The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Cult free world[edit]

Suspected sockpuppeteer

Cult free world (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Shashwat_pandey (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Rushmi (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

Duty2love (talk) 06:27, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Evidence

New User Cult_free_world (CFW) appears to be the sock puppet of users Shashwat Pandey(SP) and Rushmi(RU). This appears to be a somewhat sophisticated case as perhaps SP is reusing another pre-existing user CFW's account for the same purpose users SP and RU had tried to achieve. May be an IP check can confirm this. Both of these users have been permanently blocked from WP because of abusing WP [1]. Following are the evidences, please bear with me.

Important Note: To see things crystal clear, you will have to take a little bit of inconvenience. You will need to see some links at Orkut.com and since because of spams from Orkut, WP has blacklisted it hence you would have to replace ORKUT with "www(dot)orkut(dot)com" in the all the orkut links mentioned below. Also you will need a Google account to login into Orkut's pages (which I am pretty sure you have one ;)):

  1. Using CFW's account: Because SP has been caught and blocked from WP twice before, he appears to be attempting a very clever solution to get back in and repost the same deleted material. Here are some evidences in support of this:
    1. There is a distinct change in pattern in the contributions of CFW from prior to March 3rd 2007 to the ones later to March 19th 2007. Prior to March 3rd, CFW's contibs were intermixed between all together different subjects like - Meher Baba, Rick Ross, Marga, Bramha Kumaris, Sahaj Yoga etc.[2], then some activity started on subject Sahaj Marg subject and after after March 19th it has been fully changed to Sahaj Marg and SRCM, the same exact subjects of SP and RU.
    2. March 19th @ Orkut SP says this: Following comment from SP's blog page in Orkut (read the Imp Note above before clicking on this link) [3] says exactly this, responding to another user how it is possible to recreate deleted pages in WP: "BTW what makes you feel that it is difficult ? you are not someone who is new or is unaware of wiki, now that you have come here, kindly give us your space location on wikipedia, so that if there is anyone who wish to get involved may move in. ..."
    3. March 19th @ WP CFW creates this: "18:14, 19 March 2008 (hist) (diff) User:Cult free world/Proposed page‎ (←Created page with 'Le Sahaj Marg est un système de méditation de raja yoga hindouiste fondé en 1945. À ne pas confondre avec le classique Raja Yoga ...')". [4]. And as mentioned before from now on SP takes over this account.
    4. CHKUSER warning: While writing this, I noticed that CFW gets a comment for CHECKUSER and SUSPSOCK from an old timer acquaintance [5] ... what a coincidence or may be there is no coincidence at all as it is becoming so obvious to those who know CFW.
  2. CFW - Not a New User CFW's account has been opened on Dec 29th 2007. CFW started started the proposed page on Sahaj Marg on March 19th. Seeing the history you will notice how expertly he has been adding references, quoting WP policies and starting an RfC process [6]. Doesn't all this seems too much for a new user?
  3. SP's Blog Page: SP's blog page has a lot of evidence about what CFW has been doing at WP since March 19th. Shashwat Pandey is a long time blogger, well known for holding extremely negative POV about the non profit organization SRCM ... nothing wrong with that. He holds several blog pages at Orkut and Geocities. Note: All Orkut links pasted here will require a valid Orkut account to view. Pages posted by him has been deleted from Geocities as well [7]. Following are some relevant posts from his blog on Orkut (will need an orkut account to view), which shows his sophisticated plan of action to start the same deleted pages again at WP, having learnt a great deal after being blocked several times from so many reputed websites. Following are the posts (italicized) done by SP about the things he has been doing at WP under disguise of other account. Orkut Page: [8]
    1. Feb 25 @ Orkut: SP's comment at above Orkut page (typos intact) about Jossi's deletions of the pages created by him as CFW. "Finally Jossi was sussessful in deleating the wiki page about Sahaj marg, and got my account blocked as well !!".
    2. Mar 3rd @ Orkut: '"Jossi deleted the article once again.. 02:48, 3 March 2008 Jossi (Talk | contribs) deleted "Sahaj Marg India" ‎ (G4: Recreation of deleted material) ..... http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sahaj_Marg_India&action=edit"'.
    3. Mar 3rd @ WP: CFW had created those pages [9] and Jossi had deleted them [10]
    4. Mar 19 @ Orkut: Discussion about using a pre-existing account at WP - [11]
    5. April 8 @ Orkut: Copying all my exchanges with 4d-don [12]
  4. High Degree of Similarity: Since March 19th the contributions by CFW has a high degree of similarity with the posts done by Rushmi and SP at WP before [13], [14], [15]
  5. Reposting Deleted Content: Both SP and RU were involved with same contentious subject (Sahaj Marg, SRCM) and several pages related to this subject were removed from WP last September after a long review process [16], [17], [18]. But in spite of numerous suggestions to CFW about the recent history of this subject, it persists on posting same deleted content. My big concern is not about the content, that we can resolve in the talk pages, as we had been doing [19], [20], but if the user CFW itself is not reliable and is intentionally misusing WP to propagate its POV then isn't it a huge waste of time and resources?
  6. Previously Suspected: Other people have suspected the same in the past [21] during the same time when this user turned its attention towards this subject (Sahaj Marg) .... potentially the time the account was transferred to from original CFW to SP.
  7. Against Consensus: CFW (since March 19th) has not been too much in favor of consensus. In its proposed page, more users have not agreed with the content CFW has been adding than those agreeing with it resulting in edit wars [22]. On multiple occasions, users have warned CFW but to not much avail [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30]
  8. Personal Attack on known users: CFW has had clashes with users (namely Renee and Sethie - [31], [32], [33]) he has clashed before as Rushmi and SP - [34]. Also it holds a fairly decisive opinion about these users as if he knew them before. He even tried to launch a vandalism report on User Sethie on one of these users which was declined [35]
  9. Known for using sly techniques: As the new user Rushmi, SP had seeked adoption and was adopted by Sarcasticidealist [36], later only to be relinquished by Sarcasticidealist [37], who felt abused by Rushmi.


Additional Evidence of Sockpuppetry.

Note. As noted by Duty2Love above, the orkut site is blacklisted, hence, in the orkut listings below (#2 and #8) I have removed the periods between the "www" "orkut" "com." To view the sites, you'll need to add the periods back in manually.

1. User:Shashwat pandey posts the link to his Orkut blog here on Wikipedia. (publically outing himself)
2. Under User:Shashwat pandey's Orkut "profile" (near the end) it says, "May you be granted 20 times of that what you have wished for me!!"
(remember to add periods manually between www orkut com to read #2 above)
3. At the top of User:Cult free world's talk page, it says, "May you be granted 20 times of that what you have wished for me!".
4. The phrase on User:Shashwat pandey's blog and User:Cult free world's talk page is identical.
5. The phrase appears in both French and English on Shashwat pandey's Orkut blog, indicating Shashwat pandey's fluency in French.
6. User:Cult Free World posts a French version of the article and proceeds to translate here.
7. The editing styles of both users are identical in tone, single-purpose, and text (see this RFC on User:Shashwat pandey and then compare to User:Cult Free World's recent discussions on the ANI here, here, and here).
8. This morning I just checked to verify this was all still there and this sock report was posted under the header, "Scared zombies," here.
(remember to add periods manually between www orkut com to read #8 above)
9. User:Cult Free World made a strange comment about the newspaper article from the Pioneer being OR, see this. Then, I realized it was because he had been told that in his identity as Rushmi, here. (Read the last line where the responding editor says he it looks like some OR...) There is no way Cult free world would have known this was OR since this was a long archived post unless he read it as Rushmi. Also, note the same phrasing and tendentiousness regarding this source across both users.
This user has and is engaged in serious gaming of Wikipedia (gloating and strategizing about it on his Orkut blog). His edits are almost uniformally disruptive and tendentious. He is not here to contribute in good faith to Wikipedia, but to promote a POV in line with his user name and in support of his blog.
As a precaution, I have saved a copy of Shashwat Pandey's Orkut profile page containing the evidence outlined above on my computer (in case he changes his profile). I can email it as proof to any interested admin. Renee (talk) 15:34, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the results of the UserCompare tool. Lara❤Love 13:31, 14 April 2008 (UTC) (here is the correct link for that [[38]])[reply]

