Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ZuluPapa5/Archive

20 January 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility
 * Overview:
 * Am requesting both checkuser and SPI based on behaviorial evidence.
 * The Aro gTér article is currently subject to some heated and contentious editing. In 2014 and 2015, when the article became subject to scrutiny by several known and respected editors who work on mainstream Buddhism articles, there is substantial evidence of tag-team editing by ZuluPapa5 and User:Arthur chos, with LilyW coming into the editing and discussion earlier this month. Each editor takes sequential turns to keep attempting to add variations on the same material, which is challenged and removed by the other group of editors. JosephYon appears as a SPI at the talk page and the AfD to support the others.  history here and at the  talk page
 * The article was created in 2007 by a sockpuppet account now blocked: GlassFET, a sockpuppet of User:Ekajati, who continued to make edits to this article via an anon IP after being blocked.


 * ZuluPapa5:
 * ZuluPapa5 is an editor who has been around for several years, has edited many articles, especially on Buddhism, appears to be the primary account. This user's most recent editing focuses on the Aro gTér article. Edits to other articles in 2014 are mostly related to the Nyingma tradition in Buddhism, which Aro gTér  claims to be part of. most recent 500 edits


 * LilyW


 * LilyW made two edits in 2008, and then disappears until January 2015, when she reappears to edit primarily on the Aro gTér page and related discussions :  The overwhelming majority of edits was  to Aro_gTér- related discussions.
 * ZuluPapa5 welcomed Lily W at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lily_W&oldid=641819725 7:50 pm, 9 January 2015]


 * JosephYon:


 * JosephYon is a brand-new editor who has only edited on the talk pages for Aro gTér and the AfD:
 * ZuluPapa5 welcomed JosephYon at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:JosephYon&oldid=641819737 7:50 pm, 9 January 2015], virtually the same time LilyW was "welcomed."
 * Arthur chos:
 * Arthur chos is also another longstanding editor, but less prolific than ZuluPapa5, and with edits primarily confined to Buddhism in general and Aro gTér in particular::
 * Of the group, Arthur chos is the editor who has edited the Aro gTér the longest:
 * Arthur chos and ZuluPapa5 began editing within two months of one another: Arhtur on Jan 19, 2008 and ZuluPapa5 on Dec 5, 2007
 * I will acknowledge the possibility that Arthur chos could be a different editor engaging in tag-teaming or meatpuppetry with ZuluPapa5, but the timing and tag-teaming raises my suspicions.


 * TenzinTashi5
 * Added to SPI per discussion below and self-disclosure at their talk page. Could be evasion of sanctions.   Montanabw (talk)  06:05, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
 * There is NO need for SPI to establish any link. No sock-puppeting, no meat-whatever shown.  Editor acknowledges putting ZP5 account on break, and i guess not having access, and using TenzinTashi5 account.  Accusing at User talk:TenzinTashi5 seems to approach being harassment. -- do  ncr  am  04:21, 28 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Other notes and evidence
 * I have named Ekajati to this SPI on the possibility that all of these accounts mark the return of this rather prolific sock account creator.
 * Not sure if relevant, but ZuluPapa5 has two prior blocks.
 * It is probably relevant to this thread that I nominated Aro gTér for deletion due to lack of independent third party sources providing indicia of reliability:  here
 * It is also probably relevant that LilyW has filed an ANI on myself and several other editors here Montanabw (talk)  21:18, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * AFD is ongoing and these users have not even voted. Only discussed about their article dispute or content, that is enough for saying that they have got same attitude. Bladesmulti (talk) 00:44, 21 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Some minutes after I filed the ANI incident and notified users CFynn, Montanabw, Ogress and Victoria on their user talk pages, I copied the report details to the article's page on the AfD noticeboard. My post was immediately deleted by user Viriditas. Edit summary: "Removing extraneous comment. No, you don't get to spam this AfD. You already left this comment on ANI and you've already made multiple comments. That's enough from you." This diff also shows how I changed my initial vote 'expand' to 'no comment.' I feel that 'voting' for an outcome that was pre-determined and occurred only through a violation of of Wikipedia's institutional standards would be non-sensical. Lily W (talk) 07:52, 26 January 2015 (UTC)


 * A user avoiding one account with a "I'm leaving, you big meanies" only to pop up and edit under another on the same thread is sockpuppeting.  Montanabw (talk)  00:18, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

I am not the same person as any of the others mentioned. User:ZuluPapa5 and I disagreed with each other, back in 2010, in this relevant discussion. Arthur chos (talk) 20:43, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Hence my checkuser request in addition to the SPI.  Montanabw (talk)  00:18, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

I am indeed fairly new to editing and to date most of my edit history, though not all, is on the Aro gTer page. I got involved because I thought I might be able to help improve this page and others. Unexpectedly this one page has taken my time available for editing Wikipedia articles. In future it's unlikely that I'll focus only on religious pages. My expertise is in international diplomacy, and my edits will probably reflect that. Lily W (talk) 08:19, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Comment by Doncram: Seems like no serious evidence of anything bad. One editor welcomes 2 others. They're all interested in the same area. There are some disagreements. Perhaps there was watchlisting or on-line contact or off-line contact that prompted others to comment the AFD, but that would not be wrong, and doesn't justify an SPI. I am not sure of SPI criteria, but if nothing bad has happened, and some higher standard is met than appears to be the case here, then I kinda think it seems wrong to pursue an SPI investigation.

