Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/LanguageXpert/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


LanguageXpert

LanguageXpert (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
03 November 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Both editors are relatively new and edit the same articles, including Saraiki language, Hindko language, and Potwari language. Both get into edit-wars working in tandem, e.g., [1] and [2]. User:FisherQueen blocked the master for abusing multiple accounts with User:KwamiFKu (apparently a vulgar reference to the battles with User:Kwamikagami). Based on the edit-warring across multiple articles and the obviousness, I have blocked both editors for one week.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:45, 3 November 2012 (UTC) Bbb23 (talk) 20:45, 3 November 2012 (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 November 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


This account was just created and immediately attacked the talk pages of the articles the master edited, adding huge amounts of biased material (more than once). I've already indeffed the editor but am filing this to confirm the editor as a sock and to properly document it. (The master report was closed but not yet archived, and I wasn't sure if I could add to it by just editing it.) Bbb23 (talk) 13:26, 5 November 2012 (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]
  • Obvious sock is obvious.  Confirmed, no sleepers on those IPs. — Coren (talk) 19:31, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Now indeffing the master since he seems too recalcitrant to stop socking.
     — Berean Hunter (talk) 14:34, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
24 March 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

here are the user's contributions, and it is evident from them that after 1 day of user block, this IP started edits, and tried to paste this image (File:Map_on_Dialects_Of_Punjabi_Language.jpg) in the same articles Faizan (talk) 12:55, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
25 March 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

The same image about Punjabi Language she is adding again on the pages, with same attitude, doe to which she was previously blocked. Her message with another blocked IP on my Talk Page makes it evident! Faizan (talk) 09:10, 25 March 2013 (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]
  •  Check declined by a checkuser - As noted in the archived case, CheckUsers will not publicly link an IP address to an account. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:28, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]


27 March 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

The user was blocked but now is active by block evasion, and is now trying to put an image(File:Map of Languages of Kyber Pakhtunkha Province.jpg) to all unrelated pages Faizan (talk) 10:05, 27 March 2013 (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 see a good deal of similarity in areas of interests, types of editing in those areas, point of view, use of English, etc. Close to a duck, but I would like to see a checkuser. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:30, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

03 April 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

The reported user is a sockpuppet of LanguageXpert as the reported user has uploaded an apparently updated image File:Dialects Of Punjabi.jpg of the previous image File:Map on Dialects Of Punjabi Language.jpg and is again trying to add it in several unrelated Articles, due to which he/she was blocked before. Faizan (talk) 06:13, 3 April 2013 (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]
  •  Clerk declined - I'm sorry, but I am completely unconvinced by this one piece of evidence. Khalid Mahmood has a history of thousands of edits stretching back to before LanguageXpert was even registered. So if he is a sock, there should be plentiful behavioral evidnece if he truly is a sock. But that seems unlikely, given that KM has been active at times that LX's socks were checkusered, but did not come up. Someguy1221 (talk) 01:46, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree. I found a number of LanguageXpert's socks just a week ago, and this editor was nowhere to be seen. Closing. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 02:12, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
15 April 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


I blocked User:Saman Zara Zaidi as a duck after their reverts of previous LanguageXpert sockpuppet targeted pages: [3][4][5][6]. Requesting confirmation on the account and a sleeper check since previous SPIs have resulted in sleepers being identified.

The same editor is also in the middle of an edit war on Chashme Baddoor (2013 film) where the other two listed accounts have been blocked as sockpuppets of each other. The focus on box office receipts and other revenue are the same. Stylistic characteristics on their edits are the same. The accounts were also created within minutes of each other, though became active at different times. If they are not socks of LanguageXpert, they are likely socks of each other. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 07:12, 15 April 2013 (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]

 Clerk endorsed Duplicate closed with no action required (nothing there added anything to this investigation). Checkuser endorsed for sleepers. Yunshui 雲‍水 08:32, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

​—DoRD (talk)​ 12:58, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • information Administrator note Blocked and tagged both. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:01, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Clerk note: I've upped the block on Saeed.Karim.Hunzai to indefinite as a confirmed sockpuppet. Closing. Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:57, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
02 June 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

the name usage of OR image on articles Faizan 12:21, 2 June 2013 (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 see new activity from an IP user that is repeating the problematic edits of LanguageXpert/Maria0333, but the IP reported above is not the one that I see as being currently active. The IP I see -- and have blocked for one week based on behavior -- is:

--Orlady (talk) 17:26, 2 June 2013 (UTC) I am adding registered user Zayntic to this case (which needs to be moved to the correct title) for behavior consistent with LanguageXpert. I will also block this user. --Orlady (talk) 17:34, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Additional information needed -  Clerk declined. 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. Rschen7754 19:12, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think checkuser is needed here. In my opinion, the behavior I've seen was sufficient evidence of sockpuppetry by the IP and registered user that I blocked. I'm not sure what additional benefit would be derived from checkuser, but the user who filed the case may think otherwise. --Orlady (talk) 20:28, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
11 August 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

The editing patterns of User:Mastung and User:Shirinla are strikingly similar 1 and 2. They both seem to edit Saraiki and Punjabi language related articles and this time, they are both on current content dispute (with the same view) on Chennai Express.

Other suspected sockpuppets or meatpuppets could be:

1- More than three different accounts created on 13:48, 10 August 2013, 17:35, 10 August 2013 and 15:54, 10 August 2013. The content dispute started on the same day, i.e. 10 August 2013 at Chennai Express.

2- Special:Contributions/Ashermadan, Special:Contributions/Hamzaking123, Special:Contributions/SUMITKRISHNAGUPTA, Special:Contributions/Iamabhu, Special:Contributions/Tarandhoni and Special:Contributions/Abhinav.naman could well be suspected sockpuppets or meatpuppets. Fideliosr (talk) 04:54, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

  • I am a witness of this nuisance, which started yesterday and hasn't stopped yet. The accused certainly seem to be sockpuppets/meatpuppets due to their very similar activities and requests posted in the talk section of Chennai Express. Some, such as Gupta, have made baseless, slanderous claims against certain sources in an attempt to aid the nuisance, while users such as Ashermadan have had a terrible, block-laden history. As these attempts by them have failed, Improper/sockpuppet activity appears to have certainly taken place to support their cause due to them failing to discard uniformity on the aforementioned article. They have unethical arguments in favour of breaking the general, long-standing consensus for information on Wikipedia, which has maintained uniformity for years. This should certainly amount to trolling. Factual Proof (talk) 20:18, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Suspected sock of User:LanguageXpert: From the edit pattern (e.g., on a relatively little-attended article Saraikistan, but also on Balochistan, Pakistan and Saraiki people‎‎) I strongly suspect Mastung to be the same as User:Robinuthapa (blocked), itself a sock of User:LanguageXpert (blocked). Mastung's edit history [7] is strikingly similar to that of Robinuthapa [8], and both made identical blank-and-redirect edits on Saraikistan [9] [10]. kashmiri TALK 18:21, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Is that possible that this user, Tarandhoni, could also be checked for similarity with the two groups mentioned above. Thanks in advance. Fideliosr (talk) 15:29, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It is possible, but only with proper evidence, i.e. diffs showing edits similar to one of these accounts. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:45, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Anubhav1792 and Tarandhoni both have edited these two Bollywood movies - Chennai Express and Son of Sardaar - with very similar editing patterns: 1 and 2 vs. 3 and 4. Thanks. Fideliosr (talk) 15:57, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
​—DoRD (talk)​ 17:01, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would be inclined to move this case to the name "LanguageXpert" except that this resolves to a different name currently. If that is a mistake then those archives need to be corrected before this case is moved to help keep the page histories intact. Is there a reason why LanguageXpert wouldn't be the correct name (I see it as oldest account)?
     — Berean Hunter (talk) 17:19, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know (or can't recall) why the LX case was split like that and am awaiting Rschen7754's input. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 19:20, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I was asked to merge at User talk:Rschen7754/Archive 21#SPI case archive merge. @Gogo Dodo: --Rschen7754 00:58, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I had asked for the Maria0333 case to be merged to LanguageXpert. I think LanguageXpert is the canonical name. I think when you attempted to merge the archive back in March, you did it in reverse. That was what I was trying to say in the above referenced note to you. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 04:33, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oh okay, it seems that here is where things went wrong. Will fix now. --Rschen7754 04:47, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed, and sorry for the misunderstanding. --Rschen7754 04:51, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
16 October 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets



For the record. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:25, 16 October 2013 (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]
All three tagged as socks. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:50, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
30 October 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Editing the same set of articles as the previous socks. After the last sock was blocked Kathypearl continued the edit war with the IP sock of Bhural (talk · contribs) at Punjabi dialects. Requesting CU for sleepers. SMS Talk 16:06, 30 October 2013 (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]
18 November 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

LanguageXpert 's sock have been involved in the content dispute with Bhural (talk · contribs) and his socks on the issue whether Saraiki is a separate language or a dialect of Punjabi. Some edits that exhibit that behavior: [11], [12], [13]. Similar edits of previous socks: [14], [15]. Requesting CU for sleepers. SMS Talk 10:31, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Added 39.32.188.247 (obviously not requesting CU on this). Same language related edits. -- SMS Talk 18:34, 18 November 2013 (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 with respect to the named user(s). no No comment with respect to IP address(es). No sleepers. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:33, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Macedonish tagged and blocked indef. Closing now. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:22, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
20 November 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Addition of same language related image to articles as previous sock did. SMS Talk 17:04, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

About Gwaalpundu, same language related POV edit, followed by cover up edits by Belarushian and the IP that was earlier reported but went unnoticed. -- SMS Talk 17:08, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  • Both suspected sockpuppets blocked indef per the duck test. Closing now. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:12, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
25 November 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Similar edit to earlier sock. -- SMS Talk 16:30, 25 November 2013 (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. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 17:16, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Confirmed sock tagged and blocked indef. Closing now. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:30, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
01 December 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Same edit as by an earlier IP sock. -- SMS Talk 13:37, 1 December 2013 (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]
  • Suspected sockpuppet blocked indef per duck test. Closing now. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:35, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
04 January 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Like previous socks, this user is also edit warring with the IP socks of Bhural on language related articles/sections. The choice of username and edit summaries seem to be to avoid scrutiny by other editors. Some similar/partially similar edits with previous socks:

-- SMS Talk 15:54, 4 January 2014 (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. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:11, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Confirmed sock tagged and blocked indef, closing now. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:45, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
17 January 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

An impersonating account that did same edit as his earlier IP sock. SMS Talk 15:51, 17 January 2014 (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]
  • Indeffing sock and closing. Blocking based on duck test, no CU needed this time.
     — Berean Hunter (talk) 16:03, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
24 January 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

