Eulalefty

Eulalefty (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log· investigate · cuwiki)
11 May 2015
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Both Users have an issue with the addition of "According to the World Christian Encyclopedia, the fastest-growing branch of Islam is Ahmadiyya." on Muslim population growth. Although the registered user last edited the article on 13th April, the IP user began its first edit on 15th April. They both have edited the articles Megalopolis (city type) and List of languages by total number of speakers. They have edited the same row of table here and here. --Peaceworld 10:13, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

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

I do forget from time to time to login into my account. 198.16.164.205 (talk) 10:42, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to assume good faith, but you have forgotten to login in every edit concerning Muslim population growth, which amounts to edits over 4 different days?--Peaceworld 11:09, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Second, you have made a lot more edits via IP than your account.--Peaceworld 11:13, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I login mostly to edit protected articles otherwise I just simply edit. 198.16.164.205 (talk) 11:50, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, 198.16.164.205 is currently my IP address. Eulalefty (talk) 12:32, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
User:Peaceworld111 is in violation of WP:SPA because he has hardly made any edits outside of these two topics Ahmadiyya and Islam. Eulalefty (talk) 13:03, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No, they are not a SPA - Islam is a broad topic - and it is a borderline personal attack to call them such. If you have a problem with their edits, this is not the proper venue, so I must direct you elsewhere. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:22, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]

29 May 2015
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
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]

16 June 2015
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

User:Eulaefty and his/her sockpuppet accounts have a history of editing the article Muslim population growth and adding the phrase "but Ahmadis are considered non-Muslims by the mainstream Muslims." After having reported sockpuppets of User:Eulaefty twice they were blocked. Afterwards I reverted the edit of a sockpuppet that had by now been blocked and removed the phrase. After about two weeks User:Advilgetup creates an account and reverts my edit which most likely means that the user was aware of the situation two weeks earlier. It is important to note also that the revert was the user's first edit. (Note that most new users are even unaware of the existence of the revert button). The editor endorsed the edit by sockpuppets of User:Eulaefty by stating "Not sure why this shouldn't be added." By creating a two week delay, it appears to be an attempt to bypass previous evidences that were used against sockpuppets of User:Eulaefty. I hope I am wrong in my assessment. --Peaceworld 20:07, 16 June 2015 (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]

18 July 2015

[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

User:Eulalefty, its sockpuppets and (declared) IPs have a history of writing Ahmadiyya as a "non-Muslim" group. For one of many examples see here. Yesterday, an account was created User:Bharatooz under which the following edit was made: here, declaring Ahmadiyya as a "heterodox" denomination. Roughly 3 hours later a (declared) IP of the sockmaster, namely User:198.16.164.205 creates a link to the word "heterodox", here. It appears the user must have logged off by mistake and given away the evidence. --Peaceworld 09:06, 18 July 2015 (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]


21 July 2015

[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

I am getting fed up reverting socks on Muslim population growth. An account User:Earnshulks was created solely to remove the following sentence According to the World Christian Encyclopedia, the fastest-growing branch of Islam is Ahmadiyya, something which the socks of Eulalefty have always had an issue with. This "new" user is definitely aware of Wikipedia jargon such as "edit-warring"; "vandalism" and knowns the existence of policies, see here and [2]. Incidentally, the user uses the same "edit-warring" argument in his/her edit-summary as the sockmaster Eulalefty, here. Perhaps I'm clutching at straws here. --Peaceworld 18:03, 21 July 2015 (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]

24 July 2015

[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

The account is created soon after the last set of blocks.

I think that should suffice as evidence although there is a lot more. --Peaceworld 09:51, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

Please see Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Muslim_population_growth. The changes I made was through proper channels. I am not Eulalefty. Jjkajaja (talk) 11:48, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

30 July 2015

[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

The two similar usernames are essentially expanded versions of User:Jjkajaja. The accounts were created soon after Jjkajaja was blocked. Secondly, Jayjaykijayjay continues to maintain editing interests of sockpuppets of Eualefty. --Peaceworld 16:43, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

Adding another likely account. 2601:188:0:ABE6:489F:358E:490D:8C66 (talk) 17:24, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

10 May 2016

[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

It seems that the sockmaster has begun its cycle once again, roughly a year after it was first reported. Dozens of sock acounts, IP addresses, and proxy addresses have been blocked that have been linked to the sockmaster. I present the following evidence which links this IP address to the sockmaster and its puppets:

I should perhaps add, if at all relevant, that the sockmaster and its puppets have accused me of vandalism, e.g. [16], [17], and may have been guilty of a personal attack against me, [18] --Peaceworld 13:45, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This IP [19] and the IP associated to the sockmaster, [20] both originate from Ontario, Canada.--Peaceworld 14:13, 10 May 2016 (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]

08 June 2016

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

The following evidence should suffice:

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]

15 August 2016

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

IP has edited

This IP [25] is also from the same region as the the one belonging to the sockmaster [26]. --Peaceworld 19:35, 15 August 2016 (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]

10 September 2016

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

This account was created almost 2 hours after I reported the last sock here.

