Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Syed amjad08

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by DMySon (talk | contribs) at 12:56, 3 May 2022 (→‎Comments by other users). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

GermanKity

GermanKity (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Populated account categories: confirmed · suspected
Please note that a case was originally opened under Syed amjad08 (talk · contribs) but has been moved to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/GermanKity. Future cases should be placed under Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/GermanKity.

16 April 2022

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

Suspected sockpuppets

The GermanKity account was blocked on suspicions of undisclosed paid editing in 2021. It was almost certainly connected to a larger sock farm, as noted here (CU indicated a possible match) and here (Blablubbs suggesting "a very likely relationship" to another group of socks), but for today I'd like to focus on the GermanKity account in particular. The connections between GermanKity and DMySon are clear, as explained below:

  • Let's start with the unusual phrase "references to till date". This phrase has been used by DMySon thrice ([1][2][3]) and by GermanKity twice ([4][5]). As this search shows, the phrase has never been used by anyone else in the history of Wikipedia.
  • Next up: "hence failed WP:___" (e.g. WP:GNG, WP:ORGIND, etc.). This form has been used twice by DMySon ([6][7]) and four times by GermanKity ([8][9][10][11]). Again, per this search, never before has such a phrase been used in the history of Wikipedia.
  • Take the very particular sentence "References do not show notability of the ____." It's been used once by DMySon ([12]), thrice by GermanKity ([13][14][15]), and, when written in this way, never before at any other AfD.
  • "Un-referenced article fails": compare [16] by DMySon ("Un-referenced article fails WP:GNG.") with [17] by GermanKity ("Un-referenced article fails WP:NSCHOOL and WP:ORG"). As this search shows, this phrase has only been used thrice in Wikipedia history: once by DMySon, once by GermanKity, and once here by another user (who's likely also a sockpuppet, but that's a story for another time).
  • In edit summaries, both accounts use the word "reff" (with two f's) to denote a reference: see [18] and [19]. I can't say I've ever seen that before.
  • The phrase "Previous deletion log", with a link to the page's deletion log, has been used once by DMySon ([20]) and once by GermanKity ([21]). Capitalized and linked in this way, the phrase has never been used before on Wikipedia; see [22]
  • Take the phrase "no indication of notability. fails WP:GNG". (Note the unusual capitalization.) As this search shows, this phrase has been used just twelve times: twice by DMySon, seven times by GermanKity, twice by blocked socks who are CU-connected to GermanKity (see here), and only a single time by an unrelated user.
  • Both accounts have made requests for a number of permissions, including pending-changes reviewer, AfC reviewer, and new pages reviewer. Unsurprisingly, these requests have a great deal in common: compare [23] (GermanKity; "I wanted to help Wikipedia by reviewing pending Drafts.") with [24] (DMySon; "I want to help Wikipedia as an AFC reviewer.") and [25] (GermanKity; "Please check my deletion logs XFD, PROD, Draftify, CSD.") with [26] (DMySon; "Please also check my Deletion logs. CSD Log, PROD, XFD and Draftify.") There's also a peculiar incident here, in which GermanKity "accidentally" responds to a request that DMySon had made before quickly self-reverting. Perhaps it was a genuine mistake, but another possibility is that somebody forgot which sockpuppet account he was using.
  • Just one more: the very particular phrase "notability is not inherited from the available references". Per this search, the phrase has been used only five times in total: thrice by DMySon ([27][28][29]), once by GermanKity ([30]), and once ([31]) by another account created just three days after DMySon's, which I suspect is also a sockpuppet (but, again, that's a story for another time).

I apologize if I've gone a bit overboard with the evidence, but I felt it was important to be thorough here, particularly since CU is likely stale. I can provide more evidence if necessary (involving further language similarities and shared activity patterns), but the information I've provided above is, in my view, more than enough to justify a behavioral block. Thanks in advance. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 23:55, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking a look, GeneralNotability. While you're here, would you mind checking Jeni Wolf (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)? The writing style is very similar to DMySon's (compare Jeni Wolf's "Lack of significant coverage which are independent of the subject" [32] with DMySon's "Lack of significant coverage which are reliable and independent of the subject" [33] – a phrasing that no other user has ever used before. See also "un-referenced article fails, which has only every been used thrice: once by GermanKity, once by DMySon, and once by Jeni Wolf.), and Jeni Wolf has shown up at AfD to support DMySon's position here and here. By the way, do you see any technical similarities to the Sanketio31 case? JeepersClub is tagged as a Sanketio31 sock, so if DMySon equals GermanKity and GermanKity equals JeepersClub, it might be worth looking into a possible connection. Just a thought. Cheers, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 22:47, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

