Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kkm010/Archive

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.


Kkm010

Kkm010 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

14 August 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Already blocked:

Repeating edits of previously blocked IPs and accounts. Grayfell (talk) 09:06, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Examples include Talk:NDTV (history)

Several examples of misleading edit summaries, such as Totapuri: "spelling correction" and Talk:Ronald Ross: "block evasion". Both of those pages, and others, have been edited by multiple socks.

I've added already blocked account (Dr.Aubrey) and IPs for the record, since it took me a bit ti figure out what was going on. Grayfell (talk) 09:17, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 Confirmed. Blocked new account and tagged all three. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:44, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

19 August 2016

Suspected sockpuppets


User:LiamSmith's talk page is in the exact same format as User:MrsAbigail's (a sock of Kkm010). LS's talk page header even has links to MA's (The small "t" and "c"). - Yellow Dingo (talk) 06:09, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Some users all use this format, but still possible for a sock. 333-blue 09:28, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@333-blue: Yeah I know but the thing that got me was how there talk page banner links through to a sock of Kkm010. Probably what happened is they forgot to change the links in the template after copy and pasting it. But, it still could be a innocent accident so thats why I'm here. - Yellow Dingo (talk) 09:32, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
So the possibility I think is that "LS's contributions" links to MA's, which you had said. 333-blue 09:35, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • CheckUser requested and endorsed by clerk - Should be compared to previous socks. Vanjagenije (talk) 14:55, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Confirmed, blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:23, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

16 September 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

I noticed that Øystein.Eide restored sockpuppet User:MrsAbigail's edits: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]. Sro23 (talk) 19:17, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

The examples above share the sock's habit of using odd/wrong/misleading edit summaries, also.

Other overlap with Kkm010:

Grayfell (talk) 22:23, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Additionally, another of Kkm010's regular edits was to ask for vectorisation of non-free files at the Graphics lab. Here Øystein.Eide does just that, including 2 files uploaded by Kkm010.
    I am very familiar with Kkm010's editing, from 2010 onwards and, with all the evidence to hand, concur with the "duck" diagnosis below. -- Begoon 05:42, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 Sounds like a duck quacking into a megaphone to me - admin, please block this account and mass-revert contribs if so inclined. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:30, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

28 September 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Obviously no new user is interested in talk page bombarding with Indian ENglish and Banner shell templates which is a fetish of Kkm010 who kept pinging Ponyo and me earlier saying that if we don't unblock him he's going to create more socks. Can someone with the CU tools block this and any other floating around? —SpacemanSpiff 08:51, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

04 October 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

restored sock edit to sock magnet article Indian Armed Forces: [11] [12] [13] Sro23 (talk) 04:31, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

05 October 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

I came to the account because of some spam links and I never recalled Kkm0101 doing that, but then on looking through the contributions, the hallmarks of Kkm010 are there, so bringing here (also more than one account at a time, so CU will be beneficial). Compare this response to a warning to this and also the edit summaries dab fixes for unrelated Indian english template spamming, which is a hallmark of Kkm010. —SpacemanSpiff 09:08, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

09 October 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Really obvious block evasion by Kkm010, adding the Use Indian English template to articles: [14] [15] [16] Sro23 (talk) 18:03, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • Blocked, but I'm leaving open for a CU as there are likely more accounts (there's at least one active IP that I know of now) —SpacemanSpiff 10:32, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • The following accounts are  Confirmed since the last archived SPI:
  • It's always best to ask for a Checkuser in this case as there are generally other accounts lingering about.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:04, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tagged and closing. GABgab 01:22, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

04 November 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

THe master warned Ponyo and me that they'll create more socks if we don't unblock. THis is another one with the same idiosyncrasies [17] -- compare edit summary to the actual change, that's a Kkm010 trademark. We always have multiple socks, so a CU will be very beneficial. —SpacemanSpiff 07:10, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

28 November 2016

Suspected sockpuppets


I do not have a firm evidence, but based on my experience and looking at the edit pattern of both the accounts, I am very certain that the accounts are socks. Please verify. Thanks. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 20:08, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

I have no relation to the above stated account. Hydloc009 (talk) 20:13, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll admit the evidence is pretty thin. I've personally had minimal interaction with the sockmaster only with the accused. I'm convinced that this editor has definitely had prior experience though.

For a new user,

  • Initial edits show quite good prior knowledge on how to edit (edit summaries, template editing (first edit), using talks pages, creating blank userpage and talk beforehand--the sockmaster's puppets used to do this as well)
  • When edit-warring, knew exactly when to backout on the 4th revert at Maharashtra (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views).

If I could point a few similarities, it would be

I wish SpacemanSpiff was here, he has been responsible for most of the previous filings but has been inactive lately. I would warn the editor that this will likely be taken to some AN later if this behaviour continues. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 22:51, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hydloc started editing on 8 Nov 2016 and has 385 edits till now. He has edited 128 unique pages and it is very strange that he edited 30 pages in common with Kkm010. It is common for two editors with high number of edits to have lots of commonly edited pages; but looking at his case - what are the odds? Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 08:26, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I performed editor interaction check for the three socks and interestingly these three have edited 10 pages in common. As I said earlier, it is common for editors with high edit count to have common pages, but someone with barely 400 edits and less than a month old, its highly unlikely. Just FYI. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 08:19, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • I have no doubt that this is Kkm010 and have blocked as a suspected sock. Leaving this open to get a sweep done as we almost never have just one active sock. —SpacemanSpiff 16:25, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hydloc009 is Red X Unrelated. However, Hydloc009 and ה-זפר (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) are  Confirmed to each other. There is a significant amount of article overlap between the two accounts. Interestingly, it is on Indian articles, whereas ה-זפר’s one-year block was for violations of their topic ban related to Palestinian-Israeli articles. Nonetheless, the behavioral and technical evidence is compelling. My plan therefore is to indefinitely block ה-זפר and to tag the two accounts as socks of each other. Before doing so, though, I will wait to see if there is further input.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:59, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have increased the block of ה-זפר to indefinite and reblocked/retagged Hydloc009.  Clerk assistance requested: The only remaining issue is whether we want to create a new case with ה-זפר as the master.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:00, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

03 January 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Kkm010 has a fetish for botlike tasks and this new account has surprisingly found the dead link template and even more surprisingly the date parameter that most regular editors don't use from their very first edit. The creation of multiple accounts is in keeping with the warning to Ponyo and I as to what will happen if we don't unblock. As usual, there are likely to be a few active accounts and so I'm bringing here. —SpacemanSpiff 14:07, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

29 January 2017

Suspected sockpuppets


Check contribution history. Exact same behaviour as previous two socks. "Dead link Specified". The1337gamer (talk) 10:15, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

WP:DUCK. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:47, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply
]

05 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets


Behavior of new user পেতনীপিসি (first edit 27 January 2017) is strikingly similar to that of sockpuppet ה-זפר (indef blocked 30 November 2016).

  • Edits by পেতনীপিসি show remarkable sophistication for a new user. From day one they're using such edit summaries as "wikifying", "wikilinked", and "c/e", and formatting references with named {{cite web}} templates. By their third day of editing they deploy templates including {{third-party}}, {{disputed}}, and {{connected contributor}}, are changing (vandalizing?) a WikiProject template on a talk page, and using undo.
  • Both used usernames in Bengali script (ה-זפר was named বব২৬ until 8 August 2016), which is uncommon on the English Wikipedia.
  • Common pages edited include Bangla, Bangladesh, Talk:Bangladesh, Bengali language, and Languages of Bangladesh. The sockmaster also edited three of these.
  • Both are fixated on edit warring to make the official_language infobox parameter on Bangladesh say "Bangla", with edit summaries obsessed with what the constitution says on the matter. As far as I can tell, these are the only two users to have pushed this point of view in the past several years.

-- Worldbruce (talk) 18:37, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

  • Actually, I opened my account in Bangla wiktionary two months back to contribute there. So I opened my account under the user name পেতনীপিসি in Bangla font as it's Bangla Wiktionary. Then some weeks later while visiting other wikipedias for research purpose, I found out that my account is opened automatically in all other Wikipedias. So I began occasionally contributing.
  • Worldbruce said how I'm using templates so better; well, I'm a researcher; that's why I've been visiting wikipedia everyday for last 10 years. So I know much about how it works; though I've not opened an account, I tried to figure out how it functions, even made a few edits here and there without opening an account. Thanks. - পেতনীপিসি (talk) 20:51, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

The account is Red X Unrelated. I also need to note something related to the archive. On January 3, 2017, Katie found that Bbclenin and Nurealam10 were  Confirmed to each other and  Likely to the master based on "archival evidence". I agree that the two accounts were technically the same, but I don't agree with the  Likely finding. At best, I would have described the accounts as  Unlikely to the master. In other words, I'm not persuaded there is only one master. In addition, on January 29, 2017, NinjaRobotPirate blocked Stabens as a duck. Stabens matches Bbclenin and Nurealam10. In sum, the three accounts were properly blocked, but I don't want other CheckUsers to believe they are necessarily related to Kkm010.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:45, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • While they may are making the same argument that doesn't necessarily mean they are the same and I'm not seeing enough to be convinced that they are. Closing.
     — Berean Hunter (talk) 16:03, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

18 April 2017

Suspected sockpuppets


Note: ה-זפר original account name was বব২৬ that was very active in Bangladesh-related articles (they renamed; this is important for the evidence that follows). FWIW, the ה-זפר changed their name again to David Aaron sometime around the time of getting indef blocked for disruption in Israel-related articles (late 2016).

[A] Both Akib.H and ה-זפר have edited

Bengali calendar article (1, 2
)

[B] Both have edit warred by deleting sources and doing OR. The ה-זפר (aka বব২৬) account edit warred with Redtigerxyz, removing reliable sources and deleting any mention of Sanskrit/Hindu calendar-related content regardless of what the WP:RS are stating (3, 4, etc); Akib.H is doing the same in the Bengali calendar and Talk:Bengali calendar article where বব২৬ used to edit, and in the related

Pahela Baishakh article (5, 6, 7
, etc).

[C] The ignore-the-RS and forum-y style of ה-זפר (aka বব২৬) with Redtigerxyz seems similar to the style of Akib.H (8, 9, 10, etc).

[D] The user:Kkm010 has been an active sock in 2016, with ה-זפר (aka বব২৬) one of the sock IDs active like Akib.H in the same article. Akib.H may be another sleeper account, because Akib.H had never edited either of the two articles before April 2017. I updated these in early April. Suddenly Akib.H reappears, restarts editing an article they have never edited before with considerable interest, deleting content just like ה-זפר (aka বব২৬) alleging personal knowledge (11, 11a), canvassing multiple accounts to help preserve the old version (12, 13, 14). Although these are accounts Akib.H has never or rarely interacted with before, and some of these other accounts have low activity on wikipedia, Akib.H calls them well-informed editors. For these reasons, requesting a check on sleeper accounts related to Akib.H. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 02:10, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  •  Clerk endorsed - it appears that Ms Sarah Welch intended to request Checkuser but did not change the {{SPI case status}} flag to "CU" so the request did not appear in the list. Endorsed, although I think previous accounts are likely stale by now. The account "waking up" to continue a blocked sock's tendentious editing is suspicious. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 20:52, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • The following accounts are  Technically indistinguishable from Akib.H and display behavioural overlaps including edit warring in the same topic area and the use of a webhost to edit:
  • @Ponyo: At least  Likely. "My" accounts' UAs were more diverse. --Bbb23 (talk) 22:35, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

16 August 2017

Suspected sockpuppets


Link to interaction analysis: link shows the articles edited in common. Same interest in mass nomination of company logos for svg conversion: [33], [34]. Addition of often dubious financial data: [35], [36]. Similar interest in ethnic/"nationality" edits (see contribs). Primarily, though, (see archives), I am familiar with this long-term serial socker's posting style and areas of interest, and have very little doubt that this is the latest incarnation. The peculiar combination of "nationality" edits, "financial" edits, and requests for logo conversions at

WP:GL, along with the tone of talk page responses all but removes even that small doubt. In past cases checkuser has revealed additional socks. Thanks for your attention. Begoon 15:47, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply
]

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

04 September 2017

Suspected sockpuppets


This looks like the latest in the "series" to me:

  • Starts editing immediately after last sock, Anandmoorti is blocked.
  • Same peculiar combination of edits to Indian/Ethnicity/Financial "data".
  • Article overlap on 23 articles with last sock after just 110 edits: [37], 26 with master: [38]
  • Absolutely identical, idiosyncratic edit summaries: [39],[40] - [41],[42]
  • Lots of other peculiarly similar summaries.

Checkuser requested because it often reveals additional socks in this case.
Thanks for your attention. Begoon 03:30, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

22 September 2017

Suspected sockpuppets


Next duck in the row:

  • Starts editing immediately after last sock, Priyansh55 is blocked.
  • Same edits to Indian/Financial "data".
  • Same idiosyncratic edit summaries: [43],[44], [45]
  • Lots of other peculiarly similar summaries.

Just also noticed this revert from Sro23 - [46], (see editsum).

Checkuser requested because it often reveals additional socks in this case.
Thanks for your attention. Begoon 12:11, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

30 October 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

[47] [48] [49] [50]

WP:DUCK. Sro23 (talk) 08:07, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply
]

Comments by other users

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

I'm new to wikipedia just two weeks been here how come you are connecting me with User:KKM010 and moreover who the hale is this user KKM010. There is some serious misunderstanding going on. Please correct. Does anybody who is new to wikipedia is actually a sock puppet. what is surprising why are you connecting me with User:kkm0101. --Shanaya1 (talk) 08:35, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

04 November 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

[51][52][53][54] Obviously him. —MBlaze Lightning T 07:41, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

12 November 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Kkm010 is still evading his block using various IP addresses. The IPs listed here are the ones Kkm010 have been editing from recently. Could an admin block the IPs or do a range block? Thanks. —MBL Talk 04:41, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Now using 2405:204:4388:703D:BC89:35:14CE:CD1B (talk · contribs · (/64) · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). —MBL Talk 04:56, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

04 December 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

New account repeating what the last sock added to Economy of India: [55] [56]. Also note [57] and [58]. Sro23 (talk) 04:39, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

22 February 2018

Suspected sockpuppets

What stood out to me about this user was the focus on Economy of India ([59] [60]) reminiscent of previous Kkm010 sockpuppets, as well as the edit summaries (compare "dead link replaced" with "dead link Specified"). Sro23 (talk) 00:04, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  •  Blocked and tagged. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 03:36, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

25 April 2018

Suspected sockpuppets

Same old, same old editing habits and obsession with "economy of X" countries. Same idiosyncratic edit summaries: [65][66][67][68][69][70][71][72] MBlaze Lightning talk 12:09, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  •  Clerk endorsed - per evidence provided. Please check for additional accounts. Sro23 (talk) 01:57, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Confirmed to Aadhira68. There's some logged-out editing but no obvious sleepers. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:14, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

03 May 2018

Suspected sockpuppets

Obvious sock, created just a couple days after last CU confirmed sock, Vivaan65, was blocked.[73] Same edits at North America.[74][75] Same idiosyncratic edit summaries: [76][77] MBlaze Lightning talk 14:18, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 Confirmed, blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:06, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

18 July 2018

Suspected sockpuppets

Vivaan56's username is basically a replica of Vivaan65; he just switched the digits. The suspected sock shares the same obsession with articles related to economies of countries as master and other CU confirmed socks, made exactly the same edits on a number of articles as past socks (e.g., see the following diffs: 1, 2, 3, 4). Quacking is too loud; it can't get any more obvious than this. I have also noticed some logged out editing. MBlaze Lightning talk 08:46, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 Confirmed, blocked and tagged.--Bbb23 (talk) 10:58, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

29 July 2018

Suspected sockpuppets

1, 2, 3—same old, same old. MBlaze Lightning talk 07:07, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 IP blocked temporarily. DrKay (talk) 09:41, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

17 August 2018

Suspected sockpuppets

Quack, quack. Need I say more? MBlaze Lightning talk 05:55, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  •  IP blocked. The range is too busy for more aggressive measures. GABgab 21:30, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

01 June 2019

Suspected sockpuppets


  • Same edits to Indian/Financial "data".
  • Same idiosyncratic edit summaries: [78],[79], [80],
  • Many, many summaries of "Copy edit" when all sorts of material changes are also made
  • Lots of other peculiarly similar summaries.
  • One of many previous socks was named Priyansh55

Pinging Sro23 as familiar with this case.

Checkuser requested because it often reveals additional socks in this case. Begoon 05:39, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • This case is  Stale. CU declined.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:54, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • This case is being reviewed by 1997kB as part of the clerk training process. Please allow him to process the entire case without interference, and pose any questions or concerns either on his Talk page or on this page if more appropriate.
  •  Clerk note: Similar username, edit summary pattern and area of interest.  Looks like a duck to me. Pink clock Awaiting administrative action: Please indef the sock. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 16:15, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Blocked and tagged. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:59, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20 July 2019

Suspected sockpuppets


  • Account created when previous sock blocked
  • Similar username format to previous socks
  • Same focus on Indian financial updates - in particular Tata Motors, subsidiaries and Infosys always favourites
  • Continues, as previous sock Priyansh90 had done, to solicit edits from Vibhss: [81], [82], [83], [84], [85]
  • Requesting CU to check as sleepers often found Begoon 05:47, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

  • Bbb23 - I hadn't actually realised the batches of sleepers found in checks were mostly a couple of years ago or more, but if you look in the archives you'll see it did happen on a few consecutive occasions (you found 6 or 7 yourself here and there were some other 'batches' around that time). I guess I just got used to adding that note since these reports have gone on for ever... Priyansh90 should be recent enough to check here I hope, and the evidence for that connection is above. -- Begoon 15:45, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

@Begoon: Evidence of "sleepers often found"?--Bbb23 (talk) 15:07, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am guessing it's a reference to Ponyo's comments from 2016 and 2017 in the archive. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:38, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Blocked, tagged, closing. Sro23 (talk) 02:43, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18 September 2019

Suspected sockpuppets

See the edits done by previous sock: (Aakanksha55) from edit 2019-09-02T06:30:03‎ and forward, which were reverted (not by me).

I haven't seen any abusive use of this account in edit wars or RfC's, nor do I have any problems with this editor; I'm just starting this because it appears suspicious. Thanks. ---Avatar317(talk) 23:19, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

  • Obviously early days, but the edit summary style looks consistent with this sockmaster (with whom I am very familiar). Given the specific edits and details from Avatar317 above I'd say it certainly warrants looking into. In other words - yes, I think that's very probably Kkm010. -- Begoon 03:07, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 Confirmed to previous socks + AnanyaKaur (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:57, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14 October 2019

Suspected sockpuppets


Thank you for your time. Begoon 06:27, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • Technically, I think the best I can do is  Likely. Behaviorally, looks like a match.  Blocked and tagged ST47 (talk) 23:50, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17 December 2019

Suspected sockpuppets


Account created 13 days after previous sock User:Caseasauria blocked.

Account has done edits that look remarkably similar to previous editing by blocked sock User:GustavEklund on Economy of the United States, and appears to edit similar articles about Indian people.

Pinging Begoon who seems much more familiar with this editor's behavior than I.

I haven't seen any abusive use of this account in edit wars or RfC's, nor do I have any problems with this editor; I'm just starting this because it appears suspicious. Thanks. ---Avatar317(talk) 04:34, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

  • Yes, thanks for the ping. It looks like an obvious duck to me, just from my long experience of Kkm010. I haven't had time to do a thorough analysis to present here, but, as always, the user gives themself away by the combination of Indian ethnic/corporate/financial articles they edit, and the use of edit summaries like "scrapped" and "corrections done", "sources updated", which are idiosyncratic. Also they share the habit of the most recent sock editing "ideologies" of Indian political parties (and calling it that...)([98], [99], [100], [101] / [102], [103], [104], [105]). I'd frankly be utterly astonished if this was not Kkm010 (just as I'd be astonished if they ever stopped serial socking...) -- Begoon 02:36, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • Obvious sock blocked. Closing. Sro23 (talk) 04:29, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

02 March 2020

Suspected sockpuppets


Created right after the last sock was caught. Same interests with updating

far-right,[113][114] and more. Aman Kumar Goel(Talk) 06:14, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply
]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • This case is being reviewed by 1997kB as part of the clerk training process. Please allow him to process the entire case without interference, and pose any questions or concerns either on his Talk page or on this page if more appropriate.
  • Pink clock Awaiting administrative action - Obvious sock, indef please. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 13:42, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nothing left to do, closing. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 10:38, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


04 March 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Still socking: [115][116] D4iNa4 (talk) 04:28, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • This case is being reviewed by 1997kB as part of the clerk training process. Please allow him to process the entire case without interference, and pose any questions or concerns either on his Talk page or on this page if more appropriate.
  • Pink clock Awaiting administrative action - Please block the IP for a week.‐‐1997kB (talk) 06:13, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    •  IP blocked — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:16, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15 April 2020

Suspected sockpuppets


Deep interest in Indian Muslim-related subjects.[117][118]

Abusing clearly same IP range as the one which was blocked sometime ago per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Kkm010/Archive#12_November_2017 by multiple admins like NinjaRobotPirate, SpacemanSpiff. Geolocation is clearly same as the last blocked IP.[119] Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 10:00, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • I'm not convinced by this. As stated in the archive, this range is very busy and the topic that this IP is editing is obviously very big at the moment - it's not surprising that an IP in this range is editing this topic. Closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:16, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10 May 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Same obsession with GDP numbers. These three edits[120][121][122] are explanatory enough. D4iNa4 (talk) 07:19, 10 May 2020 (UTC) D4iNa4 (talk) 07:19, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • Blocked most recently active IP for 2 weeks. Closing. Sro23 (talk) 05:57, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13 August 2020

Suspected sockpuppets


Account registered after 2 weeks range block was made on 10 May.[123] Don't know if CU can be helpful, since everything in archives look stale now. But Sro23 might be helpful given he is still around.

Of all, this "copy edit" on

WP:DUCKTEST
.

Other than that:

Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 08:50, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • Yup. Blocked and tagged. Sro23 (talk) 09:22, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

22 June 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Same economy related updates on Delhi,[144][145], Economy of China,[146][147] Gujarat,[148][149] Maharashtra,[150][151] template addition on Hindutva,[152][153], modifying "ideology" of Biju Janata Dal[154][155], etc.

@1997kB and Sro23:  Looks like a duck to me. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 08:47, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • CU  Clerk declined - previous accounts are likely  Stale. After spending some time looking at this I'm pretty confident that this is indeed a sock. There's a large amount of overlap with previous accounts [156], similar focus on articles related to world economies and Indian politics and corporations, similar edit summaries (esp. prolific use of "copy edit" for things that aren't copy edits) and most distinctively, an unusual habit of adding bundled sources to lead sections [157][158][159][160]. Pink clock Awaiting administrative action - please indef Mariam57 as a suspected sockpuppet of Kkm010. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 05:28, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Blocked and tagged. Closing. --Blablubbs (talk) 06:15, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

05 July 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

All of the IP edits are resotring Mariam57's Wikipredia project talk page posts.

The IP is also using the edit summary "cmt" when removing or updating projects on talk. Mariam57 did the same.

115.98.24.214 is doing the exact same in readding the WikiProject Asia to talk where it was removed, using the same edit summary as 115.98.179.41.

Pikavoom Talk 06:45, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • 115.98.24.214 is inactive by now, but I gave 115.98.179.41 31 hours off. Cf. [161]. Closing. --Blablubbs (talk) 15:58, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

08 July 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Latest IP after the Mariam57 block, following [162][163][164][165]. CMD (talk) 04:38, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, 2601:19e:4180:6d50::3aa4 tried to remove part of this report. Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 07:31, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • IP is now blocked. The IPv6 is not related, wrong continent and they were actually trying to revert the 27... IP. Closing. Spicy (talk) 09:36, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

05 December 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Similar username to previous socks (female name + numbers, cf. Mariam57, Amrita62, Genevieve99). Same interest in Indian politics and world economies [166]. Same edit summaries [167][168][169][170], [171][172][173][174], [175][176][177][178], usual use of "copy edit" for things that aren't copyedits. Spicy (talk) 00:49, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • Pink clock Awaiting administrative action - please indef Angelika789 as a suspected sock. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 00:50, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Blocked and tagged Closing Sro23 (talk) 03:13, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

17 May 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Edit warring to restore own edit.[179][180][181]

Same edits on West Bengal.[182][183]

Obsessed with adding "WikiProject Discrimination" to Hindutva topics.[184][185][186][187]

Ping Spicy and Sro23. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 06:44, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

How on earth could you link me with other users just on the basis that WP discrimination was added to Hindutva articles? I mean, this is ridiculous. You've got to provide some hard evidence. I added WP Discrimination to two articles because, in the main article, discrimination against minority communities, especially Muslims, is evident. And for that, sources have also been provided. And you are linking me with other users, which is pretty strange. The basic tenets of Hindutva, or Hindu nationalism, are discriminatory by nature. I also noticed an entire article created on

Hindu nationalist ideology propagate hatred towards minority communities. I added a WP project to only one article, and on that basis, you are immediately linking with other users.--LinnéaBørresen (talk) 08:36, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

22 September 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Pro forma. firefly ( t · c ) 20:29, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  •  Confirmed to each other and  Likely to master via log data. Closing. firefly ( t · c ) 20:31, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

16 October 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Apparently, the user Glcris first started removing information on September 1st. Today, I noticed that this user also started removing the same information, while also providing a nearly identical edit summary. Please check to see if they are doing sockpuppetry. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 14:56, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, please make sure to look at CrUtRIs6, not Glcris, because Glcris is already blocked. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 14:57, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

CrUtRls6 is  Confirmed to Glcris, already blocked as a sock of this master. Blocking etc. Girth Summit (blether) 15:26, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

20 October 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

User talk. Chronikhiles (talk) 05:54, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Kkm010/Archive&oldid=1183432905"