Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Faheemmumtaz/Archive

User:Faheemmumtaz[edit]

Faheemmumtaz (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Faheemmumtaz

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

Report date February 11 2009, 02:33 (UTC)[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

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

Evidence submitted by Orlady (talk)

This user gives his name as Faheem Mumtazz. The user's entire edit history has consistently strongly indicated a self-interested connection with Tariq Farid, Edible Arrangements (a seller of fruit bouquets and dipped fruit), Salma K. Farid Academy, Lawton Foundation for Human Rights, and other charitable interests of Mr. Farid. Until seeing RHaworth's comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tariq Farid, I was not aware that Faheem Mumtazz was the name of a blocked sockpuppeteer, nor that another associated blocked sockpuppet was named User:Ediblearrangements. Another related blocked sockpuppeteer seems to be User:Shaikhbasit. Since I am not a sysop, I cannot view very much of the edit histories of these other users, but it appears likely that Famzz is a new member of this sockpuppet family. --Orlady (talk) 02:33, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties See Defending yourself against claims.

I admit that my complete name is Faheem Mumtaz. But I am not the one who is discussed here. I am here on the wikipedia for the fist time and is writting simple posts like a common man.and is very thankful to you people who areimproving my posts ading new and relevant things. If you people think my posts are not up to standard just write them with your names and its also true that I am inspired by Tariq and the way he bring his business from skratch to top. If i am a sockpuppeteer why should i use my name again ?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Famzz (talk • contribs) 05:06, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

Faheemmumtaz has no contributions, is this the correct account name? Foxy Loxy ^Pounce! 09:31, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Faheemmumtaz has plenty of contributions, all deleted, because the account is a single-purpose account, whose edits are confined to Ediblearrangements, Edible Arrangements, Edible arrangements, and Faheem mumtaz. Ediblearrangements is another single-purpose account, who chose Edible Arrangements Inc. as the single article. Faheemmumtaz2 is a single-purpose account that edited Edible Arrangements International. Shaikhbasit is a single-purpose account that edited EdibleArrangements.
  From the editing behaviour, and the tone and content of the deleted articles, including the liberal sprinkling of "®" (as frequent as one occurrence per sentence in some deleted revisions), it's clear that these are all one person, coming here to advertise a company rather than to help write an encyclopaedia. It's also clear from this edit and this edit, despite the denial earlier on this very page, that Famzz is the same person, whose agenda to incessantly promote this company has not changed, but has now expanded to creating more subtle advertising by creating articles on other subjects citing the company's web site as references and linking to the company as external links.
  Also note the copyright claim at File:Tariq-Farid.jpg. If this truly is, as stated, a picture of Tariq Farid "created all by myself", then the person behind these multiple accounts is Tariq Farid (AfD discussion), whose article was created by Famzz. This is borne out by this edit, where Famzz writes of "the Farid family" in the first person. Uncle G (talk) 13:11, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - I would not place any significance on the edit at Salma K. Farid Academy, where Famzz inserted content that speaks of "the Farid family" in the first person. That material was copy-pasted from the school's website, where the first person voice is used. --Orlady (talk) 14:41, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Well, I can't comment any further, no way to access deleted revisions. Foxy Loxy ^Pounce! 10:41, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As an admin, I can say that the only deleted contributions by User:Famzz was creating Lawton Foundation for Human Rights which is separate and uploading File:Tariq-Farid.jpg, which is let's just say suspicious. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 06:51, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Mmm, the 2 edits ([1] and Tariq Farid) that mention Edible Arrangements are concerning. This looks like the same user, but with a better approach than last time. I suggest we ask Famzz to stay away from all edits close to Edible Arrangements and see how it goes? -- lucasbfr ^talk 07:50, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, this did it: "Some one else(May be our competators) used our names and farid comapny name." It's a COI and he should be warned about it. I don't know if he shouldn't edit there but he needs to be aware of policies. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 11:25, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as I said when I filed the case, this user "has consistently strongly indicated a self-interested connection." Elsewhere I think I have said that if he is not Tariq Farid, he is someone very loyal to Mr. Farid. The findings of this case should make it easier to make COI warnings (and possibly sanctions) stick in the future. He needs to be advised to communicate only on article Talk pages if/when he wants to request changes in the articles he is "interested" in. --Orlady (talk) 15:13, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

Conclusions

Delisted Whilst it is possible that the new account is a re-incarnation of the older account, that account was blocked as a spam only account. As such, even if it is the same person, then he can return, provided he refrains from spamming. If the new account is problematic, it will be best dealt with as a WP:COI problem. Mayalld (talk) 15:08, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically.

Mayalld (talk) 15:08, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]