Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Atmnn/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Atmnn

Atmnn (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

06 December 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

1, 2 exactly same. Both the accounts are being used to edit Venkateswara Temple, Tirumala and adding unreliable sources without discussing in the talk page. μTalk 14:56, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

This case is being reviewed by Sir Sputnik as part of the clerk training process. Please allow them to process the entire case without interference, and pose any questions or concerns either on their Talk page or on this page if more appropriate.

15 December 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


Comments by other users[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

 Confirmed, including Aatman J Mehta (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki), blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:53, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

27 December 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


Chanakyathewarrior and Chandranandini are blocked post SPI checks. Mentioning them because the evidence of the new account Ugrasenchanakya seems related to them as follows:
[a] they are/were all editing the same Jainism article: 1, 2, 3;
[b] same edit warring with multiple editors, about same content. For example, trying to remove the same w/link that somehow is bothering these multiple accounts 4, 5, 6;
[c] Another article, where the blocked account and the new account are edit warring over the same thing: 7, 8
[d] 'chanakya' in the name suggests a WP:Duck. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 00:36, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

  •  Blocked and tagged. GABgab 01:11, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

21 January 2018[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

  • Mahavir dharma account created while Dasalakshana is blocked for adding unsourced content/copyvio/disruptive editing (Jainism related).
  • Edit wars at Mount Kailash over same content (slightly different portions/amounts but same content) verbatim copy/pasted from a Jainism site - [29], [30], [31], [32]
  • Compare the brief contribution histories. Posting style, content identical. Begoon 14:54, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

This case is being reviewed by Sir Sputnik as part of the clerk training process. Please allow them to process the entire case without interference, and pose any questions or concerns either on their Talk page or on this page if more appropriate.

28 February 2018[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


  • Current sock is Amatyaugrasen. I've included Jainallotrope here for the record, as they were blocked for copyvio/disruptive editing without being included here.
  • See intersect reports for articles edited in common.
  • See here for identical, distinctive edsums: [33], [34], [35]
  • Restoring earlier sock edits: [36], [37]
  • Seems new account autoblocked early on (wonder why...) - [38], notice also the common "aggressive" theme accusing anyone reverting of "disruptive editing" - [39], [40]
  • Same behaviour of copy/pasting near identical information from non RS Jain sources: [41], [42] - (see subsequent diff (can't link as rev-deleted)), [43] (again see subsequent diff for same reason)
  • Able to converse perfectly adequately in English when they want to, but strangely "fail to understand" or respond to "awkward", yet straightforward questions: [44], [45](edsum)
  • Begoon 01:04, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

 Confirmed. Blocked the unblocked account and tagged both. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:47, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

22 March 2018[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

  • Same focus on Jainism articles/content
  • Adds and reverts content sourced to obscure Jain literature: [46], [47], [48]
  • As previous socks, accuses editors reverting dubious content of "disruptive editing": [49], [50], [51]
  • Defaults to same edit summary of "added more information" as previous socks: [52], [53], [54] Begoon 05:32, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]


  • Adding Parasparograhi1 who now appears to be tag-teaming with above user at Jainism, and shares some of the same edit summary idiosyncracies (and all of the same interests) -- Begoon 08:06, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

  •  Clerk endorsed - Per evidence. Master is stale but multiple sockpuppets at disposal. QEDK (後 ☕ 桜) 14:06, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Confirmed, blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:08, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

24 March 2018[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


New account reinserting edits of previous sock(s) at Indian philosophy - [55], [56], [57], [58]. Same idiosyncracies in edit summaries, accusing editors reverting their content of "disruptive editing": [59], [60], [61], [62]. Obvious duck, but I suppose CU might find some other accounts. Begoon 19:06, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

 Confirmed, blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:58, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

06 May 2018[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


Several very new users crying vandalism over a dispute over whether to add a photograph at Karnataka. power~enwiki (π, ν) 21:48, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

28 May 2018[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Techsaire is editing in Ahimsa, a high-interest article for previous socks (Upplapati1, Samanthathepirate - see article history). Usage of an image previously uploaded by Samanthathepirate (Commons:File:Asian philosophy.jpg, now deleted as blatant copyvio on Commons). Disruptive edits in religion-related content, the complete blanking of Template:Asian philosophy sidebar (see history) as "spam" looks like retaliation for previous disputes. GermanJoe (talk) 15:19, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I added a second recently-created account, Strumoccur, who almost exclusively adds uploaded images from Samanthathepirate. GermanJoe (talk) 15:31, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

06 May 2018[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Edits are very similar. I just happen to revert the pending edit by the sock where the changed an image on Karnataka without consensus (being an FA) and the master seems to have come to the same article as reverted it back. If you also look at the edit summaries, it's somewhat similar for both the accounts: Added relevant content, removed irrelevant content — LeoFrank  Talk 09:55, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Another sock Samanthathepirate (talk · contribs) has been blocked by SpacemanSpiff. The edits of these two socks resemble Samanthathepirate. — LeoFrank  Talk 12:38, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

