Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Eswaran Naveen/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Eswaran Naveen

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

04 August 2021[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Eswnav (talk · contribs) was blocked as a sockpuppet of Eswaran Naveen in February. Tuttesnaveen has a similar (to Eswnav) focus on the actor Vani Bhojan, as well as a similar talk page posting style: compare User_talk:Veshboyyy#Image by Eswnav, with User_talk:Lionnen#Image by Tuttesnaveen. Another overlap: Eswnav was asking about Draft:Rekha Krishnappa in about ten places including here, here, here and here ; Tuttesnaveen has created Draft:Rekha krishnappa. bonadea contributions talk 11:49, 4 August 2021 (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 December 2021[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

His obsession with Vani Bhojan, and telling me to create articles for him. Kailash29792 (talk) 05:41, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

User:Uma Narmada was just blocked as a sockpuppet of User:Mridul varma tharakan who was blocked as a sockpuppet of User:Eswaran Naveen so I don't think all accounts are stale. Liz Read! Talk! 02:40, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

  •  Check declined by a checkuser - Only one account that is not  Stale -- Amanda (aka DQ) 23:11, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Given the new accounts suggested by Liz, I ran a check of Uma Narmada and Mridul varma tharakan vs. Wessodes. Uma and Mridul are  Confirmed to each other, but Wessodes is Red X Unrelated to the other two on the technical data.  Behavioural evidence needs evaluation. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:35, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Blocking/tagging Wessodes per Elcobbola's notes above. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:54, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

03 January 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Very similar edits to prior sock Uma Narmada. Compare [6] to [7], [8] to [9] Ravensfire (talk) 16:13, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Added 103.149.159.224 after the restored the edit to List of awards and nominations received by Jyothika here [10]. Requested page be semi-protected, from the .224 IP's post on my talk page [11], they don't see anything wrong with block evasion, this may go on for a bit. Ravensfire (talk) 16:59, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@RoySmith thank you! Ravensfire (talk) 18:35, 3 January 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]

17 January 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


Both accounts edit in the same topic area, Indian entertainment articles. Both intersect with each other on many pages. Both edit from a mobile platform. Both also intersect with Josh janakiraman (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), whom Ponyo CU-blocked (see below for connection to other case). Both new socks create new pages, and both are new accounts (Alone created on December 30 and OE1995 created on December 8). All of this behavior is similar to socks in the archive, but not similar enough for me to block without some technical corroboration.

I am requesting a CU to confirm and to look for others. Regardless of the outcome, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mridul varma tharakan should be merged into this case (the connection between the two has already been established).--Bbb23 (talk) 18:30, 17 January 2022 (UTC) Bbb23 (talk) 18:30, 17 January 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]

  • CU data gives nothing useful I'm afraid - they operate out of reasonably stable ranges from each other (and from the previous socks I checked), and have stable and different sets of user agents. From a purely technical perspective, I have to say Red X Unrelated. I obviously can't rule out spoofing or meatpuppetry, so this will require behavioural evaluation. Girth Summit (blether) 17:39, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Clerk assistance requested: - I didn't do a deep dive into the behavior, but from what I see, there's not enough to say these are socks given the CU result. I will note that OE1995 and Alone are more similar to each other than they are to Eswaran, but Bollywood is a hugely popular topic, so that may not mean much. I'll leave this on the clerk queue to look at the merge that was suggested. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:31, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Just to clarify, I didn't run any checks here. My comment about OE1995 and Alone is based on my evaluation of their edit histories. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:09, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Clerk note: Case merged, setting status back to checked. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 06:41, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree that the behavioural evidence is not sufficient to block these accounts in light of the CU results. Closing without action. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 04:59, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

29 January 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

The edits by IP is of the same theme - removing awards stating unsourced or poor sourcing. Libra cursa was blocked CU for multiple accounts. — DaxServer (talk · contribs) 22:45, 29 January 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]

04 February 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

New account created a couple of days after prior sock was blocked. They've continued adding awards to Indian film/television related article. [12] from Libra Cursa, then continued by new sock [13]. Very odd to see that on a production company from a new editor. Ravensfire (talk) 02:47, 4 February 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]

19 February 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

A newly created account that adds content like a pro with references despite editing on mobile. Interest primarily in Vani Bhojan like previous socks, particularly:

