Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Abrvagl

Abrvagl

Abrvagl (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/Abrvagl/Archive.

07 October 2023

– This SPI case is open.

Suspected sockpuppets

• Aredoros87 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • SPI Tools

Aredoros87 is a new account, created less than 2 months ago. They already have over 500 edits and started editing in Armenia-Azerbaijan topic area only recently once they became extended-confirmed, assuming because of the restriction in this topic area WP:GS/AA. Aredoros87 does edit very similar to an Armenia-Azerbaijan topic-banned user Abrvagl: both edit in same POV, they edit in same articles such as Ramil Safarov, doing edits like ‘citation needed’ tags [1], [2]. bot use ‘BLP’ as reason for removing content [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], both use ‘partisan’ as reason to remove Armenian sources [8], [9]. Behavioral similarities look strong, a CheckUser might reveal more. - Kevo³²⁷ (talk) 09:01, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Comments by other users

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

• Comment by Abrvagl: This SPI is groundless. I only have one Wikipedia account, which is "Abrvagl." As for the claims of "strong behavioral similarities", it is important to note that adhering to Wikipedia's guidelines, such as appropriately tagging missing citations or removing unreliable and biased non-RS references such as "panarmenian.net" or "sumgait.info," particularly when they are used to support claims concerning living persons, is a shared behavioral similarity among conscientious Wikipedia editors.

I would personally rather focus scrutiny on those who contribute such substandard content to Wikipedia. I do not know who @Aredoros87: is, but I can only express my gratitude to him/her for the outstanding job of cleaning Wikipedia from low-quality content. A b r v a g l ^(PingMe) 07:35, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

@MarioGom, no new evidence has been presented in fact. KhndzorUtogh simply referred to the same similarities that Kevo had previously highlighted, albeit with different diffs. As I mentioned earlier, these "similarities" can hardly be considered as such, as any editor acting in good faith would remove a BLP supported by dubious sources or dismiss any obviously unreliable sources as Aredoros87 did.

Also, it is suspicious to me that KhndzorUtogh, who participated at SPI only once before, all of a sudden appeared here after Kevo327 was indefinitely blocked, and diligently pursuing a goal to prove that Aredoros87 is my sock.

@Aredoros87:, you mentioned that you use a VPN to be able to access Wikipedia. If possible, can you privately contact the admins here(via email, for example) and disclose your actual IP address to them? This would greatly assist in putting an end to this groundless SPI. Thanks. A b r v a g l ^(PingMe) 17:19, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

• Comment by Aredoros87: I don't know where did this come from. I was minding my own business and somehow ended up here. I would not even know about it if I was not tagged by Abrvagl today. I have no idea who Abrvagl is or Kevo327. Those "sources" are clearly attack pages and violates BLP.

I checked Kevo327's history and figured out that this user has multiple issues with different people especially regarding to Armenia-Azerbaijan topics. He/She has been banned for 3 days and warned 3 different people on the same topic. The only thing makes sense for me is to assume Kevo's Bad Faith. Thanks. Aredoros87 (talk) 08:43, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

• Comment by KhndzorUtogh: How come Aredoros87, who is suspected to be a topic banned user because of similar behavior on various controversial articles which are related to the topic area subject to Arbcom sanctions, is allowed to continue making further controversial edits in anonymity by use of a VPN? Are we even allowed to use a VPN, considering that these are very contentious topics subject to Arbcom remedies? If so, how can this policy be enforced if users are allowed to use tools which negate checkuser info? --KhndzorUtogh (talk) 21:34, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

  Without VPN I cannot access to Wikipedia from the place I live now. Aredoros87 (talk) 09:24, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

@MarioGom: I have found a great deal of behavior overlap. Both have a strong interest in the Ramil Safarov article, which was the second article Abrvagl edited,[10] and Abrvagl then started a discussion wanting to remove content on the article.[11] This is exactly what Aredoros, a 2-month-old account that begins editing articles like Safarov and Khojali massacre immediately after reaching 500 edits, is doing now. By looking ove their edit history, I found a very similar behavioral pattern: using the word "partisan" to remove content they don't like, by both Abrvagl[12][13][14] and Aredoros.[15][16][17] --KhndzorUtogh (talk) 23:20, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

•  Clerk declined - Abrvagl is  Stale, so CheckUser won't tell us anything usefull. Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:54, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

   Clerk assistance requested: Abrvagl is no longer stale. Would CU be in order now? - UtherSRG (talk) 14:54, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

• I've restored the CU request per above. This isn't an endorsement as I haven't looked into the case beyond this. Spicy (talk) 11:41, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
•  Unlikely: Aredoros87 is using a VPN service so I cannot confirm anything, but the two accounts appear technically distinct.  Behavioural evidence needs evaluation. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 21:49, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
• Not enough behavioral evidence.  Closing without action. MarioGom (talk) 17:15, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
• Re-opened. New evidence seems worth another look. MarioGom (talk) 08:46, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

---