JulianaVVV: Similar edit as earlier sock. Requesting CU as there are some similar behaving accounts on language related articles/sections. Also I would like to request a range block on the IP range used by this user as the disruption done by this user while editing logged out is much greater. Let me know if I need to raise the issue at some other forum. SMS Talk 16:40, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Viharian101: Restored the language section as written by a previous sock. Also restored again to the version of IP sock. -- SMS Talk 21:14, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Khalidmehmod: Impersonating account as earlier, adding Language maps to articles. -- SMS Talk 06:18, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Aadilaaqib: Mass reverting ([16], [17], [18], [19], [20]) to restore the language maps as added by Khalidmehmod. -- SMS Talk 15:29, 26 January 2014 (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]
​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:32, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
28 January 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Restored the article similar to the version edited by his IP sock. Also on Rahim Yar Khan District, the Swimcool restored the article as edited by last sock. SMS Talk 18:37, 28 January 2014 (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]
  • Suspected sock blocked indef per the duck test, closing now. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:54, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
29 January 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

New editor that continues the same reversion of disputed language related content. Also similar edit to earlier sock. SMS Talk 18:25, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

@Berean Hunter 182.186.x.x is the range used by Bhural. LanguageXpert uses 39.32.x.x IP range. They are two different users. Bhural edit wars that Saraiki is a language while LanguageXpert claims that it is not a separate language but a dialect of Punjabi language. So apart from the articles directly related to the Saraiki language, both of these editors edit war on articles about the geographical regions/entities where Saraiki is spoken, with Bhural doing this and LanguageXpert reverting it. And thanks for the protections, it is really helpful. -- SMS Talk 21:26, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
16 February 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Almost all edits in mainspace by Miosong are cover edits done few minutes after IP socks' (39.32.x.x) edits each time (as can be seen in the table).

Article IP sock Miosong Time difference b/w edits
Rajanpur 39.32.71.171 Miosong 9 min
Dera Ghazi Khan District ‎ 39.32.71.171 Miosong 8 min
Karachi 39.32.77.78 Miosong 5 min
Karachi 39.32.181.229 Miosong 3 min
Karachi 39.32.151.151 Miosong 4 min
Karachi 39.32.197.125 Miosong 3 min
Jhang 39.32.151.151 Miosong 4 min

At Kashmir conflict Miosong restored an edit made by an IP sock. -- SMS Talk 14:17, 16 February 2014 (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]
23 February 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Similar edit to last socks (39.32.197.125, 39.32.151.151). SMS Talk 17:58, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

Any one can see the history of karachi article. Since i have reverted false claim that Pashto is spoken by 7 million people in karachi which is against the census figures of 1.2 million. He started reporting me as sock of language expert. See how busy he is since then because he has reported me 25 times as if he is a watch dog on me. Be an un biased admin please and keep WP as per census figures and give a fair view. If u r a nationalist then you should not mis use your powers on Wikipedia. Talk if you have proof and stop hiding behind Sock sock sock like a class 2 kid. I guess you have no valid arguments and you are tring to be personal with me. I am a good faith person so stop this watch dog behaviour. ONE BIG QUESTION IS IT MORE IMPORTANT TO FIND SOCKS THEN GIVING CORRECT INFORMATION ON WIKIPEDIA. without census how can you claim 7 million from 1.2 million a 600% increase. Even a kid will lagh on such false information but MR SMSARMAD IS A BIASED PASHTUN NATIONALIST then what to expect. Block me because i never expect justice from WP admin dealing with me because the will act like a robot on SMSARMAD orders like a serventOnlycensusfigures (talk) 04:22, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, we have an acceptance speech before the jury could decide. I must say they will be very happy with you. -- SMS Talk 10:09, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You can laugh smsarmad because you think that you are god on wikipedia but i hope that jury will consider this time my feelings after i face continuous trial by a bunch of sock indian WP editors like Smsarmad, Darknes shines please refer to article on kashmir conflict talk page and edit history summary. I suspect these two plus user Sitush are either socks or providing cover to each others edits. Smsarmad pretend him self as Pakistani but on Kashmir conflict talk page he is reverting to govt of india stance that Kashmir freedom fighters are terrrorists. I just requested on that article that why not we use a neutral word separatists instead of freedom fighters or terrorists but Smsarmad and his sock Darkness shine are not even ready to talk and edit war. I commented on talk page but Darkness shine removed my comments. just see kashmir conflict talk page history.Same applies to indo pak war related articles where these 3 socks are hyper active see the history of those pages. Sir objectivity of WP is under threat. I f you wana block me then you are 100% justified because i am a sock but please for first time see the other side of coin too Onlycensusfigures (talk) 02:49, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This is sickening how some editors push their POV. Everybody inside and outside of Karachi knows that Muhajir is the biggest enthnicity in Karachi (which it became after the partition) and Pashtun is the second biggest (which it became due to the massive migrations in last three decades). Fideliosr (talk) 13:14, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

information Administrator note Closing under admission of the user in question. Account blocked indefinitely. - Vianello (Talk) 19:12, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

14 March 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Like previous socks both of these editors started with creation of their user and user talk pages. LanguageXpert has been following the article Total Siyapaa for some months now, and keep regularly updating it and removing any information that he finds as negative, using his registered accounts and IP socks.

Some of the above edits done with alternate accounts (users/IPs) with a gap of few minutes. When other users removed promotional content that was mostly added by MusicPoineer and IP socks, MusicPoineer and Ibnebatutaji restored the same promotional content in to the article and called its removal as vandalism during the edit war.

After Ibnebatutaji was blocked he appeared on the talk page of this article using an IP (39.32.187.61), from the same range as used by LX. Requesting CU for sleepers as I can see another newbie who landed at this article talk soon after Ibnebatutaji was blocked. SMS Talk 13:05, 14 March 2014 (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]
18 March 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


On Kashmir Conflict article, Darkness shine is an Indian editor who tries to protect Indian interests on Kashmir dispute. Smsarmad has shown his identity as Pakistani editor but on Kashmir conflict article and talk page he supports pro Indian edits of Darkness shine. I have also checked other sensitive articles on Indo Pak wars etc, These both manipulate and push pro india stance and take the advantage of new users lack of back ground knowledge of WP policies. I want a sock puppet investigation. I am sure you will also find many other socks including sleepers. strongly requested. KashmiriPakCricketLovers (talk) 15:54, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: User:Smsarmad and User:Darkness Shines were originally mentioned in this obviously retaliatory report. --Rschen7754 01:20, 20 March 2014 (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]
  •  Clerk endorsed - for a check on the filer, who has made 3 edits. Clerks, once this is handled, please move this or refile and delete this one. Rschen7754 17:06, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It is probably LanguageXpert‎ Darkness Shines (talk) 17:41, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Socks blocked and tagged. Closing. Salvio Let's talk about it! 20:07, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • To whoever closes this, please do NOT archive, but move to LanguageXpert per above, leaving no redirect. --Rschen7754 20:25, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
18 March 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


This user Xcrescent9 created socks after he was blocked. Their similar actions in Total Siyapaa talk page made me suspicious that they were same. after that they were commenting on similar sections. Now this can't be coincidence that 3 different users will always comment with the same topic and similar emotional attachment. After that they wrote in my talk page in urdu language using English alphabets that he has created large number of sock accounts and will go on creating to support his favourite movie with his favourite star . He was clever not mention any names but he was referring to Total Siyapaa. Unfortunately as administrators don't understand urdu so--ZORDANLIGHTER (talk) 17:35, 18 March 2014 (UTC) ZORDANLIGHTER (talk) 17:35, 18 March 2014 (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]

information Note: These are socks of LanguageXpert (talk · contribs) and are already blocked. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Darkness Shines. Perhaps also a merge to that case? Elockid (Talk) 20:29, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Totally. Just kidding also. But the CU results were posted on that SPI page which linked a bunch of accounts to LanguageXpert (DS not linked). Elockid (Talk) 12:39, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
22 March 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Did an edit similar to one of the previous sock. Requesting CU for sleepers. SMS Talk 16:58, 22 March 2014 (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]


23 March 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

his behaviour is similar. And new account to support his previous sock puppets which are blocked ZORDANLIGHTER (talk) 03:37, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

  • POV pushing on Total Siyapaa, an article on which the previous socks of LX, MusicPoineer, Xcrescent9, Morexbine, Archtexlic and Ibnebatutaji feasted upon. To be exact they did so on the corresponding talk page as the article had been fully PROTed. – Soham (talk) 05:12, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  • CheckUser requested - Self-endorsed by clerk for checkuser attention: Given the account was created just after the previous check could a CU take another look and see if there were other sleepers created or if there is a possibility of a short term IP block? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:25, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Confirmed + Totalsiyapaa (talk · contribs). Unfortunately, an IP block is not possible atm, as he edits from a very large IP range. While it's still blockable, there would be massive collateral damage; so it's probably better to start semi-protecting all the pages he hits to slow him down... Salvio Let's talk about it! 13:06, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Blocked and tagged. Closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:48, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
26 March 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


same type of attitude.check their login details,i am sick of this guy.Constantly opening new accounts to type in my talk page.ZORDANLIGHTER (talk) 18:09, 26 March 2014 (UTC) ZORDANLIGHTER (talk) 18:09, 26 March 2014 (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 April 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Restored previous sock's edits: Swimcool, Bbb02, Kathypearl, Malignea. Requesting CU for sleepers. SMS Talk 20:28, 4 April 2014 (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 April 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Susumika did an edit similar to a previous sock at Haripur District. Requesting CU for sleepers. SMS Talk 17:37, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Vesselhome did the same edit as done by an IP sock sometime ago. -- SMS Talk 21:08, 6 April 2014 (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]
All three accounts blocked and tagged. GB fan 12:06, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
20 April 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

A new user who restored edits done by Yasir72.multan's latest IP sock that was reported today. It is confusing but I guess this time it is LX. SMS Talk 17:53, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

[21] is from Susumika (talk · contribs) already blocked as a LanguageXpert sock. [22] is from User:PuralenaChopra. They are virtually identical. Both replaced hidden notes about deleted images, and from the Languages section down you will see identical edits. A CU would be useful also. Dougweller (talk) 15:20, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  •  Additional information needed -  Clerk declined. 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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:13, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
11 May 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets



I think LanguageXpert is the type of user who can't remain inactive for a long time without creating any sock puppet. Maybe he has created some sock puppets but he is not editing the same pages so that people won't get suspicious. I don't know how check users find sock puppets but if some check user has extra time then they can see if any account was created from the same ip range of LanguageXpert and the accounts were created after his last account was blocked. I am not giving any names. I don't know whether this is against any wikipadia policy. If this type opening investigation is wrong then close this case and leave a message in my talkpageChampionkiller (talk) 11:04, 11 May 2014 (UTC) Championkiller (talk) 11:04, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds like you are going on a fishing expedition. GB fan 11:53, 11 May 2014 (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]
  • fish CheckUser is not for fishing - Unless you have a suspect account, we're not going to run any checks. We do run sweeps for known puppetmasters on occasion, but the nature of this case makes such checks almost useless. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 14:39, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
17 May 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


There must be some other socks also FORTUNESCOOKIES (talk) 11:15, 17 May 2014 (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 May 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Restored the same content repeatedly, that was earlier added by LX's sock. Requesting CU for sleepers. Also not ignoring the possibility that it is ZORDANLIGHTER 's sock who is trying for sometime to get a CU fishing check on LX. SMS Talk 16:39, 27 May 2014 (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]
08 June 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Obvious sock. Did an edit similar to an earlier sock. Requesting CU for sleepers SMS Talk 16:31, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  • Blocked, closing. A sleeper check was just performed two weeks ago, and it's best not to give our CheckUsers too much work. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:27, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
06 August 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Restored the content that was earlier added by a confirmed sock. Requesting CU for a sleeper check. SMS Talk 17:21, 6 August 2014 (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 September 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
112.79.39.201 (talk) 12:18, 9 September 2014 (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]

@GB fanForgot to tag Karachiyouth — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.79.39.80 (talk) 17:26, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

21 December 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Created soon after the last sock was blocked. Did almost the same edit as was done by an earlier sock. Requesting CU for sleepers given the history of this sock. SMS Talk 16:15, 21 December 2014 (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]
  •  Clerk endorsed - Definitely a sleeper or more here, not sure on any technical relation to the master, but I must head out the door, so i can't finish this now. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 18:08, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The following accounts are  Technically indistinguishable.
 Blocked and tagged. PhilKnight (talk) 01:54, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
22 December 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

The last blocked sock (Esatesa) was involved in an edit war with another editor at Karachi. This new editor's first edit was to restore almost the same version as was done multiple times by Esatesa. SMS Talk 18:28, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

Seeing the recent edit history of Karachi its not that difficult to guess that socking (or meatpuppetry) is being done by both sides involved in the edit war. Would be really helpful if a CU can make a run on any account of the other side also. Let me know if I have to file a new case. -- SMS Talk 18:46, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  • SamaaNews is highly  Likely to the archive. Smsarmad If you could file another case it would be appreciated. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:53, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • This case seems all set, so I'll close it for now. Mike V • Talk 17:02, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

10 August 2015[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

Rashidzaman and Zmagndstakun both tend to misspell the word "consensus" as "concensus". Rashid, Rashid, Rashid, Zmaghndstakun, Zmaghndstakun, Zmaghndstakun. This was also done by another suspected sock, Esatesa, Esatesa.

Numerous areas of intersection between Zmaghndstakun and Rashidzaman786as detailed here.

In 2013, a confirmed sock of LanguageXpert, Colajmal added content about languages to the article Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Not coincidentally, this was the subject of an edit war between an IP who removed the unsourced content, and Zmaghndstakun who restored it, then restored it and so on. Note the language about "lingua franca", which we see Rashidzaman use here. (Although to be fair, he did copy prose from the source.)

During the edit war Zmaghndstakun restored a disputed map, noting "Map is disputed but was in pre dispute version since 2013". This map was uploaded to Commons by Maria0333, a sock of LanguageXpert.

In August 2013, User Kashmiri noted that a suspected sock of LanguageXpert edited "on a relatively little-attended article Saraikistan, but also on Balochistan, Pakistan" We find that Zmaghndstakun has edited Saraikistan, as has Rashidzaman. And both editors have edited at Balochistan, Pakistan (this is where I met them). [23][24]

I'm sure I can find more behavioral stuff, but I think this should suffice to warrant a CheckUser. Hoping we're not stale. I would also like to request a sleeper check, because this Indian/Pakistani stuff is high-stakes emotional stuff for these socks and I would be surprised if they hadn't already started cooking up autoconfirmed socks. Thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:54, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

  • Ponyo if you see it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Balochistan,_Pakistan#RFC_do-over Indian editors Cyphoidbomb, BoogaLouie and Human3015 are a group which is highly active with anti Pakistan editing. On Balouchistan Pakistan Talk page when Mard4 and Paksol opposed their anti Pakistan edits in a RFC they got them topic ban. Then on same talk page they inserted RFC redo to force their anti pakistan edits. I opposed them then they filed SPI to proof me sock of Paksol where they failed. Even on Baluchistan Talk page they tried the same. Then they started monitering my contribution and got me topic ban just like Mard4 and Paksol. My only fault was that I was trying to maintan a pre dispute version to which even edit worrier Jasumkhanum10 a pashtun nationalist also agreed finally but these guys misused that situation to get me topic ban. Now these guys will get banned Rashidzaman786 (the other opposer) therefore they tried this SPI. From contributions one can easily see that user PaktunYar never edited any article which invloved me. Tanzania888 edited Tanzania. SakhiQ edited two times. Yes Rashidzaman786 edited few common WP articles but your user check has confirmed that he is diffrent from me. I would like to file a counter SPI against them. Zmaghndstakun (talk) 01:39, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A counter SPI? What will that prove? That I'm not you? I gladly admit to that. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:59, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Zmaghndstakun: Why you are mentioning me here? I gave you nice advice earlier that don't go further in this matter [25] otherwise "it will just waste your time and will be just distressing thing for you". Now you proved my words. Just to resolve this issue, even I done edit protected request at Talk:Khyber Pakhtunkhwa stating version you wanted and gave sources for that. We should assume good faith and should not take anything personally on Wikipedia. --Human3015Send WikiLove  02:38, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Smsarmad was an expert in LX socks. He is currently not active.112.79.39.68 (talk) 04:15, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

  • Note that LanguageXpert is editing extensively while logged out, so please be cognizant of that when evaluating consensus in discussions etc.
  • The following are  Confirmed as Tanzania888 socks:
  • The accounts are  Possilikely (a mix between possible and likely) connected from a technical standpoint, but could be two groups working in conjunction with each other. They should all be blocked as socks, but I'll leave the tagging for whoever evaluates the behaviour. Another option is to leave an SPI link in the block message and forgo the tagging.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:32, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • information Administrator noteBlocked and tagged. The top two have been tagged as LX socks, the next two have been tagged with just the SPI link -- more than possible behaviorally but I'll just leave it at this per Ponyo's wise words. —SpacemanSpiff 04:56, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

11 August 2015[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets


2.91.223.253 (talk) 20:19, 11 August 2015 (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]

  • 2.91.223.253 - Hi there, thanks for your report, but we need strong behavioral evidence in order to do anything about this. Can you please explain why you believe this account is a sockpuppet, and could you please provide diffs (edits before and after from both users) that support your suspicion? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:25, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The IP won't be able to answer you question as they're blocked (by me), so I'm closing this report. If someone wants to present evidence of socking they can open a new report.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:36, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

14 August 2015[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[26][27][28] Prose about language and questionable maps are the same basic thing submitted by Rashidzaman. (Which, by the way contains prose lifted inappropriately from the sources) Since LanguageXpert was shown to be operating in concert with Rashidzaman786 (a sock of Tanzania888), I'd like to request also that a CU look at those accounts in case it's the meatpuppet who's responsible for this new account. Thanks! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:52, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


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

10 September 2015[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

Restored the edit earlier done by an IP sock. Requesting CU for sleepers. SMS Talk 17:40, 10 September 2015 (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]

  • Note: This account was reported in August 2015, but the reporting IP didn't include any diffs to warrant any action. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:12, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Three intersections between Zmaghndstakun and OXFAM. They have edited at Balochistan, Pakistan. They have edited at Saraiki Dialect, and I believe the sock operator is known to speak Saraiki. There is also an intersection at this article with Rashidzaman786 who was a sock/meatpuppet of LanguageXpert. In January 2015, OXFAM edited Multani dialect, which has a significant number of edits by LX socks including Esatesa, Bbb02, Kathypearl, Mastung, Robinuthapa, Saman Zara Zaidi, Bullseyes, PPPPMLN, Maria0333, Jaredfan, Saraikistan and whomever else I missed. I'd say Multani dialect is a significant article to watchlist. I think a CU might be warranted. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:00, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:04, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

25 September 2015[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

Restored an edit made by a blocked sock. Given the history of this user I guess a CU check might be helpful in finding any other accounts. -- SMS Talk 21:21, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

 Comment: Not only these but I think there may be hundreds of account of this user. I would say This user is Punjabi nationalist who have written in majority of the articles about ethnic groups in Pakistan. I think articles related to Pakistani languages,ethnic groups,etc needs to be checked . --Jasimkhanum10 (talk) 02:33, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

29 September 2015[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets


LanguageXpert socks have always been pushing their POV in favor of Punjabi Language which exactly this sock did too. After this edit he went to User:Jasimkhanum10 's talkpage and left this message, where he says to Jasimkhanum10 that "I saw your edit on Kohat", whereas Jasimkhanum10 has never edited Kohat page. Besides, I would like to mention this sock's username "Pashtun" + "kuni". "Pashtun" is an ethnic group who speaks Pashto Language, and "kuni" (as much as I can find) a pashto language word that translates to "asshole". Since he had edit wars with Jasimkhanum10 recently (Punjabi language vs Pashto language), I gather (from his username, the message he left, and his edit at "Kohat") he is probably teasing or tempting Jasimkhanum10 (who is under TBAN) to engage in an edit war with him and violate his TBAN to get a lengthy block, like he did earlier by using the same word (1). Given the history I would prefer a CU check for any sleepers. And if possible can we place a range block for a longer period this time. -- SMS Talk 19:21, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


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


30 September 2015[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets


This is a typical edit of LX at Karachi article. Earlier similar edits were done by LibraStone, Esatesa, Esatesa. I wonder why this account created on 30 August 2015 didn't come up in last three CU checks. -- SMS Talk 18:22, 30 September 2015 (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. @Smsarmad: Each SPI is different. Mainly, it depends on the number of IP addresses used by the individual and the number of ranges of IPs used. This particular individual uses many ranges, and they are very wide. A CheckUser would have to look for other accounts on each range and then, because of the breadth of the range, check each account who used an IP in that range. The time spent can't be justified. Thus, the only times in an SPI like this that I will find other accounts is if they use the same IP(s) used by the suspected puppet I'm checking. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:45, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

24 October 2015[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

LX once filed baseless SPI against unrelated accounts with whom he had editing dispute here. This is what NA122 did here. NA122 used the term Master sock CosmicEmperor. LX socks used the same word "Master sock Soham" against during edit war.

