spark  16:01, 10 April 2013 (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

 * - - I'm not as sure about Hemanandy, whose account existed before this AFD, but the other looks very suspicious.  I'm asking for a CU to peek in so we can see if this is possibly socking or meatpuppetry, as the odds are high it is one or the other, due to timing and content of edits. This is stylistically similar.  I would also note that this edit of Hemanandy has different stylistic similarities to the alleged master as well. Dennis Brown - 2¢  © Join WER 14:56, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Angeldiv.87 and Writeindia are ✅. Hemanandy is very . T. Canens (talk) 13:24, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I've blocked the two sockpuppet accounts indefinitely. SpinningSpark blocked Writeindia for a month for continued sockpuppetry. Closing, since nothing else remains to do. Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:16, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

26 May 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

There is a separate case at Sockpuppet investigations/Javamen, establishing that the three accounts are one in the same. This case was split from Sockpuppet investigations/Nickaang, though I contend that both farms are related to the farm of sock and/or meat puppets, along with Sockpuppet investigations/Meanie.

On March 1, Writeindia asked Javamen, Run4health, and Suzannebowen to look at the now deleted article INSZoom. It seems exceedingly unlikely that Writeindia would have picked these three names out of a hat. There is obviously a connection of some sort. --B (talk) 23:09, 26 May 2013 (UTC) B (talk) 23:09, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.'' You're going to have to provide some evidence. Diffs or a pattern, etc. There's not a lot to go on here...although this editor has been blocked for sock puppetry in the past, and hasn't been active since then even though the block has expired. --HighKing (talk) 20:38, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Closing as stale, with no action on master since blocks are not meant to be punitive. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 00:38, 16 June 2013 (UTC)