It's also worth noting that [nil ] and GermanKitty have a lot of overlap, and DMySon is the primary reviewer for their spammy articles: Jerred Price, Raaheela Ahmed, as an example. MickyShy's userpage is nearly identical to GK's (see the bottom), as is DMySon's. CUPIDICAE💕 13:56, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • Not a ton of useful stuff for CU to say here. No data available for GermanKity, some log data available from the possibly-related JeepersClub family. DJSRD geolocates to the same general area as DMySon, but different ISP. MickyShy is all over the map, including geolocations both near DMySon and JeepersClub log data (suspect this is just poor geo accuracy rather than any sort of spoofing). I'm inclined to think they're the same person based on the aforementioned behavioral evidence and general gut feeling, but I'd appreciate a second pair of eyes. GeneralNotability (talk) 17:01, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

27 April 2022

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

Suspected sockpuppets

MickyShy participated in 25 AfDs. Five of those were with DMySon and in all five they came in to support DMySon: [34][35][36][37][38]. One of them also with Jeni Wolf. Same capitalization in edit summaries [39], [40]. Mvqr (talk) 15:58, 27 April 2022 (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

  •  In progress - -- RoySmith (talk) 16:59, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • After a bunch of staring at data for GermanKity, DMySon, MickyShy, and Jeni Wolf, I'm pretty much where GeneralNotability was in 16 April 2022. I'd say they're all  Possilikely (a mix between possible and likely) to each other. Could be one person. Could be multiple people at a PR firm. Could just be multiple people living in the same general area writing about topics of interest to people who live there.  Behavioural evidence needs evaluation -- RoySmith (talk) 18:23, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

02 May 2022

– A user has requested CheckUser. An SPI clerk will shortly look at the case and endorse or decline the request.

Suspected sockpuppets

Thefinaldestiny's vote reason at Riju Jhunjhunwala AfD shares same words and wikilink formats as JoyStick101's previous vote at Swati Bathwal AfD. The link dump in their vote is also similar to JoyStick101's link dump at Swati Bathwal AfD. Their article creations seem very similar to JoyStick101's in the sequence of steps. Non-mainspace edits of both accounts (Thefinaldestiny, JoyStick101) are exclusively AfD votes, draftify-ing via script or Twinkle deletion noms.

In both AfDs, these accounts voted the same as DMySon and using very similar rationales. See for eg JoyStick101 and DMySon where votes have a similar format of links, cookie-cutter source descriptions and WP:THREE invocation. JoyStick101 and DMySon have also voted using similar words in another previous AfD. DMySon removed PROD from Jungo Plus and School Chalo Abhiyan, two of JoyStick101's creations.

Thefinaldestiny's first edit in two years was to create a common.js that was exactly same as JoyStick101's common.js, as updated the day before. This copy is exactly the same as first two lines of User:DMySon/common.js. I understand that formatting similarity may be from copying the code from the respective script pages, but the selection and order of the scripts is same as well.

I don't have any idea about connection to GermanKitty, but have added here since there was an open report here about DMySon already. Hemantha (talk) 18:22, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how common this is, but User:Jeni Wolf/common.js and MickyShy's initial common.js are also exactly same as the above accounts', with the same two scripts. Hemantha (talk) 18:27, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

JoyStick101 was on my radar as well; I can provide more behavioral evidence if that would be helpful. I wasn't previously familiar with Thefinaldestiny, but I agree with Hemantha that that account is likely also connected to this group. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 18:33, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am wondering why i was not notified by any of the editors involved in this discussion? This is a personal attack by a group of editors (It might be possible they all are one person or a group) who want to trap me. This investigation was created on 17 April 2022 by User:Extraordinary Writ without any further notice to me. Now i am surprised that i was not aware about this discussion from the first day but how the other users Hemantha and Mvqr came to know about this discussion? Are they notified by the creator of this investigation?

Furthermore i want to say that i am not aware about the editors Mickyshy, Jeniwolf, Joystick, etc.. If i involved in any of the discussions where these editors are involved, it might be accidently. The above explanations do not have valid points. Any editor can easily copy and paste of other editor's activity. And i don't know how many editors are following my pattern. DMySon (talk) 12:56, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Syed_amjad08&oldid=1085972238"