  1. Wessodes
  2. Tuttesnaveen
  3. Eswnav Ab207 (talk) 11:46, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

Also note the multiple attempts at cast reordering (1, 2), similar to previous socks (Special:Diff/1070254657, User_talk:Libra_cursa#Cast_order) Hemantha (talk) 12:33, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Esdfgh added an image, with only 52 pageviews in the last 3 months which was uploaded by a previous sock Pacheswnav and included in various wikis (te, ja, mr, ms) over the past couple of months by an IP range (2409:4072:6000::/36 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial)) that's currently pblocked from Vani Bhojan. The pblock on the range might have forced them to other ranges/devices for en-wiki, causing differences from old CU data or to create a new account. Esdfgh's other image addition was also originally from a sock Cattleya90, but the master was suspected to be AhamBrahmasmi (SPI). Hemantha (talk) 05:56, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • RoySmith, is it possible that we are dealing with two different set of socks? (Eswaran Naveen, Tuttesnaveen, Wessodes) and (Mridul varma tharakan, Uma Narmada, Libra cursa, Meena Sagarmatha) as noted at Wessodes's investigation.
As far as I can tell, Naveen has an obsession with actress Vani Bhojan. All of Tuttesnaveen's (2 July–5 August) and Wessodes (15 November–27 December) contribitions are related to Bhojan's article and her works. Esdfgh now started working on the article but is not adding any new content, only restoring the previously removed ones.
Eg. See Esdfgh's wording here": In 2013, she was cast in the Sun TV series Deivamagal in the leading role." which was previously added by Eswnav, and many times as an IP
I'm not sure what's the connection with Naveen and Mridula's socks (because Mridula's interested area is somewhat broader) but I'm fairly certain that Esdfgh is a sock of Bhojan-obsessed Naveen. -- Ab207 (talk) 07:21, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ab207, Mridul's case was merged here recently after the two were found to be connected. Hemantha (talk) 08:42, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hemantha, I see but I'm unable to figure out that connection. On the contrary, Mridul was actually removing excess images added to Bhojan's article [14], [15]. Where as Naveen's socks and (presumably) their IP who operates at 2409:4072: is known to stuff more content and images in the article (as you rightly identified here). -- Ab207 (talk) 11:23, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't active when Naveen/socks were, my familiarity has been with Mridul/socks only. I do remember feeling at some point that Mridul and Naveen were different, based on talk post differences. Hemantha (talk) 12:53, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In cases like this, it's always possible that sock farms get mixed up. As far as I can tell, there's approximately 2 billion people who live in south asia, 50% of whom make a living editing articles about south asian cinema and TV :-) -- RoySmith (talk) 13:18, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I believe both these set of socks should be dealt seperately. Because mixing them up could be misleading at times. -- Ab207 (talk) 15:04, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
RoySmith, since the case is closed, does this imply the above behavioural evidence is insufficient to connect Esdfgh with Eswaran Naveen, Tuttesnaveen, and Wessodes? I'm sorry if its inappropriate to make a comment after the case is closed but a conclusion would really be helpful to guide any future filings. Regards -- Ab207 (talk) 12:15, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ab207 As long as the case hasn't been archived yet, it's not a big deal to comment on a closed case. As far as Esdfgh goes, I think we're in that grey area where we're not sure they're a sock, but also not sure they're not. That's a very common situation, and the general rule is, "When in doubt, don't block". If they really are a sock, the odds are they will continue to sock, the evidence will become more clear, and we can always come back and take another look. We'll never catch every sock, so it's not worth getting too upset over missing one or two. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:22, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much, RoySmith. I'll look to find more conclusive evidence in future. -- Ab207 (talk) 14:26, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

