Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Zrdragon12/Archive

01 November 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Zrdragon12 is permanently banned, thus any further activity by him on this site is disruptive. However, he has been known to abuse multiple accounts. Kabulbuddha first appeared on October 28, a mere 16 days after the last edit by a known Zrdragon sock. Kabulbuddha's obviously not a new user (as others have noticed): He immediately began trying to negotiate a settlement to a heated conflict, challenged another editor's interpretation of an admin's RFC closing, and provided lengthy edit summaries citing policies about "consensus" and "sourcing". Their style is extremely similar: There are too many "coincidences", particularly for two accounts that have been around for an extremely limited amount of time. TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 16:19, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Like Zrdragon, Kabulbuddha is British and deletes warnings on his talk page after calling them "rubbish". Zrdragon's "Here for any inquiries" is only changed a bit to become Kabulbuddha's "Comment here".
 * Look at their edit summaries. Zrdragon:  "I am warning you yet again to stop deleting source material just because it does not tally with your bias," "My content is well sourced, the piece you added is not sourced at all," "Not original research, it is in the article sources, try reading them". Kabulbuddha:  "Your link does not justify deleting that factual info," "That is actually a source, no reason to delete it", "It is the UK Parliament minutes so no it does not fail anything at all," ect.  Like Zrdragon, Kabulbudda opines that "He did not even read the source".
 * While this should be irrelevant, both are editing from a left-wing POV and are focused on American foreign policy.
 * Here, Kabulbuddha goes on a rant accusing User:Stumink and I of "teaming up" to supress information "critical of the US/UK", just as Zrdragon was obsessed with User:Nguyen1310 and I being "mates". Kabulbuddha writes that "they have been deleting and changing it with arguments that really do not hold any water" and criticizes our "weak edit summaries", which sounds eerily similar to Zrdragon's rhetoric: "TTAAC and his buddy ‎Nguyen have been running a campaign against my sourced edits....deleted my sourced material for no good reason....with feeble excuses".  Both of them end with a disclaimer to appear moderate despite their harsh language:  "It does boil down to a content dispute though" (Kabulbuddha),  "It is pretty much laughable but again I have also been guilty of edit waring" (Zrdragon).
 * Kabulbuddha claims to be familar with my edit history as well as my personality, even though he is supposedly a new user.
 * Kabulbuddha did not deny being a sockpuppet for Zrdragon, instead acting as though he did not know what a sockpuppet was (which is unlikely) and avoiding the question.
 * Zrdragon complimented User:HectorMoffet and expressed interest in the 1953 coup in Iran here and here; Kabulbuddha has continued collaboration with HectorMoffet on that very same topic.

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 thought this account was a sock of ; apparently, I was wrong: it's a ✅ match to . I have blocked and tagged him. Closing. Salvio  Let's talk about it! 14:13, 2 November 2012 (UTC)