Misplaced Pages

:Sockpuppet investigations/Aman.kumar.goel: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 20:06, 18 October 2021 editTamzin (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators69,268 editsm →Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments: sTag: Reverted← Previous edit Revision as of 01:29, 19 October 2021 edit undoSrijanx22 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,210 editsNo edit summaryTags: Reverted 2017 wikitext editorNext edit →
Line 29: Line 29:
*{{ping|Tamzin}} I never contacted Srijanx22 neither I saw him contacting me. A number of users keep records of each others contributions to know what is currently happening and many of them have these pages (RFPP, ANEW, etc.) in their watchlist so they get notified of the dispute. The similarities cited here are bogus since at least 4 or 5 other editors had made same reverts on the articles cited here (Bangladesh Liberation war, Bakarkhani, Ambedkar, etc.). Though I note that Nomian is clearly filing SPIs after being asked by someone else since  he is lacking any interaction with the editors he allege of socking and  this is after another bogus SPI he filed earlier at ] involving similar articles. ''']''' <sup>('']'')</sup> 02:37, 18 October 2021 (UTC) *{{ping|Tamzin}} I never contacted Srijanx22 neither I saw him contacting me. A number of users keep records of each others contributions to know what is currently happening and many of them have these pages (RFPP, ANEW, etc.) in their watchlist so they get notified of the dispute. The similarities cited here are bogus since at least 4 or 5 other editors had made same reverts on the articles cited here (Bangladesh Liberation war, Bakarkhani, Ambedkar, etc.). Though I note that Nomian is clearly filing SPIs after being asked by someone else since  he is lacking any interaction with the editors he allege of socking and  this is after another bogus SPI he filed earlier at ] involving similar articles. ''']''' <sup>('']'')</sup> 02:37, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
*What AKG said. I don't have anything else to add to this hilarious SPI. ] (]) 09:47, 18 October 2021 (UTC) *What AKG said. I don't have anything else to add to this hilarious SPI. ] (]) 09:47, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
:*That make no sense {{U|Tamzin}}. Why can't you endorse a CU if you have any doubts? You are saying that editors like us need to avoid reverting where either of us has reverted before even if the edit is problematic (like in the cases here) or the person happens to be a blocked sock or a drive-by vandal. Article's talk page is the right place to object to a valid revert than SPI. I am comfortable with ignoring your 'warning' since it lacks policy backing. You are wrong as well with saying that OP's behavior should be brought somewhere else. The OP is engaging in ] as proven above and SPI is the only venue for dealing with that issue. You should rather allow someone experienced like {{U|RoySmith}} to handle it and avoid setting problematic precedents. ] (]) 01:29, 19 October 2021 (UTC)


====<big>Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments</big>==== ====<big>Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments</big>====

Revision as of 01:29, 19 October 2021

Aman.kumar.goel

Aman.kumar.goel (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Populated account categories: confirmed

For archived investigations, see Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Aman.kumar.goel/Archive.



11 October 2021

– This SPI case is closed and will be archived shortly by an SPI clerk or checkuser.

Suspected sockpuppets

The two accounts were created around the same time (three weeks apart) and share pretty strong overlapping interests. SrijanX22 always shows up in an article with no history of editing whenever Aman.kumar.goel is reverted in a dispute and restores Goel's POV version. For instance,

While the above are from South Asian military history topic area, they also share the same POV in other areas as well.

And even in some low important stubs,

The two accounts also had similar positions in different AfDs, RfCs and RMs as the tool suggests. Such strong overlaps in interests, POV as well as editing time point towards sockpuppetry. Nomian (talk) 19:34, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Comments by other users

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

  • @Tamzin: I never contacted Srijanx22 neither I saw him contacting me. A number of users keep records of each others contributions to know what is currently happening and many of them have these pages (RFPP, ANEW, etc.) in their watchlist so they get notified of the dispute. The similarities cited here are bogus since at least 4 or 5 other editors had made same reverts on the articles cited here (Bangladesh Liberation war, Bakarkhani, Ambedkar, etc.). Though I note that Nomian is clearly filing SPIs after being asked by someone else since  he is lacking any interaction with the editors he allege of socking and  this is his 2nd SPI after another bogus SPI he filed earlier at Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Sachin.cba/Archive involving similar articles. Aman Kumar Goel 02:37, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
  • What AKG said. I don't have anything else to add to this hilarious SPI. Srijanx22 (talk) 09:47, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
  • That make no sense Tamzin. Why can't you endorse a CU if you have any doubts? You are saying that editors like us need to avoid reverting where either of us has reverted before even if the edit is problematic (like in the cases here) or the person happens to be a blocked sock or a drive-by vandal. Article's talk page is the right place to object to a valid revert than SPI. I am comfortable with ignoring your 'warning' since it lacks policy backing. You are wrong as well with saying that OP's behavior should be brought somewhere else. The OP is engaging in WP:MEATPUPPETRY as proven above and SPI is the only venue for dealing with that issue. You should rather allow someone experienced like RoySmith to handle it and avoid setting problematic precedents. Srijanx22 (talk) 01:29, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

This case is being reviewed by Tamzin as part of her training as a clerk. Please allow her to process the entire case without interference. You may pose any questions or concerns either on her talk page or on this page.

  • CU  Clerk declined. I'm fairly confident that these are different people, enough so that I don't feel comfortable endorsing a CU. They have different edit summary styles and different timecards , and while they indeed have been on the same side of several content disputes, often their respective edits in these disputes have come months apart. However, based on the number of content disputes and AfDs, RMs, etc. they've been on the same side in, I do have a suspicion that there's been some off-wiki coördination going on.  On hold pending an answer to the following: @Aman.kumar.goel and Srijanx22: Have you been discussing any of these content disputes, AfDs, RMs, etc. off-wiki? If so, has either of you been asking the other to come revert an edit or come !vote in a discussion? Please answer honestly. I'm not looking to block anyone here. It's just that if you've been doing that we need to have a talk. -- Tamzin (she/they) 01:54, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
  • I'm still a little uncomfortable with the rate of agreement in discussions and content disputes. If this were a first instance of that, I'd chalk it up to chance, but GeneralNotability had these same concerns when closing the last SPI. I understand that when you edit in the same topic area as someone and have a similar perspective to them, you may often wind up on the same "side" in discussions and content disputes. There are definitely some editors I always or almost always agree with in discussions. Absent clear evidence of tag-team editing, I don't think I can do anything when it comes to discussions. As to content disputes, showing up to an article for the first time just to revert a good-faith edit is undesirable behavior regardless of any tag-teaming issues. As such, I am closing with a warning that Aman.kumar.goel and Srijanx22 should avoid making reverts to articles they haven't visited before in a manner that could create an appearance of impropriety, without per se finding that tag-teaming has occurred. I doubt anyone here will be happy with this conclusion, but it's the one that best prioritizes the smooth running of the encyclopedia. In conclusion, any concerns about the nominator's behavior can be taken up at ANI, AE (if all involved are AWARE of WP:ARBIPA), or another suitable venue. SPI is not an adversarial venue. -- Tamzin (she/they) 19:58, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
Categories: