Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Souniel Yadav/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Souniel Yadav

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

25 April 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Souniel Yadav became active only after Spasiba5 was blocked. Both accounts have sent me emails, asking me to edit war on 2020 Delhi riots when both were blocked for making same edits there. Their edits are also same on this particular article,[1][2] both have added about "Ishrat Jahan" on the article alleging the said person of incitement on edit summaries.[3][4] Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 13:56, 25 April 2020 (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]

03 May 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Account created after Souniel Yadav was blocked. Same interests[5][6] and now attempting to restore his edit from main account by continuously reviving an answered talk page request.[7][8] Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 14:22, 3 May 2020 (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]

01 September 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Dr2Rao is like Venue9 (sockpuppet of Souniel Yadav) Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline Auto-generated every hour.

Dr2Rao is also like Spasiba5 (sockpuppet of Souniel Yadav) Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline Auto-generated every hour.

Both Dr2Rao and Souniel Yadav have used the WP:ROPE argument in appeals for mercy:

-- Toddy1 (talk) 21:32, 1 September 2020 (UTC) updated 13:14, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

I am not any of the above mentioned users. You may check my IP address.—Dr2Rao (talk) 22:05, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A lot of editors have mentioned the real name of Sonia Gandhi probably because she was the most powerful woman in India till 2013. A friend told me of the "rope". Big deal.—Dr2Rao (talk) 19:06, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
  •  Clerk note: No non-stale socks in archive. TheSandDoctor Talk 03:47, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Blocked and tagged. Closing. Dr2Rao was already indefinitely blocked by SpacemanSpiff on 21 September for long-term tendentious editing. In addition to the above behavioral evidence, Dr2Rao's 21 September unblock request, which leads with the phrase "As a relatively new editor", resembles Souniel Yadav's two unblock requests linked by Toddy1 (Special:Diff/953398329 and Special:Diff/953615128), which use the same phrase near the beginning. Based on the behavioral evidence, Dr2Rao is most likely a sockpuppet of Souniel Yadav. I have declined Dr2Rao's unblock request on this basis. — Newslinger talk 05:15, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Here is a color-coded comparison of Dr2Rao's and Venue9's comments on User talk:Chambailpankaj that were mentioned in Toddy1's report, copied from User talk:Dr2Rao § September 2020:
    • Special:Diff/960750191: {{U|Chambailpankaj}}, पंकज जी, आप सोनिया गांधी की "ओरिजिनल" नाम, विकिपीडिया पर डालने की कोशिश कर रहे थे। आप कृपया [[Talk:Sonia_Gandhi#Request for Comments|यहां]] जा कर, "सपोर्ट" डाल सकते हैं। धन्यवाद।-[[User:Dr2Rao|Dr2Rao]] ([[User talk:Dr2Rao|talk]]) 18:12, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
      Translation: {{U|Chambailpankaj}}, Pankaj ji, you were trying to put Sonia Gandhi's "original" name on Wikipedia. You can go [[Talk:Sonia_Gandhi#Request for Comments|here]] and enter "Support". Thank you.-[[User:Dr2Rao|Dr2Rao]] ([[User talk:Dr2Rao|talk]]) 18:12, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
    • Special:Diff/954561472: {{U|Chambailpankaj}}, पंकज जी, मेरा अकाउंट अभी ऑटो-कनफर्म नही हुआ है, इसी लिए मै आप से सहायता मांग रहा हूं। मेरी अंग्रेज़ी अच्छी नहीं है इसी लिए हिंदी में लिख रहा हूं। आप सोनिया गांधी की "ओरिजिनल" नाम, विकिपीडिया पर डालने की कोशिश कर रहे थे। आप कृपया [[Talk:Sonia_Gandhi#Birth name controversy|इन पुस्तकों]] का उल्लेखन दे कर उस नाम को वहां डाल सकते हैं। मैंने जो [[Wikipedia:Teahouse#Help_with_editing|यहां]] लिखा है, उसे भी वहां, सोनिया जी के लेखन में लिखिए। धन्यवाद।[[User:Venue9|Venue9]] ([[User talk:Venue9|talk]]) 02:49, 3 May 2020 (UTC)}}
      Translation: {{U|Chambailpankaj}}, Pankaj ji, my account is not autoconfirmed yet, that is why I am asking for help from you. My English is not good, that is why I am writing in Hindi. You were trying to put Sonia Gandhi's "original" name on Wikipedia. You can put that name there by mentioning [[Talk:Sonia_Gandhi#Birth name controversy|these books]]. Write what I have written [[Wikipedia:Teahouse#Help_with_editing|here]] as well, in Soniaji's writing. Thank you.[[User:Venue9|Venue9]] ([[User talk:Venue9|talk]]) 02:49, 3 May 2020 (UTC)}}
— Newslinger talk 23:07, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

03 October 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

An IP editor from Bangalore (Bengaluru) made much the same edits that Souniel Yadav's sockpuppet Dr2Rao did to the article on Kafir, and gave the same reasons for these edits. (The IP editor keeps jumping IP as can be seen from the article's revision history.)