  • CheckUser requested and endorsed by clerk - the behavioural evidence is suggestive, but not quite enough for a block on its own IMO. Please compare to previous accounts. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 19:54, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  •  In progress - -- RoySmith (talk) 20:04, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Uma Narmada, Meena Sagarmatha, and Libra cursa were the only accounts in the archives I could get data for; those three are clearly the same, but Red X Unrelated to Esdfgh. There's also some pre-existing notes in cuwiki from December 2021; against those, the best I can do is eke out a strangled  Possible, based on the same very heavily used IP range.  Behavioural evidence needs evaluation -- RoySmith (talk) 20:24, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have added another account, SaNaNtha Hegde, and am requesting a CU. I've compared the account to Libra cursa, and although I've found enough behavioral evidence to warrant a check, not quite enough to satisfy me to block behaviorally. First, they both edit from the same mobile platform. Second, they intersect on many articles, and even more so on the usual Indian entertainment topics. Third, they both filed reports at WP:AIV that were similar stylistically (Libra cursa and SaNaNtha Hegde). Fourth, they both edited mostly cast listings and filmographies, often with "simplifying" and removing entries that supposedly were not true (Libra cursa edit summary ("Not officially came out") and SaNaNtha Hegde edit summary ("Not her official entry")). Finally, they both added similar tables (Libra cursa and SaNaNtha Hegde).--Bbb23 (talk) 16:46, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  •  In progress - -- RoySmith (talk) 17:52, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • SaNaNtha Hegde is  Confirmed to Uma Narmada, Meena Sagarmatha, and Libra cursa. Unfortunately, we've lost the data chain to confirm them all the way back to Eswaran Naveen, so I'll just call them suspected. If somebody wants to do some fancier dual-tagging, they can do that. -- RoySmith (talk) 18:05, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

26 February 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

The contributions are similar to, say Libra cursa: removing awards from actresses pages. This also overlaps with Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/112qw34er, which could be a connected one like the Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mridul varma tharakan — DaxServer (t · c) 09:39, 26 February 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]

  •  In progress - -- RoySmith (talk) 14:27, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mrinalini Thampi is  Confirmed to the same SaNaNtha Hegde group from my 19 February 2022 report. As before, blocking as suspected for now because I can't confirm them back to the master. If somebody wants to do a better tagging, go for it. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:34, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

02 March 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Removes awards from actresses articles similar to earlier socks [16] with a focus on Jyothika-related, good overlap with other socks [17] — DaxServer (t · c) 09:42, 2 March 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]

  •  In progress - -- RoySmith (talk) 19:02, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • As in our last episode,  Confirmed to SaNaNtha Hegde et al, but since I can't get all the way back to Eswaran, I'll just tag as suspected. -- RoySmith (talk) 19:06, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

07 March 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Removing actors from list [18], similar to prior sock Mrinalini Thampi [19] Ravensfire (talk) 15:10, 7 March 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]

  • The diffs are certainly suspicious, but considering that Indian TV articles are a hotbed of disruptive editing from socks and non-socks alike, I'm hesitant to request a block based on that alone. CheckUser requested and endorsed by clerk - please compare to previous accounts. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 20:52, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  •  In progress - -- RoySmith (talk) 21:17, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Either  Possible (same country, possibly same city), or  Inconclusive (proxy use). Either way,  Behavioural evidence needs evaluation -- RoySmith (talk) 21:24, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I came back to take another look at this. Sure looks like a throw-away account, blocking. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:23, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

09 June 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

All edits by Trewqwer are related to Vani Bhojan, who the previous socks were fixated upon. Trewqwer restored content added by a previous sock.

In addition to the similarities listed at 19 Feb 2022 report, Esdfgh reordered credits to list Vani Bhojan higher, similar to Eswnav's earlier attempts.

Edits by the two accounts have same tags. Hemantha (talk) 12:07, 9 June 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]

  •  In progress - -- RoySmith (talk) 23:12, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I see I looked at Esdfgh back in 19 February 2022, with no firm conclusion. This time, I can say that Esdfgh is  Confirmed to Trewqwer, but still only  Possible to Eswaran. I'm blocking them both, with dual tags, assuming I can remember how dual tagging actually works. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:24, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

22 August 2022[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]

  • Blocked based on behavioural evidence including significant overlap with previous socks, little tells and technical overlap that I gleaned from the logs. @RoySmith: as an FYI as you've done extensive work on this SPI in the past. -- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:22, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect arrow Global lock(s) requested TheSandDoctor Talk 03:32, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

01 September 2022[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]

28 September 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Pushing Honey Rose up in the cast [20][21] - [22][23]. 2409:4073:4E1D:C2C5:3DAA:E860:79A9:1BF0 (talk) 13:55, 28 September 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]

  •  Confirmed -- RoySmith (talk) 14:46, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I changed the block to indefinite as I assume was the intention. Possibly a spihelper bug. DatGuyTalkContribs 10:41, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It's a feature, not a bug! If an account is already blocked, by default SPIhelper sets the duration to whatever the existing block is, rather than to indefinite. You have to manually reset it by typing (!) 'indefinite'. An easy one to overlook, thanks for picking that up. Girth Summit (blether) 11:15, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Adding for the record that I just found and blocked Kokkaachi MF varghese as  Confirmed to the above. Girth Summit (blether) 11:20, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect arrow Global lock(s) requested TheSandDoctor Talk 19:11, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

30 September 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Cast tampering. Inexplicably reverts Asuran until the same version by previous sock User:ക്രൂര നമ്പ്യാർ is achieved. Please note that ക്രൂര നമ്പ്യാർ was under block at that time. IP arrived in 5 hours after his edits were reverted. 2409:4073:2083:829D:9D16:CAA4:F7E4:41E3 (talk) 10:24, 30 September 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]

10 October 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Returned few hours after the block of Brootisian. Restoring his version in the same articles.

-- 2409:4073:487:5518:1823:8D4B:46B7:F6AA (talk) 15:20, 10 October 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 October 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Cast tampering. Pushing Honey Rose over other actors, same as previous socks - [28][29] v. [30][31]. Recently created after last blocks. 2409:4073:4E8C:A841:7555:FB01:E4EF:AA92 (talk) 07:37, 9 October 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]

11 October 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Quick return for restoring same content in Asuran:

  • [34][35]
  • Adding the "Jyothika claim" with the same fictitious reference [36][37]

-- 2409:4073:84:EFFE:EC76:1205:CCE6:F1AA (talk) 15:55, 11 October 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]

13 October 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Similar edit here [38] as prior socks [39] and [40] Ravensfire (talk) 16:03, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Thrishtika warrier, same image preference on Simran [41] as a prior sock [42]. Ravensfire (talk) 22:29, 14 October 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]

19 October 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Cast tampering, pushing Honey Rose over others in Monster: [43][44] – [45][46][47]. Also cast vandalism at '96: [48][49].

-- 2409:4073:210F:6AA3:98AC:3C81:48A6:3557 (talk) 11:27, 19 October 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]

26 October 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Mostly pro forma as editor has been blocked as an impersonation account, but wouldn't mind it being noted as they edited a couple of new articles. Similar edits to Meena (actress) as some prior socks ([50] vs [51] and [52], especially the lead). Also very similar profane rants [53] as prior socks when they were blocked [54] and the last few sections [55]. Such a lovely person to interact with. Ravensfire (talk) 03:10, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It may be worth semi-protecting '96 (film) as Naveen has been editing this with named and ip socks recently. It's a decent honeypot though, maybe pending changes on it? Ravensfire (talk) 03:15, 26 October 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]

  •  Likely, no others seen. Already blocked and locked, I added a tag. Closing. --Blablubbs (talk) 08:31, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

13 November 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

A bit tenuous, but: after User:Trewqwer got blocked as sock, Pavi4321 was registered and took over editing Miral (2022 film), which was just moved to mainspace past AfC; these accounts also share other editing interests, eg. Vani Bhojan. DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:32, 13 November 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]

  • From a technical perspective, the account is a weak(ish)  Likely to the Trewqwer group from June; I will note that I see no links to any other socks that I have data for. --Blablubbs (talk) 10:17, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Blocked without tags I find the behavioral connection along with the CU more than persuasive. Blocked without tags, as I see a complex tag was used for some of the others: I would appreciate clerk assistance with tagging, I hope that parameter use is appropriate. Vanamonde (Talk) 21:52, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Tagged as suspected to Esdfgh (confirmed master of Trewqwer) and Eswaran Naveen. Closing. MarioGom (talk) 18:24, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

23 November 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Similar edits [56] as prior socks [57] and IP socks [58]. [59]. Heavy interest at Filmfare Award for Best Actress – Tamil, including pushing Jyothika as a nominee in the 2002 award section [60] as prior socks have done [61]. Also pushes same image [62] as prior socks [63], [64]. Ravensfire (talk) 02:27, 23 November 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]