The IP range filed by Kautilya3 in SPI case against NA122 is very, very similar to the IP range of LanguageXpert as seen in the archives of LX SPI. NA122 is intentionally making spelling mistakes to look like an editor with poor English skills. Once LX accused Cyphoidbomb, TheRedPenOfDoom and DarknessShines of being socks of each other as they were not allowing him to push his POV in Bollywood movie articles. LanguageXpert is an expert of time wasting tactics. He has mastered WP:TE and WP:SOUP. LX will file bogus SPIs to discourage his opponents. NA122 knew SrikanthV is senior editor, but he made Kautilya3 as his main target and filed SPI. He knew the SPI will be rejected, but his aim was to harass the editors. --1.39.39.20 (talk) 05:01, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

@Ponyo, Bbb23, Kautilya3, and Human3015: @NeilN: Previously it was mentioned that Check Users can't link Ip with User. As LX is already exposed and in some cases he had IP socked, IPs are confirmed duck socks of LX, it would be better to merge the SPI report filed by Kautilya3 against NA122 with LanguageXpert archive. This will help us identify future socking. --1.39.39.77 (talk) 15:50, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, definitely. Please merge the Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/NA122 into that of LanguageXpert. - Kautilya3 (talk) 16:11, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

 Confirmed, blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:06, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A merger is unnecessary.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:14, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I copied those IPs here for the record. I agree, the merging of the cases is not needed. Vanjagenije (talk) 18:18, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
25 October 2015[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
See the contribution of this user, he/she is working on the same topics in the same behaviour--37.105.200.87 (talk) 18:58, 25 October 2015 (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]

29 November 2015[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_LanguageXpert

LanguageXpert created many socks with Indian names and female names as User:AlluArjunTollywood, User:Rahulbedi3, User:JulianaVVV and User:Maria0333

Aisha Baloch has a Baloch surname. Yet some edits don't show that they are really Baloch. Using a Baloch name to make anti-Baloch edits.

IP similar to LanguageXpert IPs were active in the page Balochistan conflict when Aishabaloch was editing.

This could be a sleeper account which is activated temporarily. The Avengers 05:36, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


Language sock NA122 filed this baseless SPI against us. This account came after the block of NA122. The edits of Aishabaloch are after a big gap.--The Avengers 05:45, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23: It's extremely possible that Wikipedq and Wikibaba1977 are the same user and both are socks of Aishabaloch. That makes Aishabaloch as the sockmaster.--The Avengers 05:21, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

  • Re: The Avengers' note about the baseless SPI above, I seem to remember the language troll accusing me and some other regulars of being socks of each other. There's a mention of it in the archive, but I'm having trouble finding the specific report. Seems behaviorally consistent. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:23, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Krzyhorse22: You tagged User:Wikipedq and User:Aishabaloch as confirmed socks of LanguageXpert. Why? Bbb23 didn't confirm them to LanguageXpert. He said that he "leave[s] the issue of tagging [...] to a clerk (or a patrolling administrator)". You are not a clerk, nor an admin. Why did you tag them? Vanjagenije (talk) 23:01, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, many times admins forget to do the tagging. My bad, I didn't pay close attention to the part you quoted. I had misread it.--Krzyhorse22 (talk) 02:14, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @Krzyhorse22: Admins do not forget to do the tagging. Admins often intentionally do not tag per WP:DENY. Anyway, this case is still open, so nobody forgot to tag. Please, leave that to admins and clerks in the future. Vanjagenije (talk) 22:47, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Closing the case. Vanjagenije (talk) 19:46, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

4 December 2015[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

LanguageXpert and user:Kmrhistory are probably one person therefore this and this category should be merged--2.89.234.120 (talk) 20:42, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

@Vanjagenije and Mailer Diablo: What can be done with Wikibaba1977. He was found related to NA122 by Bbb23 in the previous SPI above. Why he is not blocked? The Avengers 16:33, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

  • @The Avengers: Sorry, I thought Wikibaba1977 was already blocked as it was from a previous check. Done. - Mailer Diablo 16:47, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

20 December 2015[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.69.15.90 (talk • contribs)

Comments by other users[edit]

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

  • I'm not using any IP to edit Wikipedia or any other account, I only use Krzyhorse22 and no other. Also, I find no interest in editing Pakistani related pages.--Krzyhorse22 (talk) 23:40, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

  • 202.69.15.90 - You need to provide diffs that show a behavioral link between LanguageXpert and the suspected socks. CheckUsers will not be run unless there is compelling behavioral evidence. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:52, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • No evidence provided. Closing. Vanjagenije (talk) 12:37, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

28 Jan 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

He is continously doing the same edits at articles related to the Pashtuns.LanguageXpert was alway trying to add Hindko in most of articles about Pashtun areas the same thing this user is also doing (see here) .He is actually a Punjabi nationalist who always adds such wrong info please it should be investigated.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:16a2:57b:b500:f142:391b:c08a:ed1a (talk) 17:02, 28 January 2016‎ (UTC)[reply]

some more info[edit]

  • See the history of article Khyber Pakhtunkhwa as well as other related articles you will find that LanguageXpert was always trying to add Hindko as a major language and Hindkowan a major community whereas they are in minoroty and less than 20 of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa population is non-pashtun , but here this user and languageXpert are trying to represent Hindko and Hindkowan as a major community (whereas it a minority) and he also show Pashto as minority whereas more than 74% of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and 99% of FATA are ethnic pashtun.Due these such behaviours I think this user and languageXprt has many mutual things. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:16A2:57B:B500:F142:391B:C08A:ED1A (talk) 18:46, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

I don't think so, the accussed party will start telling lie, It should be first investigated if there is no relationship between both then no problem but if you tell him about this discussion he may start telling lie.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:16a2:57b:b500:f142:391b:c08a:ed1a (talk) 18:39, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
We are not going to investigate anything unless you provide diffs as explained below. Vanjagenije (talk) 18:44, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There are several examples please see the history of article Khyber Pakhtunkhwa , Peshawar and other related articles in all these articles the Punjabi nationalist Aadi.khan84 and other blocked accounts of user:LanguageXpert , has added Hindko as the major language in the those Pashtun dominant areas and added Hindko language and Hindkowan people as a large communite (for example see here) similarly user SherifIsInTown has also added such thing ( see here ), there are also many other examples you may check both accounts contibs.

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. Vanjagenije (talk) 18:29, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Evidence is weak, and I personally do not see any sockpuppetry here. Closing. Vanjagenije (talk) 22:52, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

02 February 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets


Tag-teaming on multiple Khowar/Peshawar language/culture/ethnicity-related articles. For example at Khowar language, Gerua18 does and then Haroonkhayjahan does the same. This is the same edit as a previously confirmed sock made to many articles. Hard to find direct matches for recent other socks because so many targets have been protected (blessing and curse of combatting LTV). Similar tag-teaming among these two new ones on Demographics of Pakistan. DMacks (talk) 07:29, 2 February 2016 (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 February 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

LanguageXpert has been known to use this IP range. This particular sock is particularly abusive: diff, diff, diff, diff, diff. He was doing this using another IP yesterday diff. A range block might be the only solution. Kautilya3 (talk) 16:38, 6 February 2016 (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]

  • CheckUser requested and endorsed by clerk - Please, comapare Wwww.oooooo to previous socks (see this). Vanjagenije (talk) 18:49, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wwww.oooooo is Red X Unrelated. no No comment with respect to IP address(es). - Mailer Diablo 19:18, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I still blocked the account based on behavior. THe master switches IPs, so it's no surprise that the accounts are unrelated. Closing. Vanjagenije (talk) 19:39, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

25 February 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets


I am not sure about LanguageXpert because i did not see his behavior that much but i have seen the behavior of LibraStone and to me this user Dcough seems like a sock of LibraStone since he is making same type of edits that LibraStone used to make, remove sourced language information and add unsoruced, please see this diff, a typical example of an edit that LibraStone used to make. Please see a similar diff of an edit LibraStone made days before his blockage. Just trying to nip it in the bud. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 16:56, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I forgot to set checkuser=yes which i meant to do, i do not know how to set that when a case is already open so please perform a checkuser. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 17:57, 25 February 2016 (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, as well as Burnfloo (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:41, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

11 March 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

I am mainly reporting the IP address 39.32.161.99 as being sockpuppet of Dcough who was confirmed as a sockpuppet of LanguageXpert. IP came out and made almost same summary line removing almost the same content from Gilgit-Baltistan giving exactly the same reason as Dcough gave. This user account was blocked on 25 February 2016 and this purportedly a Chinese user account (User:肥料) was created on 1 March 2016, five days after being blocked. User:肥料 made similar edits as 39.32.161.99 on Gilgit-Baltistan, the very first edit by 肥料 on Gilgit-Baltistan, was to remove information about demographics, see (diff). I am not 100% sure about this Chinese user but i have a suspicion based on LanguageXpert's history of changing identities. History shows that he created User:RussianRoutes and initially started editing pages in proximity to Russia such as Kazakhstan and Mongolia then later on when he thought, nobody would suspect him as LanguageXpert, he moved on to his usual topic of interest. Also history shows that he created a seemingly Japanese user name User:KwamiFKu and a seemingly French user account User:Frenchdreamer with which he edited pages such as French Open and French cuisine so he is not new to creating user accounts which seem to be totally different than what he actually is. IP address 39.32.161.99 and User:肥料 have been involved in disruptive editing and edit-warring on Gilgit-Baltistan. Considering all of the above and the history of LanguageXpert of creating sockpuppets soon after he gets blocked, a CheckUser or a sleeper check is due. As they did not contribute much yet, i can only identify limited diffs which establish the connection.

Also, check if you see connection between the archives of LanguageXpert and Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Indusonline. You might want to merge them if there is one. I have some suspicion that Indusonline and his socks might have been socks of LanguageXpert.

diffs

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]

  • Added the IP which is restoring same edits which were being restored by the blocked sock. Give me some time to check the history of User:سعد علی خان. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 15:19, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Vanjagenije: I am not sure about سعد علی خان, I checked user history but did not find striking similarities except an interest on Gilgit-Baltistan. It could be a ploy though. I am afraid you will only have to decide about User:سعد علی خان based on technical results at this point. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 09:13, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • As far as I am concerned, the combination of technical evidence and the interest in Gilgit-Baltistan are together enough. In addition, there are other problems with the editing from سعد علی خان, which have already led to one short block, and adding those problems to the evidence of sockpuppetry gives more than enough grounds for a block, so I have blocked that account. The IP addresses are ducks, but they have not edited for several days, and there is no point in blocking now. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 10:57, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

11 May 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets


An account with less than 30 edits gives views about how Discretionary sanctions can be imposed upon editors. He has no welcome message on his talk page, yet he makes this edit with edit summary "Talk Page FreeatlastChitchat viz Kautilya3 , Discretionary sanctions can also be used against individual editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any Wikipedia policy and edit is very very suspicious. Whoever he is, definitely not new. 223.176.8.115 (talk) 10:35, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

The last CU was run by Bbb23 on 13th March. This account was created few hours after that. --223.176.8.240 (talk) 10:45, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

  • no Declined I don't see sufficient evidence to link this account to LanguageXpert. Mike V • Talk 02:30, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

02 June 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

Restored almost the same content that was earlier restored by LX socks: Zalzalaoct, 39.32.231.198. Requsting CU for sleepers. SMS Talk 04:58, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

Pprcgi clearly shows evidence of an experienced user from the get-go, mainly interested in Kashmir conflict and China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (often areas of LX activity), and has duplicated a revert done by Baltistani478. The edit summary "CAUTION willard84, History and Talk page discussions are pointing out a conflict situation between you and a number of other users. Use talk page and avoid imposing your preferred views" is characteristic of LX socks. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:03, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: @Bbb23: I have gone through the contributions of Ahsaniqbal 93 and I do not find any behavioral similarities. 39.32* is a huge range which is used by many internet consumers in Pakistan. I have expressed that concern before as well that we might be overdoing and blocking many unrelated editors as LanguageXpert because we just see 39.32 in the beginning of their IP. I am afraid User:سعد علی خان might have been blocked wrongly as well. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 18:03, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

 Clerk endorsed: evidence given by Smsarmad is strong enough for a check on Baltistani478, and two mass-blankings with edit summaries advising about edit warring by Baltistani478 and by Pprcgi warrant a check on Pprcgi. Should be possible to check both against non-stale socks in the archive, i.e. the 11 March 2016 set. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 13:18, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: I reviewed Ahsaniqbal 93's contribs separately from SheriffIsInTown and I come to the same conclusion, practically no evidence at all of a behavioural connection. Regarding سعد علی خان, their block was based on stronger behavioural evidence, and at any rate it's up to them to make an unblock request if they think they've been wrongly blocked. Case closed. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 14:35, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

13 July 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


Sikhprotestor, a new account, made edits to Gilgit-Baltistan remarkably similar to those of Saladin1987 (recently topic-banned). I can't show you the diffs because Saladin1987's versions of Gilgit-Baltistan have been revdel'ed. But I remember the characteristic misspellings: "Buddha" as "Buddah", "CE" as "Ce" as well as capitalising "pilgrim" to "Pilgrim". In fact, I am almost certain that the version Sikhprotestor installed is an old version of the article that Saladin1987 presumably saved offline. Complaining about the sources "Raman & Priyanka being Indian source" was also a favourite gripe of Saladin1987 "indian editor trying to validate indian position is wrong here" [29]. Perhaps Thomas.W who reverted many of these edits, remembers more. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:10, 13 July 2016 (UTC) Kautilya3 (talk) 19:10, 13 July 2016 (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 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Xenoverse is a DUCK of LanguageXpert. The user is certainly not new. He knows "SPI" already in his very first edit [30]. The account has been a sleepr since 17 July, and made a series of trivial edits today to get autoconfirmed.

  • The IP claimed to have reviewed my edits and TripWire's edits [31] and Xenoverse claims the same [32].
  • One of the IPs advised me to edit 2016 Kashmir unrest conscientiously [33], and Xenoverse adds the material to Kashmir conflict in his first significant edit [34]. Autoconfirmation was needed for this edit as it is under semi.
  • An IP campaigned for a topic ban for me [35] and promised to generate "thousands of editors" to counter me. Xenoverse requests an "Indefinite Blanket topic ban" for me at an ARE [36].

-- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:53, 27 July 2016 (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]

  • Named account is  Confirmed. no No comment with respect to IP address(es). ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:58, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Case closed. Vanjagenije (talk) 12:52, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

06 August 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

DnDamubit is obsessed with the Kashmir conflict (2016 Kashmir unrest, Syed Ali Shah Gilani, Asiya Andrabi), a traditional favourite of LanguageXpert. Reverts edits [37] asking editors to use the talk page, a favourite tactic of LX [38]. Characteristic user page.

TouristerMan starts by making sophisticated edits to Pakistan geography pages [39], [40], [41], Pakistani languages [42], and Kulbhushan Yadav issues [43] as well as China-Pakistan Economic Corridor [44]. All of these areas are traditional favourites of LX (geography [45]; Kulbhushan Yadav [46]; and languages in almost every sock). Attempts to befriend admins [47], [48]. Hostility towards me [49].

There is possible meatpuppetry involved because LX had promised to generate "thousand editors across Pakistan" [50]. --Kautilya3 (talk) 12:33, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • TouristerMan has essentially reinstated [51] a prior edit of TripWire [52] at Baloch Students Organization. LX had previously participated on that page providing support [53] to TripWire, commented at his ARE case [54], and knows that TripWire has been t-banned from Baloch topics. TouristerMan is clearly not new. Either he/she has been around for some time or they might have been tutored. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:28, 6 August 2016 (UTC), updated -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:02, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is also interesting that TouristerMan showed up here within an hour of my filing the report in the name of LanguageXpert. Why does a one-week old user monitor the SPI page for LanguageXpert? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:10, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • With the regard to the comments below, I am not accusing anybody of being a sock. My role here is to present evidence. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 01:02, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

What the hell is this? This guy Kautilya has been harassing me from the first day I started editing here on wikipedia. What the hell does he want with me? And on top of this, why is he lying about me? If any admin is here they can just give me their email and I will link them direct to my IP to show that neither my IP, nor any other IP in my intranet has been used by this "LnguageXpert". But this harassment should stop asap. By his lying, I mean that he is including false evidence. You can clearly see that the First account Dnndamubit has been blocked as a puppet account of Exciting2015 so he cannot be a puppet account of two people. TouristerMan (talk) 13:45, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
As to Kautilya comments that I am "following" this SPI, it is another "falsehood". I have been taking a look at his contributions ever since he harassed me on my talkpage. Anyway, I have already said that I can open up my network and IP for any admin who wants a closer look. In the spirit of fair play Kautilya3 ought to have posted a note on my page. TouristerMan (talk) 03:24, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kautilya3 listed DnDamubit as a "suspected sockpuppet" not a "definite sockpuppet" of LanguageXpert and listed some of the similar behaviour. He did not "lie", he just aired out his suspicions along with similar behaviour of other reported users which is allowed here. DinoBambinoNFS (talk) 18:18, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kautilya3, if you want to say something, please do so clearly as you are well aware of the procedure. But you must exercise care before casting WP:ASPERSION as you have been recently sanctioned for the same.—TripWire ︢ ︢ ︡ ︢ ︡ ︢ ︡ ︢ ︡ ︡ ︢ ︡  ʞlɐʇ 15:51, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
TripWire, it looks like Kautilya3 filed the SPI first and then suggested that TouristerMan is possibly a sock. While not ideal, I don't see this as a violation of the aspersion restriction. Still, Kautilya3, I suggest you stick to bland statements like "an SPI has been filed against Y".
  • User:SpacemanSpiff what exactly would you mean by a duck block. I have already given every assurance possible that I edit from my own account, I run a franchise named Touristerman catering for travel goods. Now what exactly is required to "prove" that I am an individual? I can come online in skype, facebook or whatsapp. It is quite irritating to be accused again and again. Why does't an admin just talk to me online and we get this over with? TouristerMan (talk) 07:56, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Further evidence

TouristerMan accuses other editors of having poor quality English, you are telling us you are not competent in English like his previous sock, you also need fair amount of time and effort on your English grammar. Googly Drive (talk) 13:42, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment:@Nil Einne: That user account is an abuse directed towards LanguageXpert in Urdu so LX would not abuse himself. I know CosmicEmperor creates such abusive accounts and this account came after a recent conflict with User:Bulletproof Batman. See the correlation there, 07:39, Bulletproof Batman reports TouristerMan at ANI, 07:54, this abusive account gets created, then in the same ANI thread Batman mentions that TouristerMan might be an LX sock. Regardless, that user account should be blocked but not as LX puppet. Also, TouristerMan reporting that account is not automatically admission of him being an LX sock. These abusive accounts send edit "Thanks" to a user so they can see a notification of the abuse. I did not check the Thanks log yet but I am sure the abusive account must have thanked TouristerMan. so, it was completely natural for TouristerMan to report that account after seeing that the account is abusive. It doesn't matter towards whom it was directed. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 14:49, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • On evidence: I have reported LX socks previously and I do not think TouristerMan is LX. As for evidence presented here against TouristerMan, most of it is very trivial and does not provide concrete proof that TouristerMan might be an LX sock. There could be many editors who could be interested in same topic areas. I for one am interested in same topic areas as LX is, that does not mean that I am his sock. 39.* is a huge IP range and covers twin cities of Islamabad and Rawalpindi, a huge number of population lives in these cities. TouristerMan showing up possible to LX only means to me that he might have used an IP from a range which represents thousands of consumers. Also, someone claiming that they will create thousands of editors across a country does not mean they would actually do so and any future editors coming from that country would be presumably socks or meats of that editor. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 16:07, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

 Done: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/DinoBambinoNFS. Closing. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 12:35, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

01 October 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Username is obvious. As for the second account, they are making edits to similar articles, including the SPI investigation. 73.96.113.40 (talk) 16:50, 1 October 2016 (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]

Please don't bring accounts that have made no edits to SPI. No evidence presented for Googly Drive. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:10, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: - "Googly Drive" is not a registered account. The user posting as "Googly Drive" is really Harpoon Trigger, also blocked. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 12:38, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

02 October 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


Account made just to vote stack on this AFD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/India and state-sponsored terrorism, [58][59]. @Bbb23:, please check. Capitals00 (talk) 04:46, 2 October 2016 (UTC) Capitals00 (talk) 04:46, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

