Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/KaranSharma0445/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


KaranSharma0445

KaranSharma0445 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

05 April 2018

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

It smells something fishy here. Both editors are editing in the same area and KaranSharma0445 created Sharvind Page's article Draft:Divya Agarwal in mainspace and blanked Draft:Divya Agarwal using an IP address. Sharvind Page also blanked Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Manveer Gurjar. GSS (talk|c|em) 07:02, 5 April 2018 (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 May 2018

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Same username as "Sharvind Page" who was blocked by TonyBallioni and repeating the same kind of editing e.g. blanking Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Manveer Gurjar. GSS (talk|c|em) 07:47, 6 May 2018 (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 July 2018

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Same username styling FirstnameSlastname###, overlapping edits here with VarunKhurana326 and disruptive page moves. Requesting CU only because they usually have several at once. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 17:10, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

Adding VishalSingh209: compare the two accounts' edits to Krystle D'Souza: [1], [2]. TMGtalk 18:13, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

16 August 2018

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Overlap here, recreation of Fear Factor: Khatron Ke Khiladi 3, Fear Factor: Khatron Ke Khiladi + naming convention (KS4numbers) CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 14:19, 16 August 2018 (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 October 2018

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Quite the coincidence they've recreated Benafsha Soonawalla, Nitibha Kaul, Renee Dhyani (Pakistanpedia), Lucinda Nicholas, Sapna Chaudhary (2 sock farms), Priyanka Jagga (AdnanAliFaizal) Praxidicae (talk) 16:04, 4 October 2018 (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]


05 October 2018

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Editing in the same area and recreated all recently deleted article including Sapna Chaudhary (dancer). GSS (talk|c|em) 08:25, 5 October 2018 (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 October 2018

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Similar username as their previous sock PoSharvind (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and recreated Manveer Gurjar. GSS (talk|c|em) 11:55, 21 October 2018 (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 October 2018

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Here we go with another one, recreating all their deleted articles. GSS (talk|c|em) 15:58, 21 October 2018 (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 + Sahara1246 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki).  Blocked and tagged. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:16, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

26 October 2018

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Both editing in the same area and recreated Divya Agarwal. Usernameace was registered a day before Stud0708 and their previous sock DipikaKakar346 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). GSS (talk|c|em) 09:48, 26 October 2018 (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]


14 November 2018

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

The suspected sock was registered at the same time Berean Hunter blocked their previous sock and recreated their deleted article Renee Dhyani in one go and repeated the same edit at Bigg Boss (Hindi season 8) (please see the history). GSS (talk|c|em) 12:29, 14 November 2018 (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,  Blocked and tagged.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 08:12, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

25 January 2019

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

The suspected sock first made some random edits to reach the autoconfirmed status and then repeated the same edit as their previous sock Karanvir2146 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). The article is currently semi-protected. GSS (talk|c|em) 13:43, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

Hi I'm not a sock puppet of Karan Sharma. Stop lying and trying to ban me or defame me on wikipedia. I wont do any more move pages and will be carefull. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by DipikaKum123 (talk • contribs) 15:52, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The suspected sock also repeated a page move of Shastri Sisters already proposed by this master and rejected by consensus in 2018, without any further discussion. General Ization Talk 15:36, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Berean Hunter, could you take a look at this SPI? It has been open but (seemingly) unprocessed for 6 days, during which the suspected sock has made nearly 100 disruptive edits. Thanks. General Ization Talk 13:59, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Was looking at this while pinged.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 14:01, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

13 April 2019

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

These editors all have an obsession with BLP articles, primarily Deepika Singh. After discussion suspicions on IRC, it was concluded that User:ArjunSharma98 was most likely User:KaranSharma0445. I came across these socks when User:Nora Fatehi went to Oshwah's talk page to complain about Arjun which seemed odd -User_talk:Oshwah#this_user_is_giving_me_trouble_2.

For what it's worth, NoraHatehi231 did make a socking allegation about ArjunSharma98 as a suspected sock of User:IsntItCinema which is a sockpuppet of User:Dimpletisha. Dusti*Let's talk!* 14:15, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Comments by other users

[edit]

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

I am not a sock puppet of Karan Sharma why are you doing this I am not at fault I told you i am sorry about it. and plus I am just a fan of these actors so just adding what is right. I dont know who this rizvi or karan is. PLease stop this just so I can't edit on wiki. Its not nice your making me upset wth these false accusations. Nora Fatehi (Talk/Edits) 17:41, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

