Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/My Lord/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


My Lord

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

02 October 2017

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


IndianEditor made some edits to Varna (Hinduism) and discussed them on the talk page-- basically arguing with other editors about the nature of Varna and reliable sources. [[1]] [[2]] After IndianEditor was banned for disruptive editing, GhostProducer appeared and continued the argument on Joshua Jonathan's talk page.

GhostProducer has also picked up where IndianEditor left off on pages like Hindu Cosmology and Hindu Units of Time PepperBeast (talk) 21:59, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

GhostProducer reinstates edits by indefinitely blocked user:IndianEditor [3] [4] and [5] [6]. JimRenge (talk) 03:11, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've got the same impression. Why re-insert this specific original research, when multiple editors already opposed, c.q. commented? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:29, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What a joke?? I didn't delete this [7] I shifted it to here [8]

And Please see History of Sadhguru page [9] I have made this page better than anything.

And as far this edit is concerned [10] one can simply see the difference between [11] and [12]. Edit by Indian Editor includes Gautma Buddha which I removed due to lack of sources. GhostProducer (talk)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

08 October 2017

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


IndianEditor was blocked on 19 September and their sockpuppet GhostProducer on 5 October. CEO of Universe was created on 7 October and immediately started editing the same articles where IndianEditor and Ghostproducer have been active.

PepperBeast (talk) 20:01, 8 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]

This case is being reviewed by Sro23 as part of the clerk training process. Please allow them to process the entire case without interference, and pose any questions or concerns either on their Talk page or on this page if more appropriate.

14 June 2018

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

IndianEditor was blocked for WP:CIR issues and pro-Indian POV pushing in September last year. Since CU records for them will be stale I think I will have to ask for a behavioral investigation. IndianEditor's oother known socks were also caught through SPIs of behavioural evidence without any CU.[13][14]

The behaviour of IndianEditor and My Lord is identical. I am breaking the evidence down into separate sections. It just can't be a coincidence that two users are contributing to the same obscure, low-profile articles, happen to have the same edits, same edit summaries and interaction with other users, all at the same time.

Article/subject overlap
Similar/same editing of content

The edits are also the same.

  • Both My Lord [30] and IndianEditor[31] remove mention of Indus valley from the same sentence on Pakistan.
  • On Jaggi Vasudev both My Lord[32][33] and IndianEditor[34][35] edit war to remove the same content about the subject's Wife's death.
  • Both edit in only the same section, Architecture, on the Mumbai article.[36]. Actually, the edits of My Lord[37] and IndianEditor[38] here are almost exactly the same.
  • In relation to Pakistan both push POV that Pakistan doesn't have this or that
  • Both insist on balance between Hindus and Muslims in relation to Jammu and Kashmir. Also note the similarity in language in both diffs (i.e. the absence of full stops between sentences except for a full stop between the last and second-last sentences).
    • My Lord:[43] Insists on exclusion of content on massacres of Muslims in Jammu unless experience of other communities (i.e. Hindus) are also included.
    • IndianEditor: [44] Insists on inclusion of Kashmiri Hindus in the article's very first line.
Identical Behaviour on Talk:Hindu cosmology

On Talk:Hindu cosmology both would express frustration and disappointment at Ms Sarah Welch (talk · contribs) that their content was not being accepted into the mainspace.[45][46][47]. (Also observe in both diffs 33 and 34 that both accounts have given each of their sentences a separate line. Thats another behavioral match)

Behavioural matches based on edit summaries and lingustic analysis
Odd use of punctuation marks
  • Both My Lord[48] and IndianEditor[49] like using exclamation marks (!) in edit summaries.
  • Both IndianEditor[50] and My Lord[51] also like using several question marks (??) together.
Identical/similar edit summaries

Edit summaries are also similar. Both heavily use the terms "added" and "updated" in edit summaries.

Similar random capitalizations

People only capitalize the first word and proper nouns in a sentence. But you see with both these accounts that both make odd random capitalizations of words in their edit summary sentences.