Dr2Rao and the IP editor both want the following sentence to appear in the lead of the article on Kafir: "In 2019, the largest independent Islamic organization in the world based in Indonesia, issued a proclamation urging Muslims to refrain from using the theologically violent word kafir to refer to non-Muslims, in the interest of promoting religious tolerance and co-existence." In both cases, the argument for doing this was neutral POV.

  • Dr2Rao adds it to the lead. "It is important to put it here to get a NPOV"
  • 60.243.254.161 adds it to the lead. "Copied from the body of this article for neutrality"
  • 2409:4071:5b7:6978::1072:90a0 puts in a semi protected edit request for this. " Please add the same to the lead for neutrality."

Dr2Rao and the IP editor both want the following sentence to appear in the lead of the article on Kafir: "Kafir is not simply an atheist.<ref>{{cite book|author=Śesharāva More|title=Islam, Maker of the Muslim Mind|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=k7bXAAAAMAAJ |language=en|date=2004|publisher=Rajhans Prakashan|page=262|isbn=978-1-78074-853-5}}</ref>"

-- Toddy1 (talk) 19:27, 3 October 2020 (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]

09 December 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Kafir2 makes similar edits to User:Dr2Rao (confirmed sock of Sounil Yadav). Dr2Rao used edit summaries "Copied from further below"[10][11] as does Kafir2[12]. Dr2Rao used summary "Added a link"[13] and Kafir2 did too[14] and so did Mortis6[15]. Dr2Rao and Kafir2 have an interest in Islam in India topics like Love jihad etc. Kafir2 and Mortis6 have both been editing Shirk (Islam) and Sword Verse . VR talk 05:27, 9 December 2020 (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]

30 September 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Passes WP:DUCK test:

Still, a CU is warranted since this user has operated more than 2 accounts at one time before. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 11:55, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