I've removed RizkiMadani9 from the list as they are a sock of another master. ArjunSharma98 is confirmed as Dimpletisha. I'll check Nora Fatehi now.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:23, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Confirmed, blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:39, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17 May 2019

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Same editing pattern. Straight to recreating deleted templates (with edit summary "again") and editing BLPs of Big Boss series. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 10:11, 17 May 2019 (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 believe the recent accounts and IPs are the same sock farm with the same agenda, this being the most recent SPI case account that I saw from template's history. But I don't know which exact account they would be. KaranSharma0445 account was the one reverting redirects without explanation on the templates that I reverted back to redirects except the CfDed ones. As for being sock, first edits to recreate a template. Immediately reverting a sock edit. Readding same info as reverted sock edit. Edits since filing this are all to Big Boss BLPs (as expected). I previously inquired User:Ponyo about IPs doing these types of edits before, but I don't know who the sockmaster is (due to privacy). This, not being an IP, I can't check the geolocation. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 11:05, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

01 July 2019

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

IP editor trying to force same edit [3] as KaranSharma0445 [4]. IP has same focus on Bigg Boss shows and related articles as KaranSharma0445. Ravensfire (talk) 21:46, 1 July 2019 (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 October 2019

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Same IP range, same editing pattern, using same language, DUCK —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 22:00, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

[5] is telling. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 09:24, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

04 October 2019

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Very DUCKy again, same sockfarm. Same sort of edits to same articles. Like [6][7] or [8][9] and other examples. Articles like Bigg Boss Tamil 2 is protected, so presumably they have to use an account again instead of dynamic IP hopping. As usual, ignoring talk page messages while making bad edits like changing colors, styling, removing templates, adding lots of unsourced material, etc. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 08:20, 4 October 2019 (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]

07 October 2019

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Seems to follow the same exact pattern -- same sort of edits on same articles adding the same type of trivia with no summaries. Became active after socks and IPs got banned and articles protected. Talk page messages ignored like other accounts. Looks like DUCK to me again, although I am not 100% sure. In any case, SPA and promo-only/meatpuppet at best. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 11:51, 7 October 2019 (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]

Special Editor 2019 is Red X Unrelated but is  Confirmed to LoggoL (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki).  Blocked without tags.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:23, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20 October 2019

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Being disruptive again by restoring reverted edits. Very DUCK to me. Edits like [10][11] which is exactly what was reverted before. Same IP range/location. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 10:29, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

I said I am not and just doing my own bit, this user is keep stalking me. Cant she just leave me alone its very annoying and harrasment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.152.177.69 (talk) 11:48, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@RoySmith: Sorry for not being more specific. See User_talk:Ponyo/Archive_44#Recent_IP_block. I assumed I shouldn't link more info per that comment. Previous IP examples 2 Oct and 1 Jul from Ealing, Northolt. The edits are the same narrow set of Big Boss articles and people who participated on the show. I'm also unsure what information you guys have when you check these or what tools you use when geolocate IPs. (Although, by this time, they will just hop to a different IP. At least there would be a past record for the future cases.) —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 13:41, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see your dilemma. There's two different flavors of "us guys". I'm a garden-variety admin. I have the low-budget secret decoder ring that lets me see articles that have been deleted. That's not super-secret, since everything I can see has at one time been visible to the public (and may, in fact, still exist on some mirror site). Some (very small number of) admins, called checkusers, get special fancy secret decoder rings that let them have access to highly confidential information, like what IP address a given edit was done from. There's two rules that control their access to that. One is that they're not even allowed to look at that unless there's already a strong case that socking is likely. The other is that once they've looked, they're not allowed to share that information except in the broadest and vaguest way. That's what Ponyo meant when he said, As a checkuser I can't link the IPs to the actual master account publically due to our privacy policy. But, any information that you've got from publicly available sources on the wiki, you're free to summarize here in a SPI case. You don't have access to anything confidential, so there's no restriction on what you can do with the information you have. What you can't do, however, is bring in information from off-wiki. Let's say you personally know an editor. You can't say, "I know User:JohnDoe, he's a classmate of mine in school; I've watched him log into three different wiki accounts in the school library, where the IP address is w.x.y.z". That would be WP:OUTING. People get banned for that. But, as long as you stick to information which publicly available on the wiki, you're good. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:57, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
  4 109.152.176.134
  1 109.152.176.146
  5 109.152.176.171
  1 109.152.176.192
  5 109.152.176.215
 16 109.152.176.246
  9 109.152.176.247
 25 109.152.177.7
 68 109.152.177.9
  1 109.152.177.13
 14 109.152.177.29
  2 109.152.177.36
 27 109.152.177.69
 20 109.152.177.99
  5 109.152.177.119
 54 109.152.178.72
 64 109.152.178.114
  9 109.152.178.121

and those ranges are stable going back over the entire time span. Other titles edited in that range mostly look related to Indian TV/Movies. So, I propose to soft block 109.152.176.0/22 for a year, pending a CU check for legitimate users in that range. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:47, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The collateral damage would be negligible.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:19, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
So shall it be written, so shall it be blocked. -- RoySmith (talk) 21:35, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21 October 2019