  •  Blocked without tags Behavioral to previous socks is quite clear, also appears to be editing logged out as 103.155.223.192. The tagging here is messy, leaving it to the clerks. I don't see an obvious need for a CU, given that a check was run not that long ago. Vanamonde (Talk) 01:39, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tagged as suspected, closing. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 03:06, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

30 November 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Created today after prior sock was blocked a few days ago, immediately edited Simran (actress) which is a common EN target. Same preferred image [65] as prior socks [66]. Also left a mildly insulting message on my talk page [67] and prior socks have done similar things, usually after being blocked though. I think there's some frustration building in them. Ravensfire (talk) 04:50, 30 November 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]

02 December 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Replace images on Simran (actress) with preferred version [68], see [69] and [70] which uses same edit summary. May need to consider ECP on that article. Ravensfire (talk) 17:52, 2 December 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]

04 December 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Created shortly after prior sock was blocked. Similar user name to prior sock Simran Jyothika Bagga Suriya. Similar articles edited as prior socks. Ravensfire (talk) 15:19, 4 December 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]

17 December 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

The concern has been raised by Nehansaxan, who the reported user has been harrassing. LilianaUwU (talk / contribs) 10:04, 17 December 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]

17 January 2023[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Created 2 days after last block on Dec 17. Pushing Honey Rose over other cast members, same as Simran Jyothika Bagga Suriya and Simran Bagga Rishi - [71][72][73] - [74][75] - [76][77]. Username written in Malayalam script, same as ക്രൂര നമ്പ്യാർ. Use emoticons in talk page replies, same as Simran Bagga Rishi. The Doom Patrol (talk) 08:54, 17 January 2023 (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]

21 January 2023[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Created 4 days after last block on Jan 21. Pushing Honey Rose over other cast members, same as Simran Jyothika Bagga Suriya and Simran Bagga Rishi as well as കരിപ്പോട്ടി - [78][79][80] [81] Theoder2055 (talk) 03:44, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Alakananda thyagarajan is  Confirmed to a bunch of previously blocked accounts, but I can't find a chain all the way back to the master, so I'll just tag them as suspected and not sweat the details. -- RoySmith (talk) 04:07, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect arrow Global lock(s) requested TheSandDoctor Talk 16:30, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

23 January 2023[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

IP restoring edits from prior socks [82] vs [83], and [84] vs [85]. Checked on a wider range and didn't see anything obvious I would tie to EN in the past few weeks. May need to sconsider semi-protection of a few articles. There is a new IP (27.62.68.149 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)) that's edit-warring on Manju Warrier that also reverted back to EN sock edits and started after 117. stopped. Not 100% sure there yet. Ravensfire (talk) 23:04, 23 January 2023 (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]

  • Both IPs blocked for a week. I've also protected some of the articles. Closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:26, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

22 February 2023[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

A fanatic of Jyothika. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:02, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
  • @Spicy:, I'd be very surprised if this wasn't EN. They've done the psuedo-impersonation account before - Ravensfire original. And the pettiness is right in their normal behavior. When they don't get their way, they revert to insults. Hadn't even realized this new impersonation account existing - thank you for the ping. Ravensfire (talk) 15:58, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

  •  Clerk endorsed - Bommi maaran 2023 has been blocked as a confirmed sock of WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Eswaran Naveen. The master and അണ്ടിപറപ്പ് were blocked as socks of each other by Bbb23, and apparently did not show up in the check on Bommi maaran 2023. However, there are behavioural similarities between this case and Eswaran Naveen such as the focus on Jyothika, the edit summary pattern [86][87][88] and use of the mobile web editor. I would like a CU to figure out if the two "suspected" accounts are socks of Eswaran Naveen or not. If they are not, I suspect there are other accounts as creating an account with the name of an established user (Ravensfire) and a naughty word in a foreign language isn't exactly something new users tend to do. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 15:44, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Clerk assistance requested: - Spicy, we SPI-conflicted there. All of the above accounts, plus Akramaasaktha mbbs, are  Confirmed to Eswaran Naveen. This case will need to be merged over to that one, but it's a complicated merge that I'd probably mess up... Girth Summit (blether) 15:56, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hey, that's a merge I can do. :^) Filing moved from Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Pundachimol raaavensfire. Spicy (talk) 16:01, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect arrow Global lock(s) requested, closing. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 16:04, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

22 February 2023[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Similar to prior socks, UNDUE pushing of the Indian actress Jyothika. See [89] which matches prior sock edit [90]. The personal attacks towards editors that revert are also typical of this account. See [91] which uses "uncle ji" vs [92] which calls the other editor "auntyji" (plus [93] with same on my talk page). Ravensfire (talk) 14:33, 22 February 2023 (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]

24 February 2023[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Pushing Honey Rose over other cast at Veera Simha Reddy same as Alakananda thyagarajan, കരിപ്പോട്ടി, Simran Bagga Rishi, and Simran Jyothika Bagga Suriya. Did right after creating the account and page protection expired - [94][95]:[96][97]:[98]:[99]:[100]. The Doom Patrol (talk) 15:46, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
  • Comment This account started editing after I reverted edits from Bommi maaran 2023 as an obvious sock (see report above). Clear WP:DUCK, probably need to get semi-protection back on some of these. Ravensfire (talk) 18:52, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

28 February 2023[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Created after last set of socks were blocked. Pushes their preferred image [101], see prior sock [102] (and [103], and more in history). Ravensfire (talk) 04:32, 28 February 2023 (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]

17 March 2023[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Same image preference as prior sock [104] vs [105], Redordered cast to push Jyothika [106] vs [107] Ravensfire (talk) 15:14, 17 March 2023 (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]

13 April 2023[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Restoring edit from prior sock [108] vs [109]. Ravensfire (talk) 14:02, 13 April 2023 (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, Redirect arrow Global lock(s) requested, closing. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 21:03, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

28 April 2023[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

See history of List of awards and nominations received by Manju Warrier, similar gut job as done by prior socks. CU for possible other accounts. Ravensfire (talk) 00:42, 28 April 2023 (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]

22 May 2023[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Block evasion. See block log. Edits resumed at film articles. 157.44.180.132 (talk) 08:20, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

They also use the series 103.179.230.0/23.--137.97.103.192 (talk) 09:33, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

  • IP's have not edited in a while. Feel free to re-file if activity resumes. Courcelles (talk) 23:35, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

22 May 2023[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

As usual, hates Manju Warrier - [113] (this page's history is a sock farm)

With blocked IP [114][115] - [116]. Former - [117][118]

Others also suspect - [119]

Overlaps with more blocked IPs in more articles - [120]

Also see complementary edits with IPs at Draft:L2: Empuraan. 157.44.200.126 (talk) 20:16, 22 May 2023 (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]

  • AnnaMankad is now CU-blocked as a sock of Jomontgeorge. I am not endorsing a check on Paavamjinn as their account is 2 years old and they did not show up in the check on Eswaran Naveen on June 8th. Closing. Spicy (talk) 12:19, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

08 June 2023[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Replaced image of Simran with preferred image [121] vs [122]. Requesting CU check for sleeper / abandoned accounts. Pretty sure Raven s fire hotty was a dopelganger they created and just didn't spot until recently. Ravensfire (talk) 15:25, 8 June 2023 (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]

16 July 2023[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

For their love for editing articles relating to Vani Bhojan. DareshMohan (talk) 18:38, 16 July 2023 (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]

25 July 2023[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Activity at the same actresses related articles. Similar aggressive and mocking behaviour at talk pages.

At Vani Bhojan, same as last sock - [123]

Overlapped with Bunty chunni at Filmfare Award for Best Supporting Actress in 2 minutes - [124][125]

Aversion for Manju Warrier [126] and Simran [127] as usual. The Doom Patrol (talk) 10:34, 25 July 2023 (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]

  •  Possilikely (a mix between possible and likely). It might be pushing it a little, but I'll tag as proven. RoySmith (talk) 14:20, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

04 September 2023[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

His recent edits on Chandramukhi (fictional character) and unhealthy obsession with Jyothika prove this. Kailash29792 (talk) 10:33, 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.