27 June 2018 (JBM1971)[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

I've come across a great deal of edit-warring and spamming of images related to Shrimad Rajchandra. During my cleanup, I came across an edit by Tiarapawn (blocked as sock of JBM1971). Bevyriot has made a large number of similar edits. Vellore55 appears to be just starting. Ronz (talk) 22:02, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Added MagadhpatiC. Ronz (talk) 04:28, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

  • Boldly added 1 more likely sock (Galderma7, see page history for this SPI case with recent disruptions). Obviously there is a significant amount of socking and religion-related PoV pushing going on currently. GermanJoe (talk) 05:37, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • +1 (Techtonic365) mainly for documentation purposes. The account is already blocked for battleground editing, but is also very likely a sock in this group (editing in close proximity of other socks, large topical overlap, addition of the same batch of copyrighted religion-related images, same PoV-pushing behavior). GermanJoe (talk) 15:11, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • @GermanJoe, Ronz, and Bbb23: Does Mahaherodotous (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) look like the latest sock of JBM1971 to you too? Similar Jainism POV/image pushing, including this edit in which they re-add an image a previous IP sock had added earlier. Abecedare (talk) 20:58, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The image additions in Indra, Religion in Asia and Culture of Asia targetted a specific group of articles, where I removed copyvio uploads from previous socks. That's a clear editing pattern as behavioral evidence for probable socking. Also this is obviously not a new user. On a sidenote, it might be better to start a new thread in this case - this current one is almost closed. But of course that's up to SPI volunteers to decide. GermanJoe (talk) 21:32, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the confirmation. The behavior seemed a match to me too but I wanted to double-check since you all have dealt with the sockmaster before. Have blocked the account; don't believe a checkuser is needed unless to find sleepers. Abecedare (talk) 21:39, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And Kurukyy (talk · contribs). --Ronz (talk) 23:14, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for blocking. I'd forgotten the sockmaster-name already, but reverted several edits by 'the Jain-guy'. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:18, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Here's another one: User:Hepaman. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:41, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked. Abecedare (talk) 06:03, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

Vellore55 did the same edit but to a different page as Galderma7 did. And now up comes:

redoing Vellore55's edit and also making it to yet a different page. The history of Indian independence movement has several other 223.* IPs doing it also. DMacks (talk) 07:28, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

06 July 2018[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

On Commons, the account re-uploaded files and signed them as "Samanthathepirate", one of the known sockpuppets of this user. See c:COM:AN/B#Obvious socking. —Guanaco 23:42, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

  • + 1 (Grumpychic), re-addition of previous sock's copyvio (in Ahimsa). Jainism-related PoV pushing and deceptive edit summary in Mahavira. GermanJoe (talk) 23:52, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

  •  Blocked and tagged both.
I assume someone will tell me if such use of off-wiki evidence is non-kosher. Abecedare (talk) 00:34, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Abecedare: Ask and ye shall be told. There's nothing wrong with evidence from other projects, but there should also be evidence of behavioral similarities on en.wiki. If nothing else, I would not have blocked Brisbanehotcool who has no edits on en.wiki.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:53, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the clarification. The lack on enwiki edits was what I was wondering about and the reason I spelled out my reasoning at such length. I have unblocked the Brisbanehotcool account; if the account does end up being abused, it would be simple enough to block it again. Abecedare (talk) 01:05, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

11 July 2018[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

See below. Bbb23 (talk) 14:06, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

12 July 2018[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


As blatant as it gets: New account with a name similar to mine, reverting some of my edits of previous socks. [63] [64] Ronz (talk) 19:39, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

08 August 2018[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Comments by other users[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

20 August 2018[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Behavioural. Created shortly after User:Veganvegan was blocked, carries on with the same tendentious editing on vegetarianism and Jainism. — kashmīrī TALK 19:50, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

  •  Blocked and tagged. GABgab 02:35, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

21 September 2018[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


Account focused on promoting Jainism like Atmnn & Co.

Comments by other users[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

This was misfiled. Please add the suspected sock to the correct case.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:24, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

15 October 2018[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

utcursch | talk 16:25, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

  • Obviously. I indef'ed Atamadog. They are using a lot of IPs in 2409:4040:413:8d87::/32 and there are a lot of other poor edits from that range, but not sure we should block all of Jio telecom (assuming usual problem of Indian IPs being highly dynamic), and these are not in the same ranges seen previously in this SPI. DMacks (talk) 17:30, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The three given here are all in the same /64: 2409:4040:413:8d87:0:0:0:0/64 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial)). Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:38, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you're right, I miscounted the bits. Stoopid "math before coffee, results might be off-y". I could support a /64 as the usual "single customer" level of IPv6. DMacks (talk) 18:00, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • We can block the range if editing resumes. Closing. GABgab 19:55, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Atmnn/Archive&oldid=1138667184"