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Looks DUCKy again. Same sort of edits to same sort of articles. markup knowledge from the get go. For example, [12] vs [13]. May be this is LoggoL again though, since their edits overlap a lot. The timestamp gaps between edits of Special:Contributions/109.152.177.69 in previous report is uncanny. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 12:36, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

I think this is actually a sock of Satish Raman Nair. They've editing several of the same articles (see Mersal (soundtrack) and Petta (soundtrack) which were created by the master. The similar name reinforces that SRN is the correct master. Ravensfire (talk) 15:21, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

On second more careful look, I think Ravensfire is right that this is not the same person. They certainly behaved like someone with a new account but clearly not the first time editing. I jumped the DUCK on this one due to a readdition of content I saw, sorry. But apparently they are still fishy as per above? Anyway, the time ranges I meant were the last from contributions:

  • 08:30, October 20, 2019 - 08:31, October 20, 2019 -- IP
  • 10:47, October 20, 2019 - 11:15, October 20, 2019 -- Account
  • 11:48, October 20, 2019 - 12:25, October 20, 2019 -- IP
  • 12:30, October 20, 2019 - 16:40, October 20, 2019 -- Account

I guess this was just a coincidence as they have a tiny overlap of edit times earlier. I just wish there was an easier tool to compare these. I assumed a CU can just take a quick look at the account's last IP(s) and either say "Yes" or "No", because it sure takes us mortal folk a long time to make these conclusions, especially since those Big Boss articles are a gigantic mess. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 16:19, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There's a few tools that anybody can use. Click the "Editor interaction utility", "Interaction Timeline", and "User compare report" links above. I find the timeline one the most useful, but there's still plenty of room for better tools to be written. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:25, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Any updates on this report? If you look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Satish_Raman_Nair/Archive, you'll see this likely sock and prior accounts have the same fixation on creating non-notable soundtrack articles. There's going to be a decent amount of cleanup from this sock, once they are blocked. Ravensfire (talk) 16:24, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@RoySmith:, forgot the ping on this ... Ravensfire (talk) 16:26, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

@Hellknowz: again, you need to be more specific. You say, The timestamp gaps between edits of Special:Contributions/109.152.177.69 in previous report is uncanny. Which gaps? Compared to what? Pretend you were somebody who didn't know any history of this case and was trying to figure it out from what's presented here, i.e. put yourself in my shoes. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:14, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Already blocked, so closing. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:55, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

26 October 2019

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

The suspected sock was registered 10 days after VarunRandhawa333 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) was blocked. Editing in the same area and moved Mahira Sharma to main that was created by VR333. GSS 💬 12:03, 26 October 2019 (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]

 Looks like a duck to me blocked, tagged, closing — Preceding unsigned comment added by RoySmith (talk • contribs) 14:20, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

03 November 2019

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

New account created a few days after prior sock Imwet was blocked. Has similar curt edit summaries ("Added", "Updated"). Editor interaction is rather high with past two socks [14]. Ravensfire (talk) 15:39, 3 November 2019 (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,  Blocked and tagged.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 18:16, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

22 January 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Account created in 2017, but significant activity didn't start until January of this year, a week or so after the last KS sock was blocked. Showed strong familiarity with Wikipedia from the start. Editor interaction is pretty high - [15] Ravensfire (talk) 13:41, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

Red X Unrelated, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:09, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

08 February 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

See previous case. Same geolocation (Northolt, Ealing, UK), same topic area and same articles. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 15:09, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

09 February 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

New account, straight to same Bigg Boss article area, overlap with IPs from the same geolocation, reporting a recently active one (although they usually go stale instantly). Similar sounding name and use of number and "kkk" like User:KKK90. Articles where both edited like Devoleena Bhattacharjee, Madhurima Tuli or Vishal Aditya Singh all have this master confirmed, for example as User:ShehnaazGill1210. Asking for a CU to root out any other accounts and because it's such a broad range of IPs I don't know where to begin finding potential ones. Every tenth of so IP from the IP ranges have been editing Bigg Boss related articles over years. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 10:57, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

