Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TripWire/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


TripWire

TripWire (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
25 June 2015[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

User:Zmaghndstakun suddenly comes in scenario of Balochistan, Pakistan and supports views of TripWire. His first edit of life is directly on talk page of said page which is very unusual for brand new user. [1], his second edit of life is in edit warring probably to avoid 3RR [2], his third edit of life is in voting on talk page [3] to influence the outcome. Surely this id is sock of one of other involved editor, no one starts editing career like this way.

Old blocked User:Highstakes00 also had same nationalist attitude like TripWire who used to edit same pages. Human3015 Call me maybe!! • 18:33, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea if these are sockpuppets of User:TripWire. The timing and the nature of edits does give one pause. Regardles, the User:TripWire account has been engaged in EXTREMELY tendentious POV-pushing on articles related to India/Pakistan/Bangladesh. In a very WP:BATTLEGROUND-no-discussion-or-compromise kind of way. They are essentially impossible to discuss or work with. They recently changed their username (legitimately) from "PakSol" to "TripWire" after it became obvious that a user essentially named "PakistaniSoldier" is probably not going to follow NPOV on Pakistan/Bangladesh/India related articles.

Ok. That just means that this is a problem user, not that they're sockpuppeting. However, in my experience, users with such a battleground mentality very often resort to sockpuppeting in order to fight their wars. On its own it'd be... just another disruptive user. But the similarities at Balochistan, Pakistan suggest that there's more going on here.Volunteer Marek (talk) 01:25, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

I have nothing to say, because I am clean. I am not afraid and I am not worried at all. I should not be saying this, because it may sound rude, but I challenge everyone if they can prove that I have a sock, because I dont. Seriously, I am already committed at so many talk pages and is over burdened by the edits I have made there that it is humanly impossible for me to make edits through socks. This accusation by Mr Human is just an evidence that he and his pals are unable to counter my arguments with logic and have thus resorted to dirty tactics and have reported me in Bad Faith. Thanks.—TripWire talk 19:57, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • The report is malformed without any diff/evidence.
  • The report was not true and thus it was an (blatant) accusation.—TripWire talk 08:45, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  • Zmaghndstakun (talk · contribs · count) and TripWire (talk · contribs · count) are Red X Unrelated.
  • Zmaghndstakun (talk · contribs · count) is editing a lot without logging in.
  • Highstakes00 (talk · contribs · count) is  Stale and irrelevant.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:26, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Close without blocks for the two current named accounts -- CU results and flimsy evidence (at best) can't really lead to any other conclusion. As for Zmaghndstakun's logged-out editing, I'm not sure what, if anything, should be done, but the account hasn't edited in a few days, some of his subject articles have been SPP'ed, and I don't see any outrageous attempts at swaying consensus unduly by pretending to be multiple people, so for now, I suppose we can let it be. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 01:35, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

24 September 2015[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets


TripWire got highly inactive by 7th August, and this was the day when Hitch Hicking Accross Sahara was created. TripWire was violating his topic ban all time, for evading the topic ban he made this account.[6] These are similarities:-

  • Both have bad English.
  • Both have huge interest in Indo-Pakistan war of 1965. [7][8]
  • Both claims that IP addresses are sock puppets, Tripwire claimed @Human3015: [9] is socking with IPs, then HHAS claimed that I am socking with IPs.[10]

Much to say. D4iNa4 (talk) 08:11, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

  • I would like to second this investigation. I also suspect that these two are sock accounts. I would like to add more things. User:HHAS uploads many photos related to India-Pakistan conflict. For example this one. TripWire also used to upload such kind of pics, many of them are now deleted for example this notification. I also wonder how very new editor like HHAS is able to license complicated images properly? HHAS is editing Wikipedia from this month only, Licensing image is something very difficult task for new editors specially when image is not "own work", but it seems that HHAS don't have any problem in it. It seems HHAS is not a new editor. TripWire is topic banned from India-Pakistan topics for 6 months. --Human3015TALK  17:13, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Again to add, there are 2 more Indo-Pakistani conflict related images uploaded by HHAS this and this one. These are HHAS's only 3rd and 4th mainspace edit. I wonder how fast he learned to upload and license complicated images. HHAS likes to upload Indo-Pak images and TripWire was also known for uploading such images. Even after Topic ban, TripWire uploaded some Indo-pak images, I warned him about this issue in July, so to upload those kind of images again, I think he made another account HHAS, and first thing he done with this account is to upload Indo-Pak conflict related images. --Human3015TALK  17:38, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Third Second Time's a Charm? @D4iNa4: and @Human3015: aren't you guys supposed to inform me when I am being investigated for sock puppetry? Or your hatred for a poor member as myself is preventing you from thinking straight? This tag-teaming by you guys and reporting me second time without assuming good faith is unacceptable. I took leave from editing Wikipedia for being ill and you guys made it into an issue to further your preconceived notions? @Bbb23: Sir, you were the CU clerk who investigated the previous report on me, I even then requested the Admins to take appropriate action against @Human3015: for misreporting me that too after he was 'advised' to open an SPI against me by a known sockmaster User:DarknessShines2. This time again, User:Human3015 took time out and gave his two-cents on this second SPI against me. No wonder @D4iNa4: followed suit and reported me again despite the fact that I have never interacted with him/her ever. I wonder what is it in my edits and now inactivity that interests D4iNa4 which prompted him to report me again? User:D4iNa4 with his small number of edits knows how to open up an SPI but does not know that he is also supposed to inform me of the same? This was done in sheer bad faith, I must say. This suggests only one thing and that's tag-teaming. Apropos, I again request the Admins to take appropriate action against both User:Human3015 and User:D4iNa4 for:
  • wasting precious time of Admins
  • backbiting and jumping the gun
  • and assuming sheer bad-faith continuously against a particular member
  • Not to mention that the user requesting this SPI against me lacked the courage to atleast inform me. I was totally unaware of this investigation and only came to know about it when User:Bbb23 'mentioned me' while commenting here/closing the case two days ago!