  • Danishkhan can use Twinkle, which is remarkable being a new user. LX has shifted to another location to edit as Danishkhan as his TouristerMan account is blocked. 1, 2. Previous LX socks have commented on each other's talk page to behave as two different editors. Danishkan is playing sockpuppet games by commenting on TouristerMan's talk page. -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Googly Drive (talk • contribs)
  • Defending myself against claims: Accusation is based on my edit at Touristers Talk Page. I saw that he was online, I have seen his name in local ads, I wanted to know if it was the same guy, so yes I made a Talk page comment. The accusation is self destructive as My edit is dated 06:49, 1 October 2016 and Touristerman made an edit to admins noticebaord the very same second dated 06:49, 1 October 2016. Checkuser should know that the nom has made no edits to wikipedia and is someone's sock himself. Danishkan (talk) 08:21, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Add- TouristerMan is blocked as LanguageXpert. Danishkan comments as if he knows him in real life, "Are you online? would you collaborate on some articles? If you do not mind much, are you the person running the touristerman shop in sargodha?". TouristerMan replies "Yes I run the tourister franchise, you can call me if you want". This is because Danishkan knows that Check Users will find that both accounts were from same location. Googly Drive (talk) 13:15, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bollocks, Danishkan was active during the last run when TouristerMan was blocked. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 13:21, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Bollocks ???. CU on TouristerMan was done on 6th August, when Danishkan was not created. Bbb23 kept the case pending. Googly Drive (talk) 13:29, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Bbb23 ran a check on 1 October 2016 when he also found these other accounts DinoBambinoNFS and company. How is it that he connected them on 6 August but they were allowed to edit for two months? Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 13:44, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
DiniBambino is unrelated to this group. Googly Drive (talk) 13:48, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Still, its implausible to think that he connected TouristerMan with other socks in August and blocked them now, I believe a new run was done on 1 October 2016 on TouristerMan. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 14:12, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why are you getting so worried if any new Check is done on Danishkan? He knows TouristerMan. And yesterday you were commenting that Touristerman is not a sock. You don't want Darkness Shines to find other socks of Nangparbat. You need these socks in Wikipedia? Googly Drive (talk) 14:28, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think I have enough evidence to implicate Nangparbat in the second group if you will accept all the IP socks of recent months. Terms like "Indian pov", "nationalist pov", and haranging Indian sources as propaganda are peppered throughout:
  • From current accounts: [60] (Superman-roof) [61] (Sronunshiv), [62] (ChadhaSingh)
  • From IP socks: [63], [64] (82.132.214.80), edit summary [65] (5.65.190.98), [66] (5.65.190.98).
In fact, the last edit by 5.65.190.98 argued for the exact same POV tag that ChadhaSingh now added [67]. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:29, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Self-endorsed by clerk for checkuser attention - this is all a big mess. The user commenting as "Googly Drive" is really Harpoon Trigger and is blocked for separate sockpuppetry. Danishkan has separately been blocked as "somebody's sock". Bubblegum Rains is obviously not a new user; one of their two edits was reverting a contribution at the same AfD with the comment "obvious sock". Both are added to this CU request. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 12:51, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Ivanvector: I'd like your independent analysis for each account above as to why they are probably a sock of LanguageXpert. I've looked at this "mess" before and I think everyone is fishing. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:58, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Bbb23: working on it. I don't expect that these are all socks of LanguageXpert, just that they're all socks. More in a bit. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:01, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, here's what I've got. As far as Inaghetto and Superman-roof, I'm convinced they are sockpuppets since both are SPAs created to comment on this AfD, as the original request stated, however there are so many different sockmasters operating in this area that I have no idea who the master might be. Danishkan is blocked as "somebody's sock", and Harpoon Trigger (a.k.a. Googly Drive) has a block log entry linking them to accounts I think are related to CosmicEmperor, but the logs I can see aren't clear. Bubblegum Rains seems to have been created to back up Danishkan's campaign ([68], [69]) to out everyone for canvassing ([70]), but the creation date doesn't line up. It does line up roughly with a block on Bulletproof Batman, another sockpuppet complaining about sockpuppets who is checkuser blocked but the block log doesn't say whose sock they are. The only things I can see that link all these accounts to LanguageXpert are their documented tendency to create socks to argue with each other as subterfuge, and fairly vague topic area overlap. Maybe the CU logs will tie this together better, but I don't have access to them. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 22:23, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 In progress Essentially what you're saying is these accounts are all socks but unlikely to belong to LanguageXpert, but we've a few of them all together, so let's check 'em anyway. I don't like it much, but I have a feeling this will never go away unless someone checks them.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:33, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

04 October 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


This SPA seems to be created to participate in the move discussion currently active at Saraiki dialect, an article in the LX's favorite topic area .i.e. Language. Like previous socks (Xenoverse9, Nuel478, Pprcgi, Burnfloo, 肥料) this sock also created his own talkpage in the very first few edits. In the move discussion presented an argument (that Saraiki is being called language instead of a dialect on political grounds) somewhat close to what his earlier socks has also opined (Maria0333). His previous socks have actively participated in discussions in this topic area and have continued to edit war over a number of articles to push this POV.

Requesting CU for sleepers. There are a number of socks active in the India-Pakistan topic area lately and everyone seems to be without a clue as to who is who's sock. This might settle for a few of them. SMS Talk 17:15, 4 October 2016 (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]

12 October 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Quack. Sleepers? Rangeblock? Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 21:48, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

Its definitely a sock but does not look like LX. LX talks completely opposite of what this user did on that AfD. Seems to be CE or Undertrial. --SMS Talk 22:28, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

02 November 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

All these IPs sign their talk page posts as ₯€₠€₯. [71], [72], [73], [74], [75]. What they have in common with Yoyi ling is that almost all of their mainspace edits have to do with Punjabi dialects, and they all revert any article expansions or rewrites that challenge their view that Hindko and Saraiki should always be referred to as dialects of Punjabi. They have also voted in pairs in related discussions: Hindko RM [76], [77]; Saraiki RM [78], [79], Move review [80], [81] + [82] and RfC [83], [84]; Pothohari RM [85], [86]. These posts are strikingly similar in tone, style and command of English. The IPs have also posted messages to the suspected master's talk page.

They have also exhibited some peculiar common behaviours:

  • reverting mainspace edits with the odd edit summary "forumshop": [87], [88]
  • reverting an edit on one article and giving an explanation for that (referenced in the edit summary) within the RM discussion of a completely different article: [89], [90]
  • peculiar use of the word "ego" when talking about my edits: [91] (in edit summary), [92]
  • strange argument about breaking "language hierarchy": [93] (in edit summary), [94]

Full disclosure and notes: I have occasionally edit warred with these users.There is a previous SPI for this user at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/LanguageXpert/Archive#04 October 2016. – Uanfala (talk) 18:55, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yoyi ling (talk) 06:51, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

I swear by my mom that I am not Yoyi ling or LanguageXpert. I confess I had an account with my original name. Which was blocked. I used that account for ten months and got blocked. I forgot its password so can not apply for block removal. I can not tell you name of account because that is my real life name. Anyone writing in Pakistani English and supporting Dialect is not me. Dialect debate be decided by merit as RegentsPark requested. I will register new account once you allow me and follow policies. Even if you don't allow I simply request you that always resolve content disputes on merit. God have given you powers to rule English Wikipedia. Do your best to do justice with your honour. Be fair and accommodate as many users you can, Forgive mistakes. We all make mistakes. Encourage brilliance and improvement. Strictness is not solution being fair and ignoring others mistakes is. I am a Muslim and respect all religions. In Quran God says when you forgive some human I will forgive your sins. If you care for humans I will care for you. If you will hide others mistakes I will hide your mistakes and give you respect in the world. Trust me give chance to maximum people un block them. Let them learn and improve. If some one is disruptive to a page. Simply protect that page to a category just like Senior editor, Admin only or confirmed user. Uanfala just because me and Yoyi ling were contesting you. You filed an SPI against us. Look at your edits , you are confused yourself. Sariaki is a language/Variety/dialect. Potwari is transitional/dialect. Hindko is dialect/variety/Language. then what about Jhangvi , shahpuri, Jandali, Chachi, Malwi, Majhi, Riasti, thalochi , Derawali, Multani, Bagri, Doabi, Dhani, Jaangli, Naswani, Changvi. By your logic if they all are languages then congratulations for adding 20 odd new languages to the world. Atleast look at local user. You can not even know a single difference among them. I know all. But may be I am not as lucky as you are to escape all edit wars. I am ₯€₠€₯ my intent of this edit was to help you in doing your good job. I am ready for any block but please do give me a thought. All IPS 39.50.84.196, 39.51.204.132, 39.60.247.238, 39.60.129.46, 39.60.232.41 are MINE and never hide them I used my logo ₯€₠€₯ with them. I have no control on IP address selection so its not my fault.

IPs deaed is rightly swaering, i also swaer i am not him, He confuss socking, I am not. However I have decided to deactivate my account to protest behavior of member Uanfla who reported us. He is edit warring and forum shopping but no action taken.This is not a way to resolve content dispute Yoyi ling (talk) 01:30, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • The more this user edits the more firmly I believe that Yoyi ling is LX. --SMS Talk 01:47, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

SMS you also filed S P I against me which failed so please keep your shut here on. I am not IP Deaed — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yoyi ling (talk • contribs) 06:55, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

PROOF # 1 =IP Deaed had been regularly messaging me on talk page. How can he be my sock.
PROOF # 2 = I have already passed not being language expert in a S P I.
PROOF # 3 = When hindko dialect was moved with out discussion IP deaed pinged me for asking me to move reversal
PROOF # 4 = IP Deaed never edited Saraiki dialect, Hindko dialect which I mainly did , nor he did my others
PROOF # 5 = I never edited Ghebi dialect, Chhachi dialect, Pothohari dialect which were favorite of IP deaed and a lot other articles
PROOF # 6 = Average timing of IP are totally different from me

at times I copy pasted his summaries and comments but proofs are already there. We share same position that language hierarchy should not be targeted for sake of ego of Uanfala Yoyi ling (talk) 06:51, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Re #4: The IP user wouldn't have been able to edit Saraiki dialect and Hindko dialect as they're semi-protected. As for the timing (#6): your comments on the Saraiki RM were posted within a minute of one another. – Uanfala (talk) 09:57, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Re #1: This kind of deception has happened before too. LX socks talk with each other to avoid suspicions.
Re #2: No you haven't. CU said you "appear" to be unrelated. I read it as a borderline case between inconclusive and unrelated.
Re #6: Adding to what Uanfala has already said, today you came to restore 39.60.x.x 's edit within minutes after the IP was blocked. --SMS Talk 12:49, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Smsarmad I saw all details Abt LX , you had some kind of personal tiff with him . you keep on reporting him. may be u feel your self inferior to level of cleverness he showed. Its not my problem. I also sweared that I am none of these. But you must be in Lx pain so you allegating me. I request not to put me in enemy burnor. I am not Lx or IP deaed.

Re # 4 then ghebi dialect chhachi dialect, potwari dialect were un protected why I didn't edit them by your logics. As far hindko dialect is concerned IP pinged me to get involve to edit that.

Re # 1 what LX sock did is not relevant here because I have already passed S P I on it. Two, if one of our common hundred edits match by one minute then that is just a normal coincidence. Same can happen among you and him.

Re # 2 it is what u want to assume, admin are best judges

Re # 6 restore was good because if you allege him then give him chance to defend.

@SpacemanSpiff: I will not object even if you play a closer. You can block me but I know it very very clearly that blocking me will be total mis judgement and unfair. I swaer I am not guilty plz give me a fair chance.behavior evidence just because we both consider saraiki as a dialect and use Pakistani English is in fair with out any technical link.Yoyi ling (talk) 01:38, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BIGGEST PROOF= in recent times none of LX sock came to defend himself. I am not LX I know that's why I am here to defend myself. Uanfala has content dispute with me. So his efforts are obvious. IP deaed had been editiong totally different articles while I had been different. If u single out one two common page. Then by same way I can say Uanfala and Smsarmad are socks. They both used Re# in their edits. They both support saraiki as language on saraiki dialect talk page. Both use same kind of English. They both filed separate S P I against me. They both restored each other edits. They both are here in this SPI discussion. So both are behaviourally sock to each other ??? It is no way to resolve content dispute.Yoyi ling (talk) 01:59, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed LanguageXpert

LanguageXpert is known for accusing his opponents (unrelated established editors) of socks during content dispute. Yoyi ling is also accusing the above users as socks. Now he is pretending to be Japanese and editing Japanese articles, as he did as posing Indian with ArjunPatel89, AlluArjunTollywood. Posing as Chinese 肥料.

Yoyi ling is using wrong spellings to show himself different from IPs. This intentional spelling mistakes is characteristic of LanguageXpert socks. His actual English skill is of the IP's English. The IP's English is better than Yoyi ling, and this is what he wants others to think; that they are different users. He has definitely moved to a different IP range to confuse Check users.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Sultan's Assassin (talk • contribs) 05:30, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

what is this ? A joke. A completely new member Sultan's Assassin make his first edit and blames me LX, senior admins have already passed me not LX in a SPI. 2nd anyone accusing others sock is LX then Smsarmad and Uanfala accused me sock. By default they become LX socks. 3rd I myself told everyone I am using Pakistani English and edit history. I am multani history student. I have done thesis on mohanjodaro. I claim people of harapa and mohnjodaro both are known as harapians. Both speak saraiki dialect of west punjabi as per my thesis.If LX goes to wash room he sleeps he eats he drinks he prays he exercise then we all are LX. Note Last line was a joke to make everyone smileYoyi ling (talk) 06:02, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Due to nervousness after reading my comment, he is using his original English skill. Now he is not editing with wrong spellings as, "IPs deaed is rightly swaering, i also swaer i am not him, He confuss socking, I am not. However I have decided to deactivate my account to protest behavior of member Uanfla who reported us. He is edit warring and forum shopping but no action taken.This is not a way to resolve content dispute Yoyi ling (talk) 01:30, 3 November 2016 (UTC)" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sultan's Assassin (talk • contribs) 06:15, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sultan's Assns what are you talking about. If you want time pass then at least do it on useful history [95] [96].Yoyi ling (talk) 06:56, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

  • I agree with Smsarmad on this. While the technical link may not be compelling, the behavioral link is quite strong and it's not very different from the recent Touristerman and "I'm from his area and like his travel agency" sock. The topic and editing behavior also coincide. I'd just like another admin or clerk/CU to also evaluate this. —SpacemanSpiff 15:02, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • The longer this goes on the greater the behavioral match between Yoyi ling and LanguageXpert. I've blocked as a suspected sock despite Bbb23's "appears unrelated" finding. (Bbb23 or Ponyo if you think this should be overturned then please do so as you both are familiar with the behavior and the technical aspects of this sock draw). Otherwise this should be merged with Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/LanguageXpert (after closing). I'm not closing now as I think either of the two CUs familiar with this may want to take a look before that happens. —SpacemanSpiff 07:03, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

24 December 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


I suspect these are sockpuppets of either languageXpert, or Yoyi ling (SPI case for the latter: the comments there indicate that the two sockmasters might be related).

The suspected socks have engaged in one of one of the favourite activities of languageXpert and/or Yoyli ling: editing articles on districts and dialects of Pakistani Punjab, rewording the text to force the point that Saraiki and Hindko are dialects of Punjabi. An example is Layyah District, which has been edited in turns by four of the suspected socks: [97], [98], [99] and [100] (the last edit is reminiscent of this edit from a previous sock: [101]).

One of the first edits of each of these users has been the creation of a user page [102], [103], [104], [105], [106].

The suspected socks have also made comments in a recent DRN case that I find very similar in intent, style and level of English, both among themselves [107] [108] [109], and with comments made at Talk:Saraiki dialect by:

AksheKumar and LisaRoy have also attempted to build a smokescreen of edits to unrelated articles, but these have almost always been immediately reverted by various editors.

The last suspected sock, SaraikiStudents, impersonates a Saraiki (like one of the previous socks: User:Saraikistan). They claim to be the same editor who edited from IP 82.186.41.146 [115], while at the same time expressing opinions [116] which are the opposite of those expressed by the IP [117].

I'm requesting a CU check to help establish whether the two possible sockmasters are related and if not, which one these belong to. LanguageXpert has also had the habit of creating numerous sleepers. – Uanfala (talk) 13:55, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging SpacemanSpiff, who's had experience with these. – Uanfala (talk) 14:18, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

  • We're bound to see more IP activity there, but I'm not sure I understand how we deal with IP socks. Checkusers can't publicly connect them to user accounts, right? Do we then rely solely on behavioural evidence? – Uanfala (talk) 11:43, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

 In progress. I've already found that LanguageXpert and Yoyi ling appear to be technically Red X Unrelated. I'm not revisiting that question.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:14, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

29 December 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


Account created the next day after the last batch of socks were banned. First edit is the creation of a user page with placeholder text [118] as previous socks have done [119], [120], [121], [122], [123]. Voting in the Saraiki RM discusison [124] to the same effect as previous socks [125] [126] [127]. – Uanfala (talk) 12:39, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@SpacemanSpiff and RegentsPark:, can we have extended-confirmed protection for Talk:Saraiki dialect so that we don't have this user keep coming back every few days? At least until the Request for Move closes? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:07, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

  • I'm comfortable doing a duck block here (even if it'll get validated only fter a month:) ) but I'm instead changing this to a requesting CU status as it's unlikely that this is the only account active right now and the fact that it took a good four days for any edits to happen so that autoconfirmed status can be gamed. —SpacemanSpiff 13:52, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd support an immediate duck block before the list of references is spammed across Wikipedia. And a checkuser to dig out other socks. --regentspark (comment) 14:11, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

 Technically indistinguishable from, for example, Gvinayal (talk · contribs · count). No other accounts seen. Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:27, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

02 January 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

The IP has started spamming article and user talk pages with the usual rants. – Uanfala (talk) 17:40, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

Everyone who is NEW and oppose Saraiki dialect removal is not a sock LX, Check user will conform it. I have not edit war so Y not debate on Talk page. If you have sources and proper grounds then wts the point. 182.188.99.212 (talk) 18:07, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Uanfala , U check history of Saraiki dialect. I had been editing the article, and following it since ages. I am not a new user. My IP series is 182 through out article history list. 182.188.99.212 (talk) 18:56, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Blocked 72 hours. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:07, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

03 January 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

The same behaviour as the last blocked IP [128]. – Uanfala (talk) 09:15, 3 January 2017 (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 January 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Self-admitted to coming here due to off wiki canvassing from LanguageXpert and has come by to disrupt Talk:Saraiki dialect in the same manner. I've blocked as a meat puppet but there's a great likelihood that this is a sock, bringing here to check this and any other biding their time for autoconfirmed status. —SpacemanSpiff 10:07, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

  • I'm pretty sure this user's story is made up, and he's our good old LanguageXpert himself. – Uanfala (talk) 11:14, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

08 January 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


Account created today and their third edit is already at WP:AN, in a similar vein to a previous sock's post in the same thread [129]. – Uanfala (talk) 17:17, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


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

Blocked on behavior, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:42, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

10 January 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


The same edit [130] as the last sock [131]. All their other contributions consist in reverting what seems like a random sample of my edits. – Uanfala (talk) 23:05, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

  • Far too many of these that have been blocked for quacking or other reasons, I'm not sure we got them all, so a CU would be good.

I've also had to block a fair few IPs of late, so any CU sweep and/or a rangeblock would help. —SpacemanSpiff 01:38, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Well, if a CU is to be performed and IP data made sense of, then I guess it might help to list the IPs that have quacked during the past week or two (most recent ones are at the bottom):

Feel free to revert if adding this list was inappropriate. – Uanfala (talk) 01:51, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

  • CheckUser requested and endorsed by clerk - As per Spiff, even though I understand that CU has been dodgy with LX in the past. Thanks very much, GABgab 22:44, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  In progress - Katietalk 11:30, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Chotajyakora and DXawar are  Confirmed to other proven LanguageXpert socks.
  • SpacemanSpiff1, SpacemanSpuff, and Annachi poo are  Confirmed technically to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Aboobackeramani.
  • Other than saying that there's too much collateral damage for rangeblocks right now, no No comment with respect to IP address(es). Katietalk 11:55, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Clerk note: Tagged the LX socks. GABgab 23:01, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tagged the rest, closing. GABgab 18:42, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

14 January 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


This edit [132] is reminiscent of what previous socks have done [133]. One of the user's first edits is the creation of a user page with placeholder text, a hallmark style of many of the previous socks. – Uanfala (talk) 13:09, 14 January 2017 (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 + Shakira2010 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:42, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

15 January 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


The usual edits to the usual articles. – Uanfala (talk) 13:44, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


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

Blocked without a tag per WP:DENY. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:28, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

28 January 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Predictably, they've started voting the the move review [134]. – Uanfala (talk) 11:36, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


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

25 February 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


[135] ~ [136], the characteristically inane user page, edits to the usual articles. – Uanfala (talk) 20:56, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