17 February 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Active IP. I guess edit summary of [16] is probably enough. In any case, same articles and same geolocation. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 15:07, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

She is keep on doing this its like im not aloud to edit on wikipedia. I am not even doing anything wrong. User:Hellknowz without any proof how can she just accuse anyone like this. this is harrassment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.148.212.251 (talk) 15:11, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • And I don't see how anyone would believe their apology or that they understood anything in the slightest. They got banned in the first place, have circumvented the ban, edit warred, hidden new accounts, pretended under accounts, IP hopped, and even made legal threats. Their actions and sockpuppet archive page speak for themselves. It is obvious they will deceive others to achieve their goals and have absolutely no regard for Wikipedia policies until they get caught. Their disruptive edits have wasted more editor time than they could ever hope to offset with their good edits. There is zero reason to ever allow them to edit Wikipedia. It just sucks that they are editing from broad dynamic IP ranges and there's no way to block without collateral damage. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 15:53, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This area (Indian television and film) has a decent number of highly active and unrepentant (until caught!) socks that I would love to see Wikipedia improve the CU system with an automated tool to periodically check new users against known signatures and notify CU's on any highly positive matches for further review. I know, technical limitation and potential privacy issues, but something like this would be so nice here and in the other areas with high sock activity levels (and help reduce some of the paid editing too!). Ravensfire (talk) 16:44, 17 February 2020 (UTC) [reply]

User:Ravensfire please listen i am really sorry dont do this i have understood please give a chance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.148.212.251 (talk) 15:40, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Could someone create an LTA page for the vandal? The abuse has continued for two years now and the user page of the master tells that the user has been banned from Wikipedia for persistent sockpuppetry. I personally think an LTA page is in order. -- JavaHurricane 17:28, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
  • 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 2 weeks. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 16:56, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14 April 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Similar focus of editing, use of edit summaries with "Added" and "Update", recreated Mahira Sharma. Please confirm and check for sleepers. MrClog (talk) 09:54, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

No one except me and a bot and a patroller has edited the page Mahira Sharma. She is a famous TV personality but without a Wikipedia page, so I decided to create one for her. And I'm not at all related to User:KaranSharma0445. And this User:KaranSharma0445 never created a page of Mahira Sharma, he was just busy simply moving pages.

-User:ImPritamShaw(talk) 14:46, 14 April 2020 (GMT)

  • Comment - also has overlaps with admitted IP sock 86.148.212.251 to Rashami Desai, Arti Singh and Paras Chhabra, probably more as well. I'm not 100% sure on this as I've been fooled on earlier KS socks, and some of their areas of interest don't feel like the normal KS sock. They did hit Fear Factor: Khatron Ke Khiladi 10 and Bigg Boss (Hindi season 13) which are pretty common KS targets. Ravensfire (talk) 15:04, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I saw their edits before and it didn't strike me as anything obvious. Most edits have issues, with some pretty bad sourcing issues. But these articles/people are common "targets" for the topic subject. The account isn't new, but it did start editing only after all IP ranges got blocked. It feels like a coincidence, although a checkuser can probably quickly tell. They edited a bunch of other stuff before, including a school, which inadvertently suggests their affiliation. I am also not sure if they are using canned summaries or what, which is why they are in that form. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 15:26, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mz7, is there any connection per the technical data with any other sockfarm? -- JavaHurricane 02:36, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@JavaHurricane: Nothing stood out to me immediately—I mainly compared the data of this account with the data of the two suspected sockmasters. If you have compelling behavioral evidence suggesting a connection to a different sockmaster, I would be happy to rerun the check. Mz7 (talk) 02:39, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Mz7, Thanks for running the check. This editor *feels* like a sock of someone, but there's nothing I can point to specifically for behavioral evidence. There are too many active sockmasters in the Indian film and tv area and lots of enthusiastic new editors that are good at following existing examples. Some meat puppetry as well, but I don't think that's happening here. I'll put them in the enthusiastic new editor group. Thanks for the check! Ravensfire (talk) 16:23, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

28 May 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Same IP range and similar area of edits. Same types of edit on Bigg Boss and contestants of bigg boss and also on Devoleena Bhattacharjee Jhalak Dikhhla Jaa. Princepratap1234 (talk) 08:36, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

1 and 2, same statements like get back guest appearances of Hina khan and mentioning Sidharth Shukla who was not related to a topic. Princepratap1234 (talk) 16:40, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

28 May 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Same geo location which is UK , Ealing and editing only Indian TV shows. Princepratap1234 (talk) 12:54, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