  • Comment.
AfTaliban was blocked at 07:56, 23 August 2021 (UTC) because admins objected to his/her user name, and told him at User talk:AfTaliban to start a new account with a different user name. So he/she created Baamiyaan2 at 09:08, 23 August 2021 (UTC). He/she cannot be blamed for this. He/she did as he/she was told.[reply]
The editor interaction utility shows that about 25% of the 169 edits by AfTaliban/Baamiyaan2 were to pages previously edited by Souniel Yadav and/or his/her socks.
The following two pages are of particular interest to both Baamiyaan2 and to Souniel Yadav and his/her socks:
The intention of the majority of these edits was to give the subject's birth/real name as Antonia Maino.
I am not convinced that the use of the edit summaries "Fixed typo"[30],[31] and "Added a link"[32][33] are evidence. These are common edit summaries and are an accurate description of the edits.-- Toddy1 (talk) 22:48, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What tipped me off about Baamiyaan2 is their votestacking attempt where they pinged Grufo, who had not been active on that page since Sep 2020. Dr2Rao had also been active on that page in Sep 2020 (right before they were discovered to be a sock). How did Baamiyaan2 know about Grufo? Either they went back into the archives and read voluminous discussions, or the person behind Baamiyaan2 is the same as Dr2Rao.VR talk 03:35, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It is already too obvious that he is Souniel. The only problem is the lack of admin intervention. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 12:58, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I happened to find this thread by chance. I am not Souniel Yadav. I have edited some articles occasionally as an IP here. I then created the u2Barbarians User ID sometime ago but because I didn't edit anything after that, I forgot about it and never edited anything with that ID. I created the AfTaliban ID about 2 months ago but an Admin told me that that ID is unacceptable and that I should create a new, different ID which is what I am using now. I used the edit summary, "Fixed typo" as it is suggested by Wikipedia when I edit articles. The other edit summaries I have used are just descriptions of what I did. Editing articles that others edited doesn't mean anything, even if it was by Souniel Yadav (we probably belong to the same country and that's why we edited those articles). User Toddy1 says above that only 25% of my edits are to articles edited by Souneil Yadav. I learnt about users Aciram (a recent editor), Grufo (a marathon editor) and Mcphurphy (the creator of the article) and the Admin Anachronist by going through the the history of the article.-Baamiyaan2 (talk) 06:50, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Baamiyaan2: so which account was created first? u2Barbarians? or AfTaliban? Was there a gap of months or years between creating the two accounts? -- Toddy1 (talk) 08:02, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know when I created the u2Barbarians ID probably because I never used it. I edit Wikipedia only occasionally and before creating the AfTaliban user ID, all my edits were as an IP. Even now, I have just over a hundred edits after 2 months of creating the AfTaliban user ID which I probably created on 22 August or 17 August (others have many more edits in 2 months).-Baamiyaan2 (talk) 16:44, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That Baamiyaan2 was created 55 minutes after U2Barbarians? does not work well together with the explanation given by Baamiyaan2 above.06:50-07:14, 18 October 2021 The explanation seems most implausible. As for a new user accidentally finding a sockpuppet investigation, I have heard that story before. And it always turns out to be a lie.-- Toddy1 (talk) 18:14, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I now recall that I created the u2Barbarians user ID when an admin told me that the AfTaliban user ID is unacceptable but thought the u2Barbarians user ID would also be unacceptable, just like the AfTaliban user ID, so I never used. I did not know how to undo it (I still don't). I found out about this, "Sockpuppet investigation" by looking at the contributions of user VR alias ViceRegent.-Baamiyaan2 (talk) 18:38, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In the link to the section titled, "Defending yourself against claims" at the top of this section, it says only alternative account misuse (the exact words used there are, "misuse of accounts only") is an offense which I am not guilty of (I never used it and I don't know how to delete that user ID - I felt that name would be unacceptable and so, I didn't use it).-Baamiyaan2 (talk) 18:47, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
User Toddy1 has posted a table below of articles edited by me and articles edited by Sounel Yadav. However, I believe that counting the edits made to this page, the questions asked at Wikipedia:Teahouse, Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics and the edits to Discussion/Talk pages is unfair - anybody would post there. If those are subtracted, the edits to similar articles add up to 115 which is just over 5% of Souneil Yadav (Souneil Yadav has 2034 edits totally)-Baamiyaan2 (talk) 03:11, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
More importantly, the admin TNT says below that other accouns are, "Stale for comparison" and so, they should not be considered in which case, it means that I have not used more than one account (an admin blocked the AfTaliban user ID as the name was unacceptable and I was told to create a new account which is the only account I am using, so that user ID should not be used as a tool to accuse me).-Baamiyaan2 (talk) 03:50, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Another similarity:
    • Baamiyaan2 added this with the edit summary "Copied a sentence from another article" (probably from this section in Sexual slavery in Islam):
      • "Islamic law or [[Sharia]] permits raiding, kidnapping and enslaving [[Kafir|non-Muslims]] from [[Dar al Harb]]"
    • Dr2Rao had also added this with the edit summary "Copied from the Sexual slavery in Islam article":
      • "Islamic jurists permitted slave raiding and kidnapping of ''Kafirs'' (non-Muslims) from [[Dar al Harb]]"
VR talk 23:29, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Neither the article nor the sentence is the same.-Baamiyaan2 (talk) 01:06, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Analysis