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]

 Clerk endorsed because of timing and this user's lengthy archive history of socks. Please also check for sleepers here. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 18:39, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Richwales: What accounts aren't stale?--Bbb23 (talk) 19:06, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Just in case a CU can do anything with Metaphysicswar, and/or with any info on Eulalefty that might have been saved in the CU wiki from past checks. If not, I'll understand if you need to decline. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 19:16, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
My knowledge of this case is pretty old, but I'll take a stab at it. Ponyo's knowledge is more recent, so she might be able to add something when she's back on-wiki.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:33, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

24 October 2017

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Account created on 18 September, we can see same obsessional edit warring from him over same lead material on Islam, Science and Pakistan,[27][28][29][30] like he did previously with his sock Twitteristhebest.[31][32][33][34][35] Lorstaking (talk) 11:36, 24 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]

24 October 2017

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Comments by other users

[edit]

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

After going through archives, I am realizing there are more socks. There is an IP that is making same edits on Islam in South Asia[40] as the IP[41] that @Ponyo: had blocked.[42] Both IPs are same. Lorstaking (talk) 08:56, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
@Ponyo: Before I archive this, is there a particular reason ShalahPIA isn't tagged? Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:07, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Sir Sputnik: Just an oversight on my part. Tag away! --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:52, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

02 November 2017

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

The more go through into the histories of concerning articles the more I find socks.

000meow

Same obsession with claiming Pakistan to be "cradle of civilization",[43][44] (though "civilisation" is correct spelling for Pakistani articles) obsession with lead on Islam,[45][46] created the article Islam in South Asia [47] where the recently blocked IP per last report[48] has heavily contributed, making too many trivial edits on user page.[49][50]

Jacmacbac

Created Template:Islam in South Asia[51] like above account created the article. And blocked IP contributed so much on this template that Ponyo had reverted them.[52] Has also made major edits to Islam in South Asia.[53]

70.50.132.126

Since (24 October) @Ponyo: blocked the sock IP, a new IP from same location popped up on same day. Promoting the template/article created by above accounts and using same edit summaries.[54][55]

Once these socks are blocked, I believe it would be better to just G5 these problematic creations. Lorstaking (talk) 05:39, 2 November 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]

06 November 2017

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


The new account is making same [56] problematic edits as the sockmaster.[57][58] Lorstaking (talk) 16:37, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

@Doug Weller and BU Rob13: block evasion with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2601:14F:4500:F9B9:65C4:6FB0:38A:F35C restored [59] content of this blocked sock[60] and mentioned "Pakistan page", that IPs cannot edit but this sock had[61]. Capitals00 (talk) 04:24, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
I don't see any obvious accounts, but User:BU Rob13 blocked some of the IPV6 addresses used by this editor in mid-October. Doug Weller talk 17:49, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Belay that. I see a connection with Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Chanakya Volume 2/Archive but I've got to stop now. Hopefully BU Rob13 can confirm this. Doug Weller talk 17:53, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@BU Rob13: comments? Doug Weller talk 18:55, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

23 November 2017

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Edit warring over restoring the article from redirect that he basically created with his socks,[62][63][64] by calling them "good registered users and IPs."[65] Capitals00 (talk) 17:30, 23 November 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]

10 January 2018

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Same name as one previous sock "Shumam" and contributing to Islam in India[66] like past sock.[67]

The listed IP's rampant socking is going on[68], it's ISP and location matches with the past IP sock.[69]

Robertsmith1 and Reallyhotchewypizza are blocked but they belong to this sockmaster since they have also pushed same POV on Muslim and Islam by country. Lorstaking (talk) 04:06, 10 January 2018 (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]

08 February 2018

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Same preoccupation with Islam, Pakistan and Science [70], same as Eulalefty and previous and previous socks, e.g. [71]. Khirurg (talk) 18:35, 8 February 2018 (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]

+ Same to same intersection in articles with some socks. + CU Likely  Looks like a duck to me QEDK () 19:03, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

information Administrator note Blocked and tagged. clpo13(talk) 00:17, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

26 August 2018

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Obviously Eulalefty: 1 [72][73], 2 [74][75], 3 [76][77], etc.

Consider doing a thorough check because last check was done a few months ago. He sure got many sleepers now. Lorstaking (talk) 12:00, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

First example of diffs above showed him using distinctive edit summary "space?" [78][79]

As usual he is editing his favorite articles: Islam, Pakistan and Science.[80]

Last sock was blocked on 9 February and 12 days later Karachiguy was created.

Added ((cn)) with edit summary "cn" on same paragraph.[81][82]

Same edit summaries:-

"linked": socks,[83][84][85] Karachiguy [86][87][88]
"space?": socks,[89][90][91] Karachiguy [92]
"already linked above" on Islam. [93][94] Lorstaking (talk) 04:22, 27 August 2018 (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]

The case is  Stale. CU declined.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:37, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]