Just for audiences' consumption, there's a wiki policy of WP:BOOMERANG which needs to be implemented here.—TripWire talk 19:15, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I was busy due to Eid al-Adha. @Human3015 I had mentioned you Somewhere that I was an IP editor in Past. @D4iNa4 If you want to take a revenge because i have recently Filed an SPI against you and reverted some of your edits where you were warring 1 2 3 then it is the most futile way of doing that. I will request an action per WP:BOOMERANG. HIAS (talk) 04:14, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

  •  Clerk endorsed - to compare the two. Vanjagenije (talk) 08:54, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • TripWire (talk · contribs · count) and Hitch Hicking Across Sahara (talk · contribs · count) are  Unlikely.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:56, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • D4iNa4 and TripWire, I removed the last two comments by the two of you. This is not a place for childish bickering. @TripWire, there is no requirement that the "accused" be notified of the opening or reopening of an SPI. Also, it's rare for action to be taken against the filer of an SPI. I can understand your resentment about what's occurred here, but the best I can recommend is that you let it go and move on. Otherwise, you will only increase your negative feelings and accomplish little. @D4iNa4, I expect more civility, both here and anywhere else at Wikipedia. Don't tell other editors to "shut up". If anything, it reinforces TripWire's claims about your conduct. I don't want to hear from either of you about my comments. Read them, take them to heart, and that's the end of it. Anything else you have to say should be taken to the appropriate forum, and this isn't it.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:30, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Closing as inconclusive.
     — Berean Hunter (talk) 14:57, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

18 March 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets


A case of complementing each other to make a same point and trying to hunt in pairs by supposed "tag teaming" in [11], [12] and also in India-Bangaladesh-Pakistan related pages. There are also similarities with blocked Mar4d and Wikibaba1977 And, add FreeatlastChitchat to the list also. Do look into it . Ghatus (talk) 14:33, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

Ghatus: After having threatened me and post you were caught gaming the system, you thought it appropriate to report me here. Good luck!

To Admins, I would request you to speedy close this case because your time is precious. I have nothing else to say. Thanks.—TripWire ︢ ︢ ︡ ︢ ︡ ︢ ︡ ︢ ︡ ︡ ︢ ︡  ʞlɐʇ 15:27, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: Obvious Tag-Teaming across Indo-Pak-Bangladesh articles. See this also. Beside, This user (TalhaZubairButt) is involve in POV Pushing and Edit Warring across Indo-Pak articles right from his first edit. He doesn't look to me newbie at all. TBZ account was created in Jan, 2016 while Wikibaba1977 was blocked in December, 2015 and TBZ looks to me a apparent sock of WikiBaba. I request CheckUser to do a check against TBZ & WikiBaba1977 also. Thanks! MBlaze Lightning (talk) 15:47, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Suggestion: How about a CU of MBlaze Lightning and Ghatus and investigation into their Tag-teaming? Their results from 'editor interaction utility' isnt healthy. BTW, the admins/check-users should know that Ghatus as opposed to rules and courtesy, didnt bother to inform either me or @TalhaZubairButt: about this SPI. An experienced editor like him should know better, if it is not for gaming the system —TripWire ︢ ︢ ︡ ︢ ︡ ︢ ︡ ︢ ︡ ︡ ︢ ︡  ʞlɐʇ 17:50, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@MBlaze Lightning

Just a few days ago, you left me a note on my Talk page saying you would be responding to me on the Talk page of the article Rape during Bangladsh Liberation War. You did not respond at all, and now you are doing this? And yes maybe you should get my IP address (including my normal home IP address and office and uni IP addresses) etc checked. I have never been WikiBaba1977 or anyone else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TalhaZubairButt (talk • contribs) 21:14, 18 March 2016 (UTC) TalhaZubairButt (talk) 21:17, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WikiBaba1977 was itself a sock of User:LanguageXpert who used multiple IPs to avoid a SP case. So I request the check user to do match IPs of LanguageXpert with TalhaZubairButt. This case is more mysterious then it looks. Thanks! MBlaze Lightning (talk) 08:16, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

  •  Additional information needed - @Ghatus: In order to facilitate and expedite your request, please provide diffs to support your case. Please give two or more diffs meeting the following format:
  1. At least one diff is from the sockmaster (or an account already blocked as a confirmed sockpuppet of the sockmaster), showing the behaviour characteristic of the sockmaster.
  2. At least one diff per suspected sockpuppet, showing the suspected sockpuppet emulating the behaviour of the sockmaster given in the first diff.
  3. In situations where it is not immediately obvious from the diffs what the characteristic behaviour is, a short explanation must be provided. Around one sentence is enough for this. Vanjagenije (talk) 00:02, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • No diffs provided after waiting for 8 days. Closing the case. Vanjagenije (talk) 13:17, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/TripWire/Archive&oldid=1140227238"