[edit]
Analysis of percentage of edits to pages edited by socks/possible socks of Souniel Yadav
Page Timeline Page Type Mortis6 Spasiba5 Kafir2 Dr2Rao Souniel Yadav Venue9 Baamiyaan2 AfTaliban U2Barbarians?
2020 Delhi riots Timeline Article 0 18 0 0 27 0 0 0 0
Talk:2020 Delhi riots Timeline Talk 0 61 0 0 76 0 0 0 0
Shirk (Islam) Timeline Article 4 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
Talk:Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 Timeline Talk 0 11 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Sword Verse Timeline Article 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0
Wikipedia:Teahouse Timeline Wikipedia 0 16 0 1 0 5 6 0 0
Anti-Hindu sentiment Timeline Article 0 2 0 2 0 9 1 0 0
User talk:Chambailpankaj Timeline User talk 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 0
Sonia Gandhi Timeline Article 0 0 0 5 1 0 3 0 0
Talk:Sonia Gandhi Timeline Talk 0 0 0 43 0 42 12 0 0
Religious discrimination in Pakistan Timeline Article 0 1 0 3 4 0 0 0 0
Hinduism in Pakistan Timeline Article 0 11 0 0 2 0 0 0 0
COVID-19 pandemic Timeline Article 0 0 0 1 4 0 0 0 0
User talk:Kautilya3 Timeline User talk 0 2 0 12 5 0 0 0 0
Sexual slavery in Islam Timeline Article 0 0 1 13 0 0 4 0 0
Kafir Timeline Article 1 0 0 19 16 0 1 0 0
Forced conversion Timeline Article 0 6 0 2 0 0 0 0 0
Robert Clive Timeline Article 0 12 0 0 5 0 0 0 0
East India Company Timeline Article 0 5 0 0 4 0 0 0 0
Battle of Plassey Timeline Article 0 7 0 0 3 0 0 0 0
Zakir Naik Timeline Article 0 6 0 0 8 0 0 0 0
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard Timeline Wikipedia 0 0 0 5 2 0 0 0 0
Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement Timeline Wikipedia 0 14 0 13 0 0 0 0 0
Freedom of religion in Pakistan Timeline Article 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
Love Jihad Timeline Article 0 3 6 0 0 0 0 0 0
Talk:Love Jihad Timeline Talk 0 5 11 0 0 0 0 0 0
Islam in India Timeline Article 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0
Talk:Sexual slavery in Islam Timeline Talk 0 0 0 23 0 0 9 0 0
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Souniel Yadav Timeline Wikipedia 0 0 0 4 0 0 11 0 0
Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics Timeline Wikipedia 0 13 0 0 0 0 5 0 0
Total edits 14 756 38 664 483 79 171 13 0
% edits to pages edited by more than one of the accounts listed 50% 26% 66% 22% 33% 75% 29% N.A.

-- Toddy1 (talk) 19:13, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]


10 April 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

mass pinging as before [44] [45] first comment on this thread . Y2edit has been blocked to edit this page. Venkat TL (talk) 12:27, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[46] @Abecedare and Bishonen agree.--Venkat TL (talk) 19:18, 11 April 2022 (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 July 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Still obsessed with the term "Kafir"[47] like previous socks.[48][49] Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 18:42, 6 July 2022 (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]

09 August 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

At Reincarnation and Talk:Reincarnation mostly: same POV, and same disregard for WP:RS. I don't say they are the same user, maybe they are someone having the same interest, but a check would be okay. tgeorgescu (talk) 00:44, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23: [52] cites https://www.near-death.com/reincarnation/research/ian-stevenson.html . [53] same Stevenson gets mentioned, a similar source gets mentioned, namely https://psi-encyclopedia.spr.ac.uk/articles/imad-elawar-reincarnation-case . Prone to edit war despite failing WP:RS: [54], [55], [56] (search for Anne Frank). And they are persistent, see all their edits at Reincarnation after 31 July 2022, including oversighted edits. Buddhism at [57] and [58] (MDPI paper). Also, at [59] the subject in an actor in Hindi films, which corroborates with the previously reported IPs being from India. WP:SOCK Spasiba5 also edited Reincarnation. tgeorgescu (talk) 01:51, 9 August 2022 (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]
 Unlikely/Red X Unrelated. Different ranges from vastly different countries, and no evidence that any of the ranges are proxies, VPNs, etc. They also use completely different user agents. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:52, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

01 September 2023

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Still obsessed over Sonia Gandhi's name.[60][61] He swiftly took it to talk page and cite Subramanian Swamy (a rival politician) as source for the information just like he did before,[62][63] and cited Talk:Sonia_Gandhi/Archive_5#Birth_name_controversy where his sock Venue9 significantly participated.

  • Wants to use the WP:HOAX name "Edvige Antonia Albina Maino" on article.[64][65]
  • Makes sure to put the name "Antonia Maino" in bold on talk page.[66][67]
  • Tends to "repeat" himself by quoting himself.[68][69]
  • Uncommonly puts letters in bold.[70][71]
  • Proclaims himself to be "new editor" or "newbie".[72][73]

 Looks like a duck to me

Other similarities are that he asked same person to make controversial edits,[74][75] and POV pushing on Ram Mandir.[76][77] Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 02:32, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@TheSandDoctor and TonyBallioni: Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 11:22, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Same reaction to SPI after hounding Toddy1:-