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

  • @Kailash29792 and Ravensfire: Apologies for this request, but I couldn't immediately find the relevant diffs myself.  Additional information needed. 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. Mz7 (talk) 07:28, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • no Closing without action. Feel free to report again if there's more tangible evidence. MarioGom (talk) 22:51, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

08 December 2023[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Restoring preferred image of main account [129] vs [130], [131] vs [132]. Removing same text from lead of Trisha (actress) - see [133] vs [134] Ravensfire (talk) 23:23, 8 December 2023 (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]

  • Because this sock is causing ongoing disruption in multiple places, I have blocked, tagged, and requested a global lock without waiting for a check. I have left the CU request in place, though. Bbb23 (talk) 17:40, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Clerk endorsed - Sleepers check is needed. Vanjagenije (talk) 22:36, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Highly likely to a previous sock, tagging as proven and reblocking as a CU block.  No sleepers immediately visible. Redirect arrow Global lock(s) requested RoySmith (talk) 00:48, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

17 December 2023[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Restoring edit from prior EN socks, pushing the Indian actress Jyothika. See [135] vs [136]. Ravensfire (talk) 17:07, 17 December 2023 (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 to several accounts previously tagged as proven, so doing the same here. RoySmith (talk) 18:07, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect arrow Global lock(s) requested RoySmith (talk) 18:07, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

28 December 2023[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Usual focus on Jyothika, same edit here [137] as prior sock [138]. Ravensfire (talk) 05:24, 28 December 2023 (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 December 2023[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

User:Kuchimma Nirmala and User:Shruthi Nandagopan - Interaction Timeline. Undid a WP:BANREVERT here [139] vs [140] (Sock additions) on List of awards and nominations received by Jyothika. Has enough knowledge for a fairly new account with 51 edits [141] Jeraxmoira (talk) 05:47, 30 December 2023 (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]

  • I can't get all the way back toe Eswaran, but  Confirmed to a previously proven sock. RoySmith (talk) 01:19, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Blocked, glock requested RoySmith (talk) 01:20, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

16 January 2024[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Please bear with me as this is another film-related sock rabbit hole so hopefully I am able to get it right for reviewers here.

  • User:Shreejash Tuladhar was blocked without a master (at least I cannot tell who the master is) on October 24, 2023. The account edited a lot of award content for film-related articles, including the creation of the now deleted The Indian Icon Film Awards.
  • User:Kuchimma Nirmala was blocked on December 28, 2023 as a sock of Eswaran Naveen (notice that the most recent SOCK (Shruthi Nandagopan) also edited award related information on film-related pages, including additions to List of awards and nominations received by Jyothika.
  • User:Mariaa Henry also similar editing pattern and has created a draft for List of awards by Nimisha Sajayan and also editing award information on pages such as Helly Shah.

Based on the similar style usernames (long history of similar styled usernames with this sock) and the history of the awards in film-related pages (and creation of draft page for list of awards), I believe these are all related. CNMall41 (talk) 06:27, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Girth Summit:, thanks for the check. I saw (prior to deletion) they also were creating an award template in their sandbox which was something one of the film-related sock farms was constantly doing but cannot remember which one so the overlap with those farms isn't surprising. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:40, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, it was Helloo 68. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:43, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Girth Summit:, at this point I feel for you. I can't see the back-end of what you see but I am sure these are all a mess. Thanks for the work. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:20, 17 January 2024 (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]

  • So, I'm not sure about the link to this case - some of Mariaa Henry edits are on a range that overlaps with old socks from this case, but it's a pretty wide range so that's no smoking gun. However, I would call them  Confirmed to Sarith Varma, recently blocked by Ponyo as a sock from a different case. Any thoughts on a link? Girth Summit (blether) 16:10, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post close note - I've also blocked Arunima Sudha, as  Technically indistinguishable from Mariaa Henry. Tagging both as socks of Chandan Tara and suspected to the Helloo 68 case. Closing. Girth Summit (blether) 10:45, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Now closed for real. Vanjagenije (talk) 01:35, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Noting for future readers that all reported accounts are either blocked or locked. Courcelles (talk) 14:16, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

01 February 2024[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Usual promoting of Jyothika. [142] vs [143], [144] vs [145] Ravensfire (talk) 18:51, 1 February 2024 (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 to each other and  Likely to past accounts:
Spicy (talk) 13:31, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Blocked and tagged, Redirect arrow Global lock(s) requested, closing. Spicy (talk) 13:34, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Eswaran_Naveen/Archive&oldid=1202707296"