Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BaharatlıCheetos2.0: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 17:45, 22 July 2024

BaharatlıCheetos2.0

BaharatlıCheetos2.0 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

For archived investigations, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BaharatlıCheetos2.0/Archive.

30 June 2024

– A user has requested CheckUser, but more information is required before deciding whether to check.

Suspected sockpuppets

BaharatlıCheetos2.0'ın devamı (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Tools: Editor interaction utility · Interaction Timeline · SPI Tools

Per their talk page, BaharatlıCheetos2.0 has been warned nine times by other editors in the month since their account was created, including two warnings for edit warring and one warning for using multiple accounts or coordinated editing. The BaharatlıCheetos2.0'ın devamı account was created within two days after the most recent warning given to BaharatlıCheetos2.0. A quick comparison of edits by BaharatlıCheetos2.0 and BaharatlıCheetos2.0'ın devamı shows that, of the five articles edited by BaharatlıCheetos2.0'ın devamı, three were also edited by BaharatlıCheetos2.0. Furthermore, the largest number of edits made by both accounts were to a single, recently created article, Anglo-Turkish war of 1918–1923. This edit by BaharatlıCheetos2.0'ın devamı refers to the article as "my article" despite being ostensibly a new user. Huntthetroll (talk) 21:06, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Hi everybody, I have suspected as its socks or as acting in a set the next editors: Turkabdulhamitci (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki), Emre1071qoeo (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki), Sadifan (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). User:88.236.184.51 and a lot of IPs active on the article Greco-Turkish War (1919–1922). Jingiby (talk) 16:05, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Firefangledfeathers, the edits of this group of participants have a strict thematic orientation and coincide in time, and my intuition tells me that they may be related in any way. Jingiby (talk) 05:00, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I am not sure. Judging strictly by edits to Hellenic Army, (revert 1, revert 2, warning) Jingiby warned BaharatlıCheetos2.0 immediately after BaharatlıCheetos2.0 added information to Hellenic Army that was similar to an edit that Jingiby had previously reverted. Huntthetroll (talk) 16:20, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In the interest of full disclosure, I should note that the newer account's Turkish Wikipedia page explicitly states the following:

BaharatlıCheetos2.0 hesabını yanlışlıkla ahirete kavuşturduğumdan dolayı buradan devam edeceğim.

Turukkiler maddesinin şu anki halinin baş mimârı.
— User:BaharatlıCheetos2.0'ın_devamı

As translated by Google Translate:

Since I accidentally brought the SpicyCheetos2.0 account to the afterlife, I will continue from here.

The chief architect of the current state of the Turukki article.

I don't speak Turkish myself, so I don't know whether this user is calling the old account dead because of the warnings it received or because the user lost access. Perhaps someone could request an explicit acknowledgement of multiple-account-use policy from the user, one way or another. Huntthetroll (talk) 00:40, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Firefangledfeathers I agree with you about jumping to conclusions. Just commenting to note that I just found a third "SpicyCheetos" account, which appears to be the first chronologically: tr:Özel:Katkılar/BaharatlıCheetos. Huntthetroll (talk) 16:22, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know turkish and what it can be inferred is that said sccount was lost by an accident 88.229.58.139 (talk) 19:11, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks bro for helping me BaharatlıCheetos2.0'ın devamı (talk) 21:09, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It roughly translates to "Since I accidentally nuked the BaharatlıCheetos2.0 account, I'll continue from here". Basically discloses that it's their old account which they lost access to. Necatorina (talk) 00:15, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a WP:DUCK case, same username but the second account's name has "devamı" at the end, which translates to "sequel".KhndzorUtogh (talk) 13:18, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Jingiby, the group of editors they've shown largely overlap wtih BaharatlıCheetos2, I think a CheckUser is likely to show if these are connected or not, or if there are more accounts. KhndzorUtogh (talk) 12:26, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Firefangledfeathers @Blablubbs Here's what I found based on the additional accounts @Jingiby provided: IP adding Treaty of Moscow to the article [1], [2] - BaharatlıCheetos2.0'ın devamı adding the same [3], [4], [5]. IP adding USA and Asia minor to the article [6] (scroll down), [7], [8] - BaharatlıCheetos2.0'ın devamı doing the same [9] ("extra source"), [10].

Now per BaharatlıCheetos2.0'ın devamı comments here, this IP can't be them because the IP commented here [11] (it's an IP from same range) and BaharatlıCheetos2.0'ın devamı thanked them [12] like they're talking to a different person. But by the evidence itself that I've shown, as you can see, there is at the very least concerns of sockpuppetry or meatpuppetry.

Given this evidence, I believe a CheckUser is warranted - I know we can't CheckUser IPs, but there are clearly indications that the user has sockpuppeted/meatpuppeted, and at the very least a CheckUser will reveal if the other accounts are connected to master or not, or it'll show if there are additional accounts that were missed. For the IP evidence, please at least examine the behavioral evidence I've shown. KhndzorUtogh (talk) 13:23, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Obvious WP:DUCK per their usernames and EIA results. The new account is called "sequel" so there could be a sock farm. --Mann Mann (talk) 06:32, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welp, guys my account is not banned or another things. I just forgot my account's password and I am contiuning here. BaharatlıCheetos2.0'ın devamı (talk) 17:37, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You guys can ask if my old account banned or another thing BaharatlıCheetos2.0'ın devamı (talk) 17:38, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