Dr2rao: "I am not any of the above mentioned users. You may check my IP address."[78]
Shaan Sengupta: "I would request checkusers to kindly check my account."[79]

Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 19:28, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

SHAMANTH legend is also a throwaway sock of this master. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.157.66.131 (talk) 15:59, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The last SPI for Souniel Yadav was August 2022, so a checkuser can neither prove nor disprove that he/she is a sock of Souniel Yadav. I do not suppose for one moment that Souniel Yadav stopped creating new accounts in August 2022, so a checkuser might show evidence that other blocked sock accounts are indistinguishable from Shaan Sengupta. I think that the evidence presented is good enough to justify a checkuser investigation, but that there would need to be far more evidence to justify a block if the checkuser result were negative.

You have to remember that this is a BJP editor, and BJP editors tend to have lots of things in common (for example: what websites they read, and similar obsessions). And whilst there are many BJP sockpuppet editor families, we cannot assume that all BJP editors are sockpuppets. -- Toddy1 (talk) 13:25, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding edits to Talk:Sonia Gandhi:

  • Dr2Rao made 43 edits (starting 4 days after account creation)[80]
  • Venue9 made 42 edits (starting 1 day after account creation)[81]
  • Baamiyaan2 made 12 edits (starting 37 days after account creation)[82]
  • Shaan Sengupta made 2 edits (starting 106 days after account creation)[83]

That Shaan Sengupta edited the talk page after their edits were reverted looks less like obsession and more like the behaviour of a normal editor who unexpectedly meets resistance to their edit to the article page.-- Toddy1 (talk) 18:42, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Still remains the only editor who wants to change the name of this article on Sonia Gandhi by citing her outright political rival Subramanian Swamy. Then there are other characteristics too. This is a pure WP:DUCK case. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 19:25, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Aman.kumar.goel Just putting that name to Sonia's page make me sockpuppet of someone? I would request checkusers to kindly check my account. I can't believe this. There must be many editors who had done the same. Does that mean they all are sock? Thank god I reached here seeing Toddy's contributions otherwise I would never have known what's going on here. I myself report vandalism and socks. I would request you Aman to kindly do user interaction link given by Toddy. Might make it clear to you that you have suspected wrong.
Clarifying charges made by Aman.
  • I added Antonia Maino because I read it on a reliable source India Today the other user just added it as can be seen in edit history.
  • Other names or previous name are always pit in bold. Like in Prayagraj the old name Allahabad is in bold.
  • If someone is misinterpreting me what else can I do rather repeating myself.
  • I always put letters in bold or italic that need to look different from all other sentences. Those letters are the ones that needs to be stressed on.
  • I joined in May only. Its hardly 3-4 months. This is not a claim but a truth that I am a newbie. I asked Vanamonde because he was the that reverted my edit. Should I have gone to third party or the senior who is already there into it.
  • I went to talk page of Sonia Gandhi days after I edited. That too when my edits were reverted. What else should have I done. Edit warring to get blocked?
I am being accused of being sockpuppet just because I added to Sonia Gandhi name that too with a reliable source.
Shaan SenguptaTalk 07:28, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Adding one more point, it is being said that I and the sock or sockmaster whosoever added Swamy as reference. I shall tell the reason why I added. I was reading about Sonia Gandhi. Found India Today article that I added as source. Everything was ok then my edit was reverted. Then to get some more confirmation I started browsing and saw this image at a Twitter Account. I did an image search on Google of the certificate I found on Twitter. Got to see that Swamy has shared the exact same thing. Thought sharing link to his post might be more authentic to add since he is a long time parliamentarian and former Union Minister. Shaan SenguptaTalk 08:24, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Editor interaction utility comparing Shaan Sengupta with nine of Souniel Yadav's accounts-- Toddy1 (talk) 20:36, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at the times of edits in the three of Souniel Yadav's accounts that had the most edits: Dr2Rao, Souniel Yadav, and Spasiba5; and they show a similar pattern. But the times of edits for Shaan Sengupta show a different pattern; the graph for Shaan Sengupta is based on 2300 edits so it is unlikely that this difference is accidental. One explanation is that a different person is doing the edits. Another explanation is that they have changed job and have to work different hours, or have moved to another country.-- Toddy1 (talk) 10:58, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Toddy1 I am still a student. I am from India and I have not yet left this country since birth. Shaan SenguptaTalk 11:57, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Aman.kumar.goel What else am I supposed to say after @Toddy1 requested Checkuser. Asking for checking IP address and asking to checkuser to check account. How are these two similar. You just want to pick anything right or wrong. You won't pay attention to the proofs Toddy has given. They show that I and the socks have so much difference. Whether it is timings of editing or interaction to articles. You are being a WP:FANATIC. Shaan SenguptaTalk 03:00, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am tagging some checkusers that I have reacted to in past few days. Some on ANI and one in a sock I successfully reported. So that we can get this clear. I am sorry for bothering you guys. I interacted with @Girth Summit and @Materialscientist on ANI and @Firefly in my last successful sock report Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Marxist Economist. I don't know if it's right to tag selected checkusers but I am distracted by this report. Please pardon me if this is a mistake. But I want this case to be closed ASAP so that I can focus with my editing. Shaan SenguptaTalk 11:20, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
  • The hoax name is covered across a large amount of sources (newspapers, books, etc), so it seems to be a weak signal to me. Engaging in controversies and sharing the same POV is all too common in some topics, so it also falls short. Users reported to SPI sometimes request their IPs to be checked, that is also pretty common. I do see some similarities, but not enough to recommend any action. no Closing without action. MarioGom (talk) 19:19, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