I do note that editor TenzinTashi5 acknowledges being a duplicate account to ZuluPapa5 account, within User talk:TenzinTashi5, something about losing access to the ZP5 account (lost password?) Which is fine too, you can create a new account and leave old one behind, though TenzinTashi5 should probably be advised to post the connection between accounts more clearly. At that Talk page discussion, TenzinTashi5 denies any sockpuppeting going on. The wp:Editor Interaction Analyzer currently shows no overlap at all between TT5 and ZP5 accounts, meaning they have not both edited at the same article or Talk page. They also have not overlapped in time at all: ZP5 contributed up to 07:27, 18 January 2015 ;  TT5's first edit was at 17:21, 18 January 2015. This is fine. Perhaps they need advice/help about linking the two accounts or getting access restored to the earlier one, but there is no SPI issue deriving from this account duplication, either.

I have no previous connection to editors mentioned here; I happened across the ongoing Aro gTér AFD from my regularly watching & participating in AFDs. -- do ncr  am  21:31, 26 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Appears to be tag-teaming or meatpuppetry, it's the JosephYon and Lily W accounts that concern me most, also the possibility of a returned sockpuppet that was permanently banned. And this new account could easily be an attempt to avoid detection. An experienced sock would behave this way.    Montanabw (talk)  06:05, 27 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I see no way that there is any tag-teaming or whatever between TenzinTashi5 and ZP5. I haven't investigated other pairs, but don't see convincing evidence anywhere here. -- do  ncr  am  04:21, 28 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I regard this SPI as a distraction. I know I'm not anyone's puppet and have no puppets - therefore I have nothing to defend. Lily W (talk) 00:46, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
 * You ZuluPapa5 admits to the TenzinTashi5 account on that user page.  Montanabw (talk)  06:18, 30 January 2015 (UTC)  And did so again today.  I stand corrected in confusing the sockmaster account with one of the proposed socks.   Montanabw (talk)  23:00, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Wanted to avoid participating in this; however, I am missing any substantive claim of abuse or misuse to respond to for improvement. With the targets focused on me here, it seems to be escalated and within my accusers imagination. Feeling innocent, I am failing to see how I can defend my innocence what has been called a planned attack. What the issue looks like to me is some drama fell on me. I was editing with others in Aro gTer, perhaps aggressively and welcomed them, the article goes to a diffcult AfD, then an ANI warns about further unsubstantiated claims and the drama continues here now. Any advice on how to downplay this drama would be appreciated. Cause, I feel harassed and in fear that maybe my history crosses some other disruptions. TenzinTashi5 (talk) 05:38, 1 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Doncram's analysis of their behavior and similarities was correct. They are not operated by 1 user. Bladesmulti (talk) 03:41, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
. The named master is the oldest account if you don't take into account the supposed Ekajati connection. There apparently never was a case for Ekajati. However, they have lots of confirmed puppets. I went through several to see if any were not stale, but all of the ones I looked at (I'm not looking at every one) were blocked in 2006-08. One thing in addition to the evidence already presented: Lily W and Arthur chos both created their accounts in January 2008 within days of each other. As already noted, Lily made only two edits and then years of silence. Arthur edited more at the time the account was created and over the years, although sporadically.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:33, 31 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Checkuser note: I'm actually a bit surprised that this was endorsed. We have two accounts that are clearly linked together, one of which has apparently become unreachable due to a wikibreak. Provided that they are visibly linked (as they are, at least as well as many longtime users with multiple accounts have linked themselves), they are not socks. I would suggest that if the user is going to keep editing, though, putting their primary account on a wiki-break and then creating a new account is probably not the best way to persuade people you are disengaging from a topic area.

The account will not be checked. It was indefinitely blocked at the user's own request over 7 years ago, and I can see no reason at all for its inclusion in this SPI. One would hope that having multiple editors over the course of time working in a topic area of a faith that has hundreds of millions of adherents around the world would be considered a feature, not a bug.

There is absolutely no technical link whatsoever amongst any of the other accounts. Specifically, the following accounts are ❌:
 * / (acknowledged linked accounts)
 * Risker (talk) 03:26, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Closed with no action taken.--Bbb23 (talk) 05:51, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
 * / (acknowledged linked accounts)
 * Risker (talk) 03:26, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Closed with no action taken.--Bbb23 (talk) 05:51, 2 February 2015 (UTC)