Oh look, they're back. There was an IP range block for a year before during which we didn't (presumably) see them much. After that, they've been sneakier. But I really don't see any other solution that doesn't involve tremendous waste of editor time. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 13:46, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Hellknowz, they were active but we couldn't catch them. [17] , [18], [19] all these were active but nobody suspected them. They all are sock puppets. Princepratap1234 (talk) 14:03, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

28 May 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Same geo location and same area of interest. Similar types of edits. Princepratap1234 (talk) 13:19, 28 May 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]

28 May 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

only edits indian tv shows and same edit history with same edit summary. Princepratap1234 (talk) 14:24, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Princepratap1234, Please see the request for more information, below. If you can't supply the required information, we'll have to close this with no action taken. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:50, 10 June 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]
  • I have temporarily blocked the suspected sockpuppet as they were continuing to disrupt the investigation. SuperMarioMan (Talk) 09:23, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Check declined by a checkuser. Unfortunately, all previous sockpuppets of this master are now  Stale. Additionally, we will probably need more information than this to make a decision about the account.  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.

01 July 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Account created on 6/1 after prior suspected sock (Roshnikaur123) was blocked for blanking the SPI. Like many KS socks, the account name follows a common pattern. Similar edit summaries to most recent prior sock [20] vs [21], [22] and [23] vs [24], [25], [26]

Shows strong interest in Bigg Boss articles, a common focus for KS socks. Easy smoking gun are these revertings [27], [28] removing tags from long ago KS socks. Ravensfire (talk) 13:35, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also a lot of activity on 109.158.70.0/24 [29] which is a common range for KS socks. Ravensfire (talk) 13:51, 1 July 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]

27 July 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Originally reported Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/KaranSharma0445/Archive#28_May_2021_3, but closed due to lack of information from reporter. Roshnikaur123 stopped editing after the report, but started up today. Several of their edits today [30] and [31] are returning information I removed as being added by the prior KS sock. The last one in particular is telling - it's just pure fancruft that KS loves to add to Bigg Boss articles. Ravensfire (talk) 20:46, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sock removed a comment here [32] from another user. Probably will be reverting edits as a WP:DUCK soon to limit the disruption. Ravensfire (talk) 19:45, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Adding 82.47.210.111 IP - recent edits have all been to articles that Roshnikaur123 has edited. Ravensfire (talk) 19:18, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

I am not a sock puppet. Please let me edit it. I am not doing anything wrong. I won't add fancruft things. Please let me edit Wikipedia.

User:Ravensfire User:Hellknowz I am sock ks so please block me. User:RoySmith I will never come back here again. I am the Person so please block.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

01 September 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Started just after prior sock swore off editing [36] (ahh, the sincerity...). And new sock promptly jumps right into the same areas - indian reality TV shows and actors. Shows same interest in Devoleena Bhattacharjee date of birth - [37] and [38]. Same warning people about using images with watermarks - [39] vs [40]. Same image preference [41] vs [42]. Ravensfire (talk) 02:19, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

Also this is telling. They keep saying one thing and then doing another thing. Then they get caught and they get confrontational. And it's clear from their comment that they have not bothered to even look at the "rules". After all this time, they still don't understand all the problems with their editing and have a complete disregard of the community and consensus. And that doesn't even begin to address lieing and socking. I wish we could just DENY and BANREVERT promptly but the broad topic of interest, huge IP range, getting caught late, evidence gathering and CU queue makes it a massive waste of time for everyone. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 12:06, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Pretty much everything just said. Also, why do I bother discussing with them at all? Like I think they will change? Ravensfire (talk) 12:12, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
  • In addition to the evidence provided above, I've spotted a curious commonality in the writings of Kevin and several earlier confirmed socks. That's enough for me to call this proven. In our last episode, I blocked Roshnikaur123 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) as NOTHERE; since they exhibit this same behavior, I'll change that to sock/proven. FWIW, back in January, Princepratap1234 was also suspected of being a sock and found unrelated by CU; I'll add that I checked their edits and don't see this behavior, confirming CU's technical finding.
I'm going to leave this open and ask another clerk to look at this and consider endorsing for a sleeper check, or just close it if you don't think it's worth doing. -- RoySmith (talk) 18:35, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16 March 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Same IP range and geoloaction is england. Editing Indian(Hindi) TV shows. 2409:4063:6C15:FC4A:4D63:DD37:E795:A5A (talk) 13:14, 16 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]
  •  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) 02:15, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/KaranSharma0445/Archive&oldid=1081769434"