| Revision as of 10:26, 28 February 2015 editCabayi (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators142,249 edits →Comments by other users: r← Previous edit | Revision as of 11:08, 12 March 2015 edit undoVanjagenije (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators130,605 edits Marking case as closedNext edit → | ||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
| {{SPIpriorcases}} | {{SPIpriorcases}} | ||
| =====<big>20 February 2015</big>===== | =====<big>20 February 2015</big>===== | ||
| {{SPI case status|}} | {{SPI case status|close}} | ||
| ;Suspected sockpuppets | ;Suspected sockpuppets | ||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
| ** Admin comment: No CU check was performed, both versions of the article are the same. However CSD has been declined by another admin (take note of the declining comment), please take care not to ] but explain and introduce the relevant policies to the relevant users. - ] 19:54, 24 February 2015 (UTC) | ** Admin comment: No CU check was performed, both versions of the article are the same. However CSD has been declined by another admin (take note of the declining comment), please take care not to ] but explain and introduce the relevant policies to the relevant users. - ] 19:54, 24 February 2015 (UTC) | ||
| *Well, this is obviously the same person. The question is whether she used two accounts illegitimately. She registered new account after she realized that writing an article about herself while having her real name for username is not a good idea. '''] ]''' 22:36, 27 February 2015 (UTC) | *Well, this is obviously the same person. The question is whether she used two accounts illegitimately. She registered new account after she realized that writing an article about herself while having her real name for username is not a good idea. '''] ]''' 22:36, 27 February 2015 (UTC) | ||
| *The edits of those two accounts do not overlap. Both stopped editing. Closing the case. '''] ]''' 11:08, 12 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ----<!--- All comments go ABOVE this line, please. --> | ----<!--- All comments go ABOVE this line, please. --> | ||
Revision as of 11:08, 12 March 2015
Shiba Ali Khan
Shiba Ali Khan (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
For archived investigations, see Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Shiba Ali Khan/Archive.
20 February 2015
– This SPI case is closed and will be archived shortly by an SPI clerk or checkuser.
- Suspected sockpuppets
- Sak Kas15 (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
Sole edit is identical recreation of autobiography, Shiba Ali Khan. Bazj (talk) 19:43, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Comments by other users
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
- No BITE intended. An autobiographically-titled article in which the first ref checked referred to another actress, Sivan sanaju, with no mention of the article's subject looks pretty much like a fantasist's A3 to me. An exact copy created under a sock-puppet (with a give-away set of initials) soon after the deletion of the first copy doesn't even merit a second thought. Bazj (talk) 11:34, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
- whether she used two accounts illegitimately - creating an autobiography under a pseudonym seems a pretty blatant violation of WP:SOCK's first definition "attempts to deceive or mislead other editors". A lenient approach might be called for if she were here for the good of the wiki but all contributions under both personae have been self-publicity. Both accounts have edited the latest version of the autobiography. Bazj (talk) 10:25, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Clerk note: Admin should check if the newly created version of the article Shiba Ali Khan is similar to the deleted one. If it is, than this is an obvious case of sockpuppetry, and no CU check is needed. Vanjagenije (talk) 20:44, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
- Admin comment: No CU check was performed, both versions of the article are the same. However CSD has been declined by another admin (take note of the declining comment), please take care not to WP:BITE but explain and introduce the relevant policies to the relevant users. - Mailer Diablo 19:54, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
- Well, this is obviously the same person. The question is whether she used two accounts illegitimately. She registered new account after she realized that writing an article about herself while having her real name for username is not a good idea. Vanjagenije (talk) 22:36, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
- The edits of those two accounts do not overlap. Both stopped editing. Closing the case. Vanjagenije (talk) 11:08, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Categories: