Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Zhanzhao

Zhanzhao

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

For archived investigations, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Zhanzhao/Archive.

23 March 2015

– A checkuser has completed a check on relevant users in this case, and it is now awaiting administration and close.

Suspected sockpuppets

• TCKTKtool (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• 72.196.235.154 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Resaltador (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.
• Editor interaction utility

I don't think that anyone else other than Zhanzhao on this article(Rape in India) could ignore the guidelines like WP:BLPCRIME, WP:NOTABILITY and continuously edit war over undiscussed edits. I am sure that the sole purpose of this account as well as the IP is just to restore the edits of Zhanzhao, and lend support to the arguments of Zhanzhao.

One of the main evidence is that Zhanzhao was recently told to stop violating the WP:ILLEGIT. It was 14 March, and right after a few hours, this IP edit warred on this article. Another evidence is that the IP and the account have used edit summaries for discussion and ignored the ATP.

72 says "This article is about Rape in India",[1] TCKTKtool says "This article is about Rape in India".[2] Zhanzhao says "it IS about rape in india".[3]

Argument is not different, TCKTKtool says "major news",[4] and Zhanzhao says "significant news coverage".[5]

Considerably same edit warring over the ratio/percentage.[6][7] [8][9]

After two downed,[10][11][12] Zhanzhao came and restored it.[13] OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 07:41, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

TCKTKtool says "major news around the world".[14] Zhanzhao says "news agencies around the world".[15] OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 08:35, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Added Resaltador, previously he was blocked for evading his block with 96.231.161.128, an IP that shows same geolocation as 72.196.235.154. Resaltador's edit summary also matches with TCKTKtool.

• Compare [16][17] with [18][19]
• Mentioning the username, [20] [21][22] and [23][24][25] OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 16:53, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

@Vanjagenije: Resaltador's previous block evasion matches with this IP address. Resaltador's mentions only usernames in the edit summaries and mentions the section title in edit summaries, similar to the IP and TCKTKtool. Check again, they are not automatically filled. The automatically filled ones reads differently. See the difference:-

(→‎Unproven/non-notable allegations)[26], by Padenton, it was automatically filled. Font was grey.

(Unproven/non-notable allegations)[27], [28] by TCKTKtool and Resaltador. Not automatically filled, and the font is black. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 03:35, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

• Thanks Dord. Considering the match of the IP's location[29] with the IP with which Resaltador had evaded his block previously,[30][31] exactly same use of rare edit summaries, I believe that we should consider analyzing their behavior. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 14:48, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
• I have checked elsewhere, Zhanzhao has claimed that he often use a "StrongVPN".[32] It is highly useful for fooling any IP match. Also given the confidence of Resaltador and Zhanzhao that they haven't socked while carrying out the admin-shopping[33][34][35] just to target me(see the titles of those talk sections), I cannot believe that 2 unrelated persons would share these similarities.
• Also given Zhanzhao's previous history of abusing WP:ILLEGIT on this article, and clearly reverting to the version of the obvious sock, even using the similar words for his argument, I am certain that he has violated the above policy once again. Over the last 2 years, 132 edits of Resaltador are unrelated with this subject. Zhanzhao had recently added a header to Resaltador's comment,[36] on here, even after knowing that additional headers are removed.[37]

Who had even told Resaltador about this SPI? My contribution history is usually excessive, no would want to take stress of tracking my edits. I cannot find any notification on Resaltador's UTP, if he was notified about the SPI. Any 2 things are possible, #1. Resaltador checked every SPI. #2. He was notified off-wiki. #3. Zhanzhao just thought of extending the raid against this SPI.

^ Second and third point makes more sense. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 15:39, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Clerks/patrolling admins should feel free to look at this evidence, but at best, it is weak and circumstantial. ​—DoRD (talk)​
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
"forgot to sign"[38][39] "NPOV issues"[40][41] "to make it clear"[42][43], [44] "wrong section"[45][46] Zhanzhao capitalises "talk", like Resaltador,[47][48] [49] and DanS76.[50] Specific identification, "by IP". [51][52][53] "formatting"[54][55][56] Capital t of "talk"[57][58][59][60] "headline"[61][62] "to match".[63][64][65] Edit summaries for discussion.[66][67][68][69] 3 words userpage.[70][71] "This is Wikipedia not.."[72][73] What you would like to say? OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 14:48, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Comments by other users

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

Defendant's word in

Zhanzhao

I don't know if there's any relationship between TCKTKtool and the IP, but do go ahead to run a Checkuser on me against them. But since this SPI has been raised against me by OccultZone, can I at least expect the gentlemanly response of an apology from OccultZone after its been decisively proven that I'm not either one of them? Cos its unfair that he keeps firing popshots at me which leaves a record while he gets to keep his own record clean. Zhanzhao (talk) 07:57, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Just to point out about how frivolous some of the accusations are:

72 says "This article is about Rape in India",[74] TCKTKtool says "This article is about Rape in India".[75] Zhanzhao says "it IS about rape in india".[76] OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 07:41, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

May I draw the attention of whoever is overlooking this case to the following edit summary of another editor who also used the exact same words This article is about Rape in India. There aren't that many ways to express a generic statement like this is about XX article. But I guess this escaped the accuser's notice just because that editor didn't happen to get into his bad books. Zhanzhao (talk) 10:54, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Do not move, because this is a direct reply to yet another ridiculous and easily refuted accusation.If you check StrongVPN's service, you will notice that StrongVPN does not have routers points at those areas that the IPs are located. Have you not caught on that whatever evidence you are trying to pull against me, just makes you look sillier? Have it never occured to you that my confidence stems from the very simple fact that I am innocent? Or are you so desparate to believe I am guilty that you have lost that capacity of thought? Stop grasping at straws. Its becoming pathetic. Zhanzhao (talk) 15:38, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Resaltador

I also have no relationship between TCKTKtool, 72.196.235.154, or Zhanzhao. I agree that OccultZone seems to attack anyone that disagrees with him. I try and stay neutral but he is going over board on this. I think a Admin should review his actions not only here but other edits and request as well. Resaltador (talk) 17:56, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

• CheckUser requested - Self-endorsed by clerk for checkuser attention To compare Zhanzhao with TCKTKtool. I'm not so sure about Resaltador. OccultZone, can you find some stronger evidence against Resaltador? Diffs 16-19, those edit summaries are just section titles, automatically filled. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:29, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
•  Clerk note: @OccultZone: You are right, Resaltador is also suspicious. He should also be checked. Vanjagenije (talk) 08:05, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
• These three accounts are  Unrelated.  No comment with respect to IP address(es). ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
• @OccultZone: Zhanzhao has claimed that he often use a "StrongVPN" - I was fully aware of that, and it had no bearing on my results. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:57, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

---