Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Azamishaque/Archive

Azamishaque

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

14 September 2010

Suspected sockpuppets

Case edu (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
AhmadJawad (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Horticultures (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Tradinguk (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) Note: Blocked for WP:CORPNAME vio, may be useful for technical evidence though.--Terrillja _talk 14:20, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Bahriaintl (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Nhapak (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Evidence submitted by Terrillja

All have been editing an article on Harvest Tradings and/or Ahmad Jawad, the CEO of the company (note who one of the suspected socks is), most have very few contributions, an those are limited to the articles in question for most of them. Most have signed their user talkpages in the exact same manner with no other content, and a number of them have tried to remove the AfD templates using similar reasoning. If that was all that they were up to, I'd call it a WP:DUCK and not ask for CU, but they are now commenting on the AfD discussions with similar reasonings, which could affect the outcome of the deletion discussion, and based on the number of suspected socks, it wouldn't surprise me to find out that there are other sleepers out there. In addition, Nhapak (talk · contribs) has now turned this into some sort of jihad and is canvassing other muslim users to try and rally them to defend the articles. Terrillja _talk 14:19, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties

See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users

I've only been involved in this situation at the AfD for Harvest Tradings, but I do find it concerning that they all appear to be using very similar (and invalid) reasoning, two of the users have attempted to "vote" multiple times, and their overall writing style (spelling, grammar, clarity, etc.) is very similar in each case that I've seen. I also glanced briefly at the contribution history of User:AhmadJawad and noticed that they edited the user page of User:Azamishaque, for example. Some of the accounts have sufficient edits outside the AfD to not be considered SPAs, but none of them have exactly large numbers of edits, and it seems unusual that they have all managed to find their way to the AfD and comment within 2-3 days of its beginning, on a new article about an obscure topic. All of these factors combined produces fairly strong behavioural evidence of sockpuppetry for at least some of the suspected sockpuppets, IMO. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 14:26, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

User:Slaughter00 has apparently added himself to this list (see this admission). David Biddulph (talk) 17:49, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've blocked them (without running a check) for quacking. I've also moved this comment to the archive. TN X Man 18:34, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

All of the accounts are Confirmed as being the same. TN X Man 14:39, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Any other sleepers or was that all of them?--Terrillja _talk 14:45, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There were none that I saw. TN X Man 14:51, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked and tagged by TFOWR. TN X Man 16:15, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

09 October 2010

Suspected sockpuppets

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

Evidence submitted by Terrillja

Same signing of userpage, recreated page that had been deleted by AfD before, adding links to harvest tradings. As we just had the SPI and then this user was created within a few days, I'd like to know if there are other socks out there or not and if a rangeblock is doable without too much collateral. Terrillja _talk 07:58, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties

See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

Clerk endorsed given that the account has previous history of sockpuppeting and continues to do so. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 22:49, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed:

Marshidkhan (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Azamishaq (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Sheryar91 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Nashmias (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Likely:

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

Tiptoety ^talk 02:26, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All blocked -- DQ (t) (e) 02:54, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

29 January 2011

Suspected sockpuppets

AAJPAK (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
SirSadiq (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters "~~~~"

Editing the same subjects as the previous socks, removing db template from copyvio/spam article, SirSadiq appears to have some relation to me as they have copied my userpage almost exactly and the user was created just after the last SPI. AAJPAK has signed their talkpage EXACTLY the same as the other socks and is creating more spam articles in the same niche as the other socks. Asking for CU to look for other socks as every other time there have been additional socks and there is an AfD open, so I don't want that to be affected. Terrillja _talk 03:39, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

Clerk endorsed - Per WP:DUCK I've blocked both accounts, but I'm endorsing to check for sleepers against them, as it seems there could be others, given the tangle of articles here. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 04:13, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Azamishaque is

Stale, but the other two are

Confirmed. No sleepers at a glance. TN X Man 17:52, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

29 January 2011

Suspected sockpuppets

USLeaks (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters "~~~~"

Less than a day after the SPI closes and my userpage and talkpage get hit by a vandal? Given that I haven't done anything else controversial recently and 15 minutes after blanking my pages they happened to stumble across an AfD I had commented on in the same obscure niche as the other socks, quack qack. Ask for another CU to see what is going on here as well since this account was just created and the other two were just blocked with ACB, so they shouldn't be able to create more. Terrillja _talk 21:42, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Respected user Terrillja _talk, Dont make confusion, i think you are involve in this Sock puppet Case. I request admns put him in this investigation. --USLeaks ^t/_c 16:02, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So what you're saying is that it's just coincidence that (a) you just happened to stumble upon Terrilja's user page (only to vandalize it) just minutes after creating your account... the same user page one of the previous socks had actually copied for his own use, and (b) you have the same grammar, style, etc., to your edits, complete with copying Terrilja's signature when mentioning him in context ([1] vs. [2])? WP:HONESTY, please. I think this is a WP:DUCK, but I'm also curious as to why the IP block didn't catch this one, and whether there are any other sleepers. --Kinu ^t/_c 11:29, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Dear User, this is not WP:DUCK. i dont have the same garmmer style as the above user which you mentioned. to copied terjilla signatures only to higlight him infront of panneel.--USLeaks ^t/_c 16:43, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

Clerk endorsed - Yeah, I'd almost call it per WP:DUCK, but CU can confirm. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 14:00, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed to the most recent socks in the archive. The master account is Stale. -- Avi (talk) 06:03, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]