Might be relevant too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Bhural — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.186.191.246 (talk) 05:09, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • On my talk page I described myself as married to linguistics.Nowadays,im learning Hindi and Sindhi.I found on wiki that many people misunderstood Saraiki as Punjabi.But in Pakistan,Saraiki is a sepprate language.People have Saraiki as their mother tongue in Narional ID card.If Saraiki is Punjabi then why gov allow people identify themselves as Saraiki people.If you accused me of being a puupet its not ture.I dont much know how to use wiki.I mostly use wiki to study diffrent languages.Where i found on wiki Saraiki as Punjabi I always try to correct it.I think because of that I am accused of being puppet.But im not.I always try my best to make wiki free of errors and describe Saraiki as not Punjabi.Its my first account on wiki and I mostly use it to clear misunderstandings about Saraiki.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Goodboy991 (talk • contribs) 13:47, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

13 May 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

The unmistakable behaviour in the RM discussion at Talk:Hindko dialects#Requested move 7 May 2017, which very strongly parallels what was done at Talk:Hindko dialects#Requested move 26 October 2016 by previous socks (linking to the relevant SPI case from November). – Uanfala (talk) 21:43, 13 May 2017 (UTC) – Uanfala (talk) 21:43, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • I've also added Refimp now. User's fifth edit so far was to vote in the above-mentioned discussion. Two of their other edits were the creation of a user page and a user talk page with the typical of previous socks inane placeholder text. – Uanfala (talk) 21:06, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

  • Note. Could someone have a look at Netherlands2 and the IP? They've both voted in the ongoing Hindko RM discussion: as a participant there I can't refactor or strike any of their votes even though it seems to me like the sockmaster's style is unmistakable. Are people familiar with it, or should I look for representative diffs? – Uanfala (talk) 00:17, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Refimp is  Confirmed and blocked. Netherlands2 is  Possible/ Inconclusive and should be decided based on behavior.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:01, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hardblocked IP one week, indeffed Netherlands2 with suspect tag and left CU tag on Refimp. Closing.
     — Berean Hunter (talk) 18:01, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

16 May 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


A new editor's only contributions are reverts of several of my edits to various pages, which was the behaviour exhibited by this previous sock. – Uanfala (talk) 20:50, 16 May 2017 (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, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:55, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]


17 May 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


A new user with four edits so far – all of them to articles I've edited in the last week (cf. with the previous case). Two of these edits are the starting of language/dialect-related RMs. One of them [137] is in the same direction as the votes by previous socks in that article's last RM [138] [139]. I'm requesting a CU check in case there are other recently created accounts. – Uanfala (talk) 20:04, 17 May 2017 (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]

  • Closing. I've blocked (and tagged as a suspected sock) due to the deafening quacks. If a CU/clerk thinks that a sleeper check is beneficial then feel free to reopen. —SpacemanSpiff 04:36, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

20 May 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


Compare with the last sock Motugang (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). – Uanfala (talk) 12:50, 20 May 2017 (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]

29 May 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

The expected edits to Saraiki dialect: the article's protection has expired, so there's bound to be some regular disruption there. It would be nice if someone could keep an eye on it. – Uanfala (talk) 16:57, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


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

26 August 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


Blanking of talk page threads they disagree with, in LanguageXpert's topic of choice: Punjabi language and ethnonationalism [140] [141]. The threads blanked are ones that a previous sock (never investigated but behaviourally obvious) has rallied against [142] [143]. Another tell-tale sign is that one of the first edits of this new user is the creation of a user page [144] with a characteristically inane placeholder text. – Uanfala 17:35, 26 August 2017 (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]

  • Quacking loudly, blocked and tagged, closing. —SpacemanSpiff 18:03, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

27 August 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Quacking [145] on the same talk page as the last sock puppet. – Uanfala 12:20, 27 August 2017 (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]

  •  IP blocked. GABgab 13:58, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

19 October 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

I would have waited a while to file this SPI, but this account has been causing severe disruption having filed two AE complaints (one revedeled), a spurious SPI and now a meandering ANI complaint. This account seems to have been created just to attack MBlaze Lightning and me.

First the IP 39.32.140.22, previously tagged under LanguageXpert, issued this threat way back in June 2016. Roughly a month later this Facebook post appeared under an account Pakistani TV channels top 10 ranking:

Kautilya3 ek anti Kashmiri or Anti Pakistan Wikipedia editor hay.....Wo aaj kal sab Pakistan or Kashmir related pages par control kar raha hay.......... Ap sb Pakistanio is Kuty ko sabaq sikhao jo Pakistan ko bdnaam kr rha hay................Mea nay akely us ka boht muqabla kiya lakin wo dusry Indians k sath mery hr naye account ko block krwa deta hay. .............Ap sb mera sath do ....Is page ko save kr lo yani book mark kr lo...https://en.wikipedia.org/wi…/Special:Contributions/Kautilya3 is say ap log rozana us k Wikipedia par contribution ki list dekh sktay ho,,,,,,,,,,kisi bhi contribution pr (Hist) yani history click kro......or us k edit ko UNDO krtay jao.....us ko itna tang kro Pakistani shero k ye indian kuty Pakistan or kashmiriyo k khilaaf kabhi likh na paey. SHARE THIS

A literal translation as far as I can do is as follows: Kautilya3 is an anti-Kashmiri and anti-Pakistani Wikipedia editor. Nowadays, he controls all Pakistan or Kashmir related pages. All you Pakistanis, teach this dog a lesson, as he is defaming Pakistan. I have confronted him many times all alone, but he in conjunction with other Indian accounts has gotten my every new account of mine blocked. All of you, please give me support. Bookmark this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wi…/Special:Contributions/Kautilya3 and watch it everyday to check his contributions. Click on any contribution or history and keep undoing it. Give him so much trouble, for the sake of Pakistani tigers, (a bit incoherent here) that the Indian dogs can never write in opposition to Pakistan or Kashmiris. SHARE THIS

Is Sardeeph a sock of LanguageXpert, or is he responding to these on-wiki and off-wiki campaigns? Clearly he is not new editor. Kautilya3 (talk) 23:00, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

– Uanfala 23:25, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is obviously a bad faith SPI designed to detract attention from the ANI where skewed editing by the complainant has been reported.

I don't have any links with anyone, but admit I certainly have been an observer for a long time.

Nevertheless it surprise me not at all, going through that Facebook post, that other editors have found the same problems with Kautilya3. It strengthens my view. Sardeeph (talk) 03:41, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

  • There are enough editing similarities to warrant a checkuser. Though, after reading the ANI report that Sardeeph filed, I suspect they will be blocked anyway, a CU would be useful to flush out other socks. --regentspark (comment) 12:22, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Clerk endorsed - Something is very clearly up with this "new" account. Thanks, GABgab 14:33, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Red X Unrelated but obvious sock of someone is obvious. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 07:16, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK, thank you for checking. Closing since the account is indeffed anyhow. GABgab 15:48, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

23 October 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Both accounts were created in the first half of the year, each has an editing history of about 20 edits in unrelated fields (one has to do with Laos, the other – with business). Then after an editing gap all of a sudden they both come out of the thicket to vote, within 15 minutes of one another, in the RM discussion at Talk:Saraiki dialect, less than a day after it was started. This is LX's favourite area for socking, and the votes of these users are all to the same effect as those of previous socks: [146] [147] ~ [148] [149] [150] [151] etc.

Their previous activity on wikipedia looks more like the creation of a smokescreen than anything else: for example this edit by Fanalysis is simply copying text from another article (at least it's been flagged up as such by another editor [152]). Elevonjan's edits were such that two of them were reverted by Cluebot. Fanalysis has created a user page with a characteristically inane statement: I am Lao Fanalysis. I am from Laos (compare for example with [153] [154]), and has asked disengenuous questions at the teahouse [155] and at another users's talk page [156].

I'm requesting a CU check in the hope that the inevitable sleepers could be discovered, but given that we've seen edits by LX coming from a large number of frequently changing IP addresses, I don't know to what an extent this could be of use. – Uanfala 17:56, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've now also added NtiniMkaya: another user with a small editing history (25 edits on the topic of Myanmar and cities of Asia), who's all of a sudden decided to mess about with the naming conventions on languages [157] (which are highly relevant for the ongoing RM referenced above) and who apparently has a history of impersonating other users [158]. – Uanfala 18:15, 23 October 2017 (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'm not overly familiar with LangaugeXpert's recent activities and there doesn't appear to be any recent confirmed cases I can use for comparison. NtiniMkaya is editing from the same geolocation as previous socks, but Elevonjan and Fanalysis don't appear technically related. It may be helpful to have a checkuser more familiar with the case to take a look?--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:04, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Relisted - As per Ponyo. Thanks, GABgab 18:06, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I blocked "NtiniMkaya" right after he closed the RM with the LX logic. I blocked "Fanalysis" a few hours back as they've continued the standard LX tirade on the RM. I've also blocked "Sobtwo" based on the standard LX canvassing. As for technical relationships, it's quite sometimes difficult to link LX accounts, as Bbb23 knows and a lot of this boils down to evaluating behavior. For some of the troubles, please check the archive, specifically 04-Oct-2016 and 24-December-2016 (specifically "Yoyi ling" which came back as unrelated first and then as confirmed). Some other accounts that I blocked recently but that weren't checkusered -- "FootballCricket", "ParathaDaal". cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 11:34, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm reasonably sure Elevonjan is a LX sock as well. They're following the standard pattern of making small edits in diverse pages before hitting the Saraiki page. And there are other troubling signs. The reference to Dr. Maria's paper ([159]), the odd back and forth with another LX sock ([160]). --regentspark (comment) 17:30, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I blocked "Loferboy" as another sock. And a few IPs too. —SpacemanSpiff 17:32, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • The following accounts are  Confirmed to the master:
    • NtiniMkaya
    • Sobtwo
    • Loferboy
    • ParathaDaal
  • Elevonjan is  Possilikely (a mix between possible and likely)/ Inconclusive to the master and highly  Likely to Yoyi ling (talk · contribs · count). On that basis, I’m blocking and tagging Elevonjan.
  • Fanalysis is  Possible/ Inconclusive. FootballCricket is  Possilikely (a mix between possible and likely)/ Inconclusive.
  • With everyone blocked, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:32, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

29 October 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


A new user the majority of whose edits are canvassing with regard to the Saraiki RM. The canvassing message contains a long list of links that is identical to the one recently posted within the RM in a series of edits by another suspected sock Fanalysis: [161]. – Uanfala 11:02, 29 October 2017 (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]

Already  Blocked and tagged. GABgab 15:26, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/LanguageXpert/Archive&oldid=1138674252"