22 April 2024

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Using WP:TEAHOUSE for content dispute.[84][85]

Adding similar Islamophobic content on History of concubinage in the Muslim world.[86][87]

Modifying the same sentence on Ayodhya.[88][89]

Seeking help from the same editor.[90][91]

Copying content from the same article to Kafir.[92][93]

Posting same kind of misleading "defense" on WP:ARE; "After being warned, I have always cited sources for my edits",[94] "I have been extra careful about my edits after the warning by an admin".[95] Srijanx22 (talk) 12:12, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Comments by other users

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

I have gone through all the diffs and I can safely say that none of the sentences are the same. I have made more than 900 edits now and it is possible that some articles I have edited match those of Souniel Yadav, possibly because he is from the same country (and only 2 articles I have edited are the same as what he edited; the sentences however, are different). Asking an experienced editor who posted a welcome message on my Talk page or at the WP:Teahouse are frivolous complaints. I hope this case is closed soon.-Haani40 (talk) 15:54, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The user I am being accused of being a sock puppet of (Souniel Yadav) was blocked more than 4 years ago, so isn't it stale to use for an SPI?-Haani40 (talk) 16:04, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If Toddy1 wants to report me as a sock puppet of Ayodhya-prayagraj, he should open an SPI under that name, not here.-Haani40 (talk) 16:13, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have used more than one wi-fi connection to make edits (while being logged in). I hope that the IP addresses of those aren't used to match those used by Souniel Yadav. Souniel Yadav was blocked more than 4 years ago, so that account is stale to use for an SPI (in my opinion).-Haani40 (talk) 16:47, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As per instructions at Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry/Notes for the accuser, Srijanx22 had to, "Notify the suspected users. Edit the user talk pages" which he didn't.-Haani40 (talk) 17:03, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't [Souniel Yadav] stale to use for an SPI? No, it isn't. The evidence from Srijanx22 does not refer to any edits by the old Souniel Yadav account, but to more recent edits by its known socks. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Souniel Yadav/Archive. Note also that the instructions Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry/Notes for the accuser that you mention aren't valid any more, see the note at the top of that page. It's no longer common to notify the suspected users. Bishonen | tålk 21:41, 22 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]
The check user is, "inconclusive". I believe that the filer of this SPI has gone through all my 900+ edits, matched it with some super sock puppeteer with 10 blocked sock puppet accounts (as Toddy1 mentions above) and found that 2 articles I have edited are the same as what he edited (and when 2 people are from the same country, if only 2 articles out of 900+ edits match, it is unlikely to be sock puppetry). The sentences used are also different. Please assume good faith, decline any sanctions and close this SPI. Thanks!-Haani40 (talk) 20:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
  •  Inconclusive. What CU data we have for the blocked socks is old - the most recent I could see was from 2022. People move around, change ISPs, etc. The data for Haani40 would be consistent with them being the same person, in the sense that the geolocate to the same city, but that's no smoking gn (and it's a big city). I will note that Haani40 has engaged in logged out editing in a manner that looks like they might have been trying to evade scrutiny.  Behavioural evidence needs evaluation Girth Summit (blether) 19:37, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Blocked, tagged, closing. Bbb23 (talk) 23:10, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Souniel_Yadav/Archive&oldid=1220637695"