Additional evidence of random capitalizations
IndianEditor
  • "Added Links and Deleted extra Words" [95]
  • "Added Life of Brahma"
  • "Don't Dare to Delete this" [96]
  • "Added Story about Submergence of Dvarka in Mahabharata" [97]
  • "Added Archaeology Findings" [98]
  • "Dvārakā is Confusing as well as It's not easy to Search. So I replaced this with Dvarka" [99]
  • "Corrected Spelling if Billion" [100]
  • "Added Sanskrit Translation" [101]
  • "Its better to use Simple Terms. "Kya" is Confusing for readers who don't know about these terms" [102]
  • "Added Name of brahma in Sanskrit" [103]
  • "Corrected Spelling" [104]
  • "added more info with sources Will work on the Page" [105]
  • "Added Description label" [106]
My Lord
  • "Deleted some Wrong info and added important information" [107]
  • " Undo Unwanted deletion" [108]
  • "Added a line We have discussed it in Talk page" [109]
  • "Fixed grammar of Article" [110]
  • "I dedicate my 200th Edit to Shiva" [111]
  • "There is a difference between Co production and ghost production"[112]
  • "Again I am telling There is difference between co production and Ghost production" [113]
Referencing similarities

Same styles of referencing.

  • Both have www.google.co.in in their references and add in full Google Book URLs. [114][115] Both also suffice with author, publisher, title, URL but exclude ISBNs.
  • They both add citation parameters in weird places. Here IndianEditor writes the page number parameter before the publisher[121]and again writes pane number parameter before author and publisher parameter here.[122] My Lord has the same struggle, he writes the page number parameter before title parameter here[123] and here[124].
  • This odd use of parameters can also be seen on the edits on Hinduism. IndianEditor adds page number parameter before the author's parameter[125]. So does My Lord.[126] Again both use full Google book URLs with www.google.co.in in the URL parameter.
  • Its also seen on Hindu units of time. My Lord again inserts the page number parameter before the author/publisher parameter here.[127] Indian Editor does likewise on the same article with the page number parameter before the author parameter in his citations.[128] Again both use full Google books URLs with www.google.co.in in the URL parameter.

'Similarities in instructions to other users

  • IndianEditor's edit summaries instructed people not to do things (i.e. "don't") [129][130][131]
  • My Lord also tells people not to do things (i.e. "you can't") in his edit summaries. [132][133]

Obaid Raza (talk) 05:49, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My Lord has given a thoroughly unconvincing response. IndianEditor was never subject to a CheckUser. He was blocked for his WP:CIR issues. So for all Wikipedia may know IndianEditor may well have been your sock rather than the other way around. I did not find it reasonable to list an already blocked account as your sockpuppet because the evidence shows that a blocked user is still operating another one of their accounts (whether its the primary or secondary one is irrelevant) which has till now evaded detection due to the lack of CU. Its not unknown that users blocked for disruption maintain their other accounts which have escaped by pure luck despite same behaviour.

  • Contrary to My Lord's claim, the style of disruption by the two accounts is the same. As we already all know, IndianEditor had serious WP:CIR issues, as evident from the number of their talkpage warnings.[134][135][136][137][138]
  • Like him you also have a sheer number of talkpage warnings for the same style of disruption, often on the same/similar pages.[139][140][141][142][143][144][145]
  • Interestingly both you[146] and IndianEditor have been blocked for copyright violations.[147][148]

So there really is no difference between the behaviours of either you or IndianEditor. Its identical.

  • Your response about the editing on obscure articles is non-understandable. I checked the article histories of these pages before I brought this case here. See for instance Satya Yuga, where there were only 6 other editors in the year 2017 besides you and IndianEditor. Those six did not have the same rate of overlap as you two nor did they have the same style of editing and other behaviour.
  • On Jaggi Vasudev you have 2nd ranking and IndianEditor had 13th ranking (probably because that account was here for a less amount of time)[149]
  • The ratio of “added” and “updated” in the edit summaries of both of you is remarkably similar (especially in those of your edits closer to IndianEditor’s time of activity)
  • You both are mainly inactive between 22pm-4am. Which confirms that both accounts are in the same time zone. Add to that the same edit summaries, same capitalisations (which conveniently happen to both of you but not to the others who are editing the same articles as you two on their mobiles).
  • Then there is the issue of both you making the ‘’’exact same edits’’’ on several pages, even edit warring for the exact same content, which confirms you are just one person behind the usernames.
  • And then there is the exact same writing style, line breaks, use of “@” etc in the complaining against Ms Sarah Welch on Talk:Hindu cosmology.

Of course it is possible that people living in the same country may have similar interests and while its true that different users may have behavioural similarities here and there but you two share too many characteristics for anyone to agree you are two separate people. The similarities between you two actually ‘’’pile up’’’ all together at an extraordinary rate and this high rate of similarities cannot be a coincidence at all. You are the same person.

I have suspected your link with IndianEditor long before I commented at the AE concerning you and was going to file this anyway. My AE comment was caused by your level of (continuing) disruption on the Project which is evidenced by the sheer number of editors who have had to warn you on your page. Obaid Raza (talk) 18:20, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Vanjagenije: and @BU Rob13:. I think this SPI has gone on long enough. There is clear evidence here of WP:DUCK between IndianEditor, My Lord and Iamgod12345 (as pointed out by Pepperbeast). You guys have taken action in the previous cases of IndianEditor so I think you will be the best for some action here too. Cheers. Obaid Raza (talk) 06:24, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Pepperbeast points out Iamgod12345 is another stale sock. Same interest in Kashmir[150] and articles like Jaggi Vasudev, Kshmr. Iamgod12345 has the same emphasis on using multiple question marks[151][152] as My Lord and IndianEditor. Also has the same random capitalisation issues[153][154]]https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jaggi_Vasudev&diff=prev&oldid=808142516] as My Lord and IndianEditor. Whats also interesting is the similarity in usernames. There's an element of divinity in both. Iamgod12345 and My Lord. Coincidence? Not by a long shot.
Another interesting thing is that recently, and especially since this SPI has been filed, My Lord's editing style has changed. He is no longer making random capitalisations nor using words like "added" or "updated". His writing style, edit summaries and language have also evidently changed. My guess is that he is moving to mask all the behavioural similarities with IndianEditor, ample evidence of which I have already shown on the SPI, so that editors unfamiliar with IndianEditor's case and My Lord's earlier editing history, can open his contributions, (knowing they will only read the recent hundred or so) and think to themselves "oh he does not sound like IndianEditor". Those who are familiar with this user's history are not that gullible.Obaid Raza (talk) 03:13, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

You forgot to add the most interesting fact that IndianEditor is a newer account than mine.

Jaggi Vasudev, Yuga, Brahma, Kshmr, Bhuvan Bam, Satya Yuga are not obscure articles but popular articles and everyone in South Asia know about them including you, per your own understanding. They are all related to each other in numerous senses. When you edit same article you would happen to interact same editors, but there's a BIG difference in my reaction and that of IndianEditor. IndianEditor was multiple times blocked for his actions, I wasn't.

Editing same popular articles and using most common edit summaries, are not similarities. Even if I am going to take your claims that I have edited all those interrelated articles way before IndianEditor,[155][156][157][158][159] after that I created IndianEditor someday to started edit warring, insulting and get blocked. Then according to you, I created new accounts to defend such content in place of using a more established account, "My Lord". Sorry to see that you think this connection is funny and laughable, but its not. It's wholly unrealistic.

"random capitalizations" is a technical defect and it is not alien to anyone who is editing with a mobile device. There are many sources detailing this problem on random capitalization of words as technical defect.[160][161] Even the President of the US, Donald Trump couldn't avoid it.[162] Cherry picking a couple of my messages won't do anything since my most messages are rid of such capitalization. I didn't added "full Google Book URLs", did not "exclude ISBNs" etc. you can read my article Point 5240 in place of cherrypicking. I edit often with Wikipedia:ProveIt, thus referencing style is automated. Now this alone debunks your lousy analysis of referencing.

FWIW, you failed to get me banned on WP:ARE,[163] so now you have resorted to this nonsense.

I think that's enough for me to add regarding this absurd SPI. Consider searching a better way to win disputes. My Lord (talk) 13:09, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is a clear case of WP:DUCK. IndianEditor used to push the WP:TERRORIST label on the articles of Kashmiri rebels.[164] My Lord does the same.[165] As Obaid Raza said, its possible that people living in the same time zone have the same interests. But the same edits? Same punctuation mistakes (which no one else has on those articles these 2 edited)? Sure sometimes coincidences happen. But these are just too many. The identical language structure and behavior on Talk:Hindu cosmology[166][167][168] and going to edit war for the same content[169][170][171][172] pretty much clears this case. Nauriya - Lets talk 22:05, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]


What has actually convinced you to edit this SPI when in fact you are editing this space after 2 years? I hope you can acknowledge the problems with this SPI. Obaid Raza admitted that he can't write in English[173] yet he files an SPI like this even though he's never actually interacted with My Lord ever before[174] (just like you[175]). Don't pretend to be a CheckUser by using their templates. It doesn't any more credibility to this SPI. --RaviC (talk) 12:20, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think I see anything significant that hasn't already been pointed out here. Small aquatic bird of the family anatidae. FWIW, I think Iamgod12345 is another sock (but a stale one). PepperBeast (talk) 20:35, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Abecedare: Obaid Raza (the filer of this report) never even edited an SPI ever before this SPI[181], let alone creating one. As already noted here, Obaid Raza no interaction with My Lord,[182] neither the two of the other editors (Nauriya,[183] مھتاب احمد[184]) who are pretending to have deep interactions ever had any. Nauriya's inability to write above English has been established on his own SPI, while Obaid Raza said he can't speak English as recently as 2015.[185] مھتاب+احمد never edited an SPI ever before either.[186] These same editors were involved in fishing expedition on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/My Lord, an SPI that is completely frivolous. What I i am trying to say is that the report has not been filed by the users themselves but given to them, like it had been established the same about Nauriya on Faizanali.007's SPI. In all fairness, if My Lord is to be blocked, then these 3 accounts (مھتاب+احمد, Obaid Raza, Nauriya) should be blocked for the violation of WP:MEAT which is indeed a violation of WP:SOCK. The filing of the report has been undoubtedly suspicious as well as the attempts to get My Lord blocked anyhow.
As for the SPI, whether My Lord and IndianEditor are connected or not, fact remains that My Lord has been an excellent contributor and has not repeated the behavior of the account "IndianEditor" and instead improved himself significantly. I would remind what was done at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Faizanali.007, that the SPI was closed with no blocks, regardless of Nauriya's mass copyvio, meat puppetry, frivolous SPIs and more recent violations. I believe that this case is far more simple than that and should be closed as no action given My Lord has not been in violation of any policy for long and has significantly learned and improved. The problem is not current and the CheckUser on other SPI has already confirmed that My Lord has not been socking.[187] Razer(talk) 16:12, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes I used the IndianEditor, etc. for evading the real life identity. However, I denied it here because I felt that admitting the sock puppetry would lead to a speedy block and I had been more concerned about the real life identity and also the on-going content disputes such as Talk:Exodus of Kashmiri Hindus#Restart. In real life I live in a very troubled area, it is militancy prone. I was not accurately aware of sock puppetry policy, I was not even aware that you would be unblocked if you have abused multiple accounts. I think I was never guided that way. The above mentioned account Iamgod12345 was also mine but I stopped using it the day I carefully read WP:SOCK and realized that any use of undeclared accounts is the violation of the policy. Since then I stopped abusing all multiple accounts and worked hard to rectify the errors that I used to make as IndianEditor. After learning WP:SOCK I also learned that usernames can be changed, and I wanted to change because of the location where I live. Changing username that would solve the problem, thus making me realize that creating multiple accounts must had been a bad idea after all and result of weak understanding of the policy. ML talk 18:23, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am concerned with the suspicious SPIs of Obaid Raza. He never interacted me and filed a bogus SPI against me Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AmritasyaPutra that he obviously didn't create himself because he lacks any necessary interaction. Nauriya is also engaging in that meat puppetry in this SPI. I don't see a reason why this disruption should be ignored when policy on WP:MEAT has been violated by three of the editors. Is there any reasonable finding that we need to ignore it? It is too difficult to think that if Nauriya was not blocked for his 5 years of socking which involved editing and recreating same articles as main account - but My Lord has been blocked regardless of any recent abuse. Sdmarathe (talk) 04:26, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: given the current circumstances, I request to run a CU on the abuser. For more socks/sleepers. As the accused has openly confessed, and there are multiple socks, I think a CU is justified/not out of order. Pinging Bbb23 for his opinion/guidance. —usernamekiran(talk) 07:37, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
  • I was emailed to take a look at this SPI report that has been lying unattended for over a month. At random sampling of the evidence, the case is at least intriguing. Example, adding the same (since deleted) image to Mumbai [188], [189] etc. But most suspicious is the editing history at:
Those three articles were a significant (and very idiosyncratic) common interest for Indian Editor and their socks Ghostproducer and CEO of Universe. My Lord had just one prior edit to one of those articles but became heavily involved in all three starting November 2017 once the three socks had been blocked and it became clear that any new account appearing at those articles would be easily spotted as an IndianEditor sock.
Pinging @Bishonen and Pepperbeast: who have dealt with IndianEditor and their known socks, for further input. Abecedare (talk) 15:02, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • @My Lord: I'll ask directly: Were User:IndianEditor et al your accounts? I noticed that the My Lord account was inactive in the June 17−Oct 26, 2017 period, which is when those accounts were created and were active. Given that, and your account name change earlier this year, I can at least imagine some legitimate reasons for you creating the IndianEditor account originally. IMO, would help if you were straightforward. Abecedare (talk) 17:56, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
While I can see arguments for no-admin-action, or for indef, currently my inclination is towards, say, a 2 week block, since My Lord's actions have been against policy; disruptive; and, edits to same articles by the various socks have created misleading impression for support/opposition to certain content All this is somewhat ameliorated by lack of current sock-puppetry and other reasons cited by Razer2115 (last para) (also indeffing accounts users who admit sockpuppetry removes any incentive to ever do so).
Since Bishonen appears to be off-wiki at present, pinging User:Bbb23 for a sanity check, and for input on if/how the case-name and tags need to be updated. Abecedare (talk) 18:44, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Abecedare: Blocking a sock for a limited time is rarely justified. I would block indefinitely. If they want to be unblocked, they will have a good deal of explaining to do. I would do it myself, but you've spent all the time on this, not me.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:49, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
My Lord is correct: they are the master, not a sock. Although that means a limited duration block could be imposed, I still think ML should be indeffed. What's happened here is not acceptable, and if there's any leniency to be shown, ML should wait at least the SO six months from now before requesting an unblock and explaining why it should be granted.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:41, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Blocked without tags
Iamgod12345 (talk · contribs)
My Lord (talk · contribs)
the latter with advice to use SO after appropriate wait and clean-conduct. Abecedare (talk) 22:23, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. Accounts re-tagged. Case closed. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:08, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