to the admins BaharatlıCheetos2.0'ın devamı (talk) 17:38, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23 and @Firefangledfeathers, The checkuser request in the trwiki been approved by Vincent Vega. Brightt11 (talk) 00:30, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The IP's 88.236.184.51 and 78.174.205.204 (same location) have been editing extensively for the past months the exact same articles as BaharatlıCheetos2. with significant overlap. A clear example is in the article of Turukkaeans where both IP's had been trying to insert a pseudoscientific theory regarding their Turkic origins: 1, 2. When they were both reverted multiple times, BaharatlıCheetos2.0 tried to insert the same theory back to the article the same day: 3, 4. The history shows their large overlap in the article. Like the others said, it is very likely that the user has engaged in sock/meat puppeting and I believe a check can be warranted. Piccco (talk) 15:01, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This reminds me. I made a remark about BaharatlıCheetos2.0 likely being the account of the IP 88.236.184.51 back in 1 June [13] HistoryofIran (talk) 23:01, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
188.119.21.2 seems to have come out of the woodwork as well to attack anything trying to improve BaharatlıCheetos2.0's articles. Insanityclown1 (talk) 15:44, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it appears that these two IP's are undoubtedly related. The third one that Insanityclown1 provided (188.119.21.2) seems to have a similar pov and could potentially be somehow related too, since they appear the same day only to support BaharatlıCheetos2.0. They even went as far as making personal attacks. Something's wrong here. Piccco (talk) 21:21, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A fellow user just informed on my talk page that this might be Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Tirgil34, which seems very plausible. A brief description about Tirgil34 from the link; Persistent spreading of fringe theories about Central Asian history, Indo-European culture, Turkic peoples and related subjects, which is done through tendentious misreprentation of sources, personal attacks, edit warring and sockpuppetry. Primary topics of focus are racial theories, genetics and linguistics, especially etymology. His primary agenda is to push a Turkic origin of various ancient cultures and peoples." Reminds you of someone? Per the link, one of their targeted areas are Gutian people, just like BaharatlıCheetos2.0 [14]. Tirgil34 claims "that various Iranian peoples, especially Scythians/Saka were instead of Turkic origin", just like BaharatlıCheetos2.0 [15]. HistoryofIran (talk) 17:45, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

@Huntthetroll: What multiple accounts is Jingiby referring to in their warning?--Bbb23 (talk) 13:13, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CheckUser requested - Because of the accounts added to this case, I am requesting CU. Bbb23 (talk) 16:15, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Baharatlı stopped using their 2.0 account and started using the "sequel" account with no overlap. I wouldn't jump to an assumption of bad-faith sockpuppetry. I'd suggest just asking them to declare the (obvious) connection more publicly. No comment on the rest of the case. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:04, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've (somewhat accidentally, to be honest) invited BaharatlıCheetos2.0'ın devamı to comment here. They do claim that the other account was theirs and no longer accessible. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:31, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The stuff with the two Baharatlı accounts is sorted to my satisfaction. Jingiby, do you have diff evidence to present for the other suspected sockpuppets? Firefangledfeathers (talk / *contribs) 22:04, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure there's enough here for a CU to run a check, but I'll leave it up to them. Here's the EIA. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:55, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Checkuser note: The BaharatlıCheetos2.0 <-> BaharatlıCheetos2.0'ın devamı connection is obvious and not itself problematic because there was clearly no intent (or effect) of deceiving anyone. If this ends up checked, it won't be because of the connection between these two accounts.
So far, all that's been presented regarding connections to other accounts amounts to "they overlap and I'm really convinced it's socking". That doesn't cut it. Socking allegations are serious, and anyone making them needs to be able to present concrete evidence in the form of diffs to back them up. Unless someone presents some, this case will likely find itself closed without action. --Blablubbs (talk) 12:10, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Jingiby, hoping to call your attention to the above comment by Blablubbs. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:15, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 45: / Line 45: @@
 *::188.119.21.2 seems to have come out of the woodwork as well to attack anything trying to improve BaharatlıCheetos2.0's articles. [[User:Insanityclown1|Insanityclown1]] ([[User talk:Insanityclown1|talk]]) 15:44, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
 *:::Yes, it appears that these two IP's are undoubtedly related. The third one that Insanityclown1 provided ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/188.119.21.2 188.119.21.2]) seems to have a similar pov and could potentially be somehow related too, since they appear the same day only to support BaharatlıCheetos2.0. They even went as far as making personal attacks. Something's wrong here. [[User:Piccco|Piccco]] ([[User talk:Piccco|talk]]) 21:21, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
+*::::A fellow user just informed on my talk page that this might be [[Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Tirgil34]], which seems very plausible. A brief description about Tirgil34 from the link; {{tq|Persistent spreading of fringe theories about Central Asian history, Indo-European culture, Turkic peoples and related subjects, which is done through tendentious misreprentation of sources, personal attacks, edit warring and sockpuppetry. Primary topics of focus are racial theories, genetics and linguistics, especially etymology. His primary agenda is to push a Turkic origin of various ancient cultures and peoples."}} Reminds you of someone? Per the link, one of their targeted areas are [[Gutian people]], just like BaharatlıCheetos2.0 [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gutian_people&diff=prev&oldid=1230458356]. Tirgil34 claims "that various Iranian peoples, especially Scythians/Saka were instead of Turkic origin", just like BaharatlıCheetos2.0 [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Saka&diff=prev&oldid=1229388810]. [[User:HistoryofIran|HistoryofIran]] ([[User talk:HistoryofIran|talk]]) 17:45, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
 ====<big>Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments</big>====