08 July 2018

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Just a day after Obaid Raza initiated a behavioural investigation on 14 June into My Lord's association with Indian Editor, this new account is registered.[190] My guess is that since there shall be no CU in that SPI, My Lord thought he might get away with creating another sock.

Sometime in early 2018 My Lord's editing style changed and began to resemble a different user's. In other words his main account's main function now is to be a meat puppet for that other user. So it is probable to carry on his own wholly independent editing, on the sidelines of the main account's proxy editing, he made this new account, which behaves the exact way as the My Lord of 2017.

Adding The Truth's IP[191] shows he is from Jammu,[192] a predominantly Hindu city in Jammu and Kashmir. My Lord's special interest in Kashmiri Hindus[193][194] indicates a similar origin.

Common editing traits include Pakistan bashing. Adding the Truth: [195][196][197][198]; My Lord: [199][200][201]

Edit summaries of both use the term added extensively, My Lord (2017): [202] [203]; Adding The Truth: [204]

^Same predominant use of a mobile device between Adding The Truth and My Lord (in the 2017 edits).

Both like to claim they are fixing bias by showing "both sides" [205][206]

Same language/style of complaining to other editors that their edits are not being accepted into main space. They also like to give each sentence in their complaint a separate line.[207][208]

It seems to have been quite a while since My Lord last used his mobile device. CU might not be able to get those details now. So it is possible that My Lord is using a PC and Adding The Truth is being segregated to the mobile. Still a CU needs to be run, maybe other sleepers could be found and/or an technical connection between these accounts. If CU results are not conclusive there nees to be a behavior analysis. مھتاب احمد (talk) 09:27, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

Same habit of adding things WP:WEASEL terminology such as "alleged" or contentious attributions like "Pakistan claims", despite WP:YESPOV, to sentences on Kulbhushan Jadhav.

They also share a habit of "neutralizing statements" on that article by adding "counter-statements"

 Sounds like a duck quacking into a megaphone to me. But I am also concerned with the mobile issue. Adding The Truth, like My Lord used to in 2017, makes mobile edits. However, since several months My Lord has stopped making mobile edits. Its possible some technicalities may be missed by Checkuser because of device segregation. Which is why there needs to be a behavioural evaluation. Nauriya, Let's talk 14:34, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't looked at Adding The Truth's edits. They don't have many edits so I don't think there is much evidence to go on here. But there is a clear overlap and behavioural evidence connecting My Lord to IndianEditor[217] who was blocked in 2017. Same edits, even edit wars for the same content, all from the same time zone. Theres tonnes of linguistic matches too. For that case (not this one) I say  Sounds like a duck quacking into a megaphone to me. Obaid Raza (talk) 17:03, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WOW! I'm on a trial here? I think I need to make a few not naive comments here. There have been a lot of irrelevant points which need to be countered.

1) Looks like مھتاب احمد and Nauriya need to realize that if 2 different people use their mobile devices which obviously are different of course, doesn't mean they are the same people. There are over 2 billion mobile device users on Earth.

2) How many ways are there to refer a person/establishment from a country? For eg, you are going to use 'Pakistani' or "Pakistan's" more often than not when referring to something/someone from the Islamic Republic of Pakistan like you do with any other country.

3) مھتاب احمد - "Just a day after Obaid Raza initiated a behavioural investigation on 14 June into My Lord's association with Indian Editor, this new account is registered.[1] My guess is that since there shall be no CU in that SPI, My Lord thought he might get away with creating another sock." You need to try harder, mate. How is that even relevant?

4) My friend مھتاب احمد has presented his/her case very immaturely and tried stuffing religion in out of nowhere which didn't make any sense at first but made a lot of sense after I saw their profile.

5) When there is a dispute between claims by the two opposing side and no one's claims are conclusive, "alleged" is the word used as per the English language. IT DOES NOT VIOLATE NPOV. Try reading the edits made on a particular article.

I feel like I've said enough even though I haven't even commented on the IP address (along with Hindu city!? Wait, what? Lol) they've mentioned. It's rather funny.

I rest my case. Adding The Truth (talk) 16:09, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

 Behavioural evidence needs evaluation. As noted above there is a mobile/non-mobile thing. CU won't help with that, though we can say that the mobile device used by My Lord on 5 June and before is not the same device used by Adding The Truth. We can also say that the CU results wouldn't rule anything out. -- zzuuzz (talk) 13:18, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Clerk notes: I am taking as conclusive evidence of sockpuppetry:
    1. I'm interpreting the technical result as  Inconclusive (courtesy ping zzuuzz) which means that a connection is not ruled out.
    2. Both My Lord (ML) and Adding The Truth (ATT) pushed a POV (under the guise of neutrality) that certain details of Kulbhushan Jadhav's arrest were claims made by Pakistani authorities, against the apparent stable consensus that they are factual details rather than disputed claims. They were the only two accounts to do this.
    3. ML and ATT both defended their SPIs in similar fashion: highlighting lack of previous association with the filer, suggesting a retaliatory battleground motive to the report, and dismissing the allegation with a mild insult. GhostProducer also did this.
    4. ML has admitted, after having denied it up to yesterday, that they operated the IndianEditor accounts, and I take their statement to mean that they deliberately created separate accounts in order to "silo" their edits to evade scrutiny. ATT fits that profile. And while ML claims that they have not created any new socks in the past nine months, they lied about the IndianEditor accounts right on this page right up to yesterday, so I have no reason to trust that claim. I also note that ML seems to have deliberately altered their behaviour between the master account and the various socks, in a way which makes ATT look more behaviourally similar to the older accounts.
For these reasons, Adding The Truth is  Blocked and tagged. Updating and closing. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:02, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/My_Lord/Archive&oldid=1138676115"