Comments
Duty2Love Comments. While I am not contending about the relevance of the content CFW/SP/RU has been posting, my big question & concern is the user's validity, its behavior and possible sophistications used to misuse WP. I trust admin's judgement in this case and I will be happy to work with him/her as I have done in the past. However, above strong reasons suggest me that this is the same user who have not once but twice caused a lot of trouble for WP and its users in the past. Hence my request is that this user should be removed from WP immediately. Your serious considerations will be much appreciated. Thanks and ... wooof! Duty2love (talk) 06:27, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Cult Free World/talk-to-me Comments. Lol... so according to you my account has been compromised ? well that is not the case, about orkut, those who are interested in the subject will defiantly look at what is happening about the subject elsewhere what is the problem with that ? if someone having interest in a topic is discussing about that topic in forum other then wikipedia, what can i do for that ? I took up this topic after I noticed Jossi deleting the article, after declaring that he will not do that, more details here [39]. Moreover the article i am trying to write is taken from french wikipedia [40], and content that i am adding is based on my experience with Brahma_Kumari and Sahaja Yoga articles, and there also members of the group came out with exactly the same thing,[41], about finding references... is it that difficult to find references ? all you need to do is to search google with proper words, you will find tons of information.
This is yet another attempt by the group to prevent any information leaking out to world. Degraded attempts like these only motivate me to continue and finish the article, and publish it [42], interested users may wish to have a look at hallucination.--talk-to-me! (talk) 08:36, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
user:Duty2love you should come prepared, you have noted that there is a Checkuser warning at my talk page, you should have seen the talk page of the person commenting that, it was in response to my request [43], to inform me as how to file for check user, as i am sure that User:Innerself is someone from you three only.--talk-to-me! (talk) 09:12, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Sethie's Comments. Initially I was unsure. CFW's syntax, word-choice etc. were a bit different. However, overtime, it is EXACTLY the same as Sashwat (guess he was consciously trying to talk differently, till old habits kicked in).
Shashwat is easily recognizable by certain tell-tale signs. I will not post them here, and if the admin investigating this case does not see the above as enough evidence, I will be happy to email them. He has even engaged in some of the same behaviors here in his response!
Here I ask him if he is Shashwat [[44]].
And here he says he is "not new to the article." (reff coming) Well, there was me, Renee, Duty2love and.... Shashwat. Case closed.
The whole problem is he comes in as Shashwat causes a lot of problems and disapears. Then returns as Rushmi, causes a bunch of problems then disapears. Then he returns as CFW, causes the same problems... It makes him unaccountable for his past behavior, because only 3 or 4 of us are aware of the full history. I propose he pick ONE username, link to the other socks on that page and if he does this again, bam then all. Sethie (talk) 14:26, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Reneeholle's Comments. While this user is not using his different socks at this time, he is using this identity to avoid scrutiny, in order to continue tendentious and disruptive editing on topics related to Sahaj Marg. I was concerned about "outing" the user and then I realized he outed himself with this post, that links exactly to the blog Duty2Love points out above. As an aside, User:4d-don, a meatpuppet of User:Shashwat pandey/Cult Free World, outs himself here regarding his blog. You'll see that these two users spend a great deal of time off line coordinating their attack of Sahaj Marg on Wikipedia. These types of point-of-view single-purpose-accounts disrupt Wiki, are an abuse of the Wiki consensus process, and show that there is no intention to abide by Wiki policies of WP:NPOV, WP:NOR, WP:R and WP:V. Renee (talk) 15:03, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is kind of interesting. When Duty2love filed the checkuser case, User:Cult free world immediately worried that his account might have been "compromised" and that " I will file for disabling my account if i feel it is compromised". Pretty fishy huh? Shashwat and Rushmi may have used his computer without his knowing and he might have to disable his account if they compromised it... Renee (talk) 21:58, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Indeed, this is very interesting, you misread my statement yet again, as you did here [45] here is the preceeding statement from the same link If my account is compromised or not, how does that concerns you by the way--talk-to-me! (talk) 17:39, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Even my profile[46] also says May you be granted 20 times of that what you have wished for me.lol --talk-to-me! (talk) 15:09, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for proving it Shashwat! It was pretty easy to confirm that you just created a new profile on name of "cult free world" in Orkut [47]. There are absolutely no posts by this user as of yet and it has 0 scraps, videos, photos, fans and testimonials. It has only 1 friend which is you and look at the communities that you made this guy part of ... exactly same as the ones CFW was active in WP before March 3rd 2008. The most compelling evidence I found on Orkut proving this is a new user created over night is - search results for users for username "cult free world" does not even find this user. Most likely because Orkut's cache has not yet picked it up. I have saved all the pages and search results. Admin: Either check at Orkut immediately or please request me if you need to see the print out of these evidences as overtime we will lose these in Orkut as cache updates and SP posts more material as CFW at Orkut .... doing sockuppettry even at Orkut. Duty2love (talk) 17:17, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am not going to teach you how to operate orkut, check out your privacy option, just FYI check out my communication in the same site, you are uselessly waisting everyone's time here, no-one on wikipedia is bothered about what is anyone doing outside wikipedia, and also there is no point guessing my identity, moreover you should also consider the security concerns that Shashwat might have, he has been receiving threats from this cult, which he has posted on the same site. In any case, I am least concerned about this nonsense.--talk-to-me! (talk) 17:44, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Doubly fishy. I just went through every single post on the Orkut Sahaj Marg forum User:Cult free world belongs to (from its inception until today) and there's not a single post from Cult free world, which supports the view that this was a hurredly-made account in response to this sock case. Renee (talk) 21:58, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Renee, you are pron to making mistakes check out communication "Zombie Reaction (Abhinav alwys for luv)"--talk-to-me! (talk) 05:28, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


And his only friend in the entire Orkut world is *TA-DA* Shashwat Pandey! Dude - Your crimes against my intelligence just keep piling up! Marathi_Mulgaa (talk) 23:01, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you are soo afried of him, try talking to him, I could not see any communication from you either, if i am more intelligent than you, try to learn more :)--talk-to-me! (talk) 05:28, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That is an all-time low.... creating a sock on another board to avoid sock accusations. Sethie (talk) 16:16, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


What you are posting here is blocked by spam filter, you are spamming wikipedia. If it is so easy to create multiple accounts on orkut, do you think you are giving valid reference for SSP case on wikipedia ? you are waisting every bodies time here, in your yet another fruitless attempt to block article. In any case we cannot demonstrate anything other than what we are.--talk-to-me! (talk) 16:43, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unmistakably, the same toxicity

After two interactions I knew right away that Cult Free World was User:Shashwat Pandey. I had many interactions with him when he was a true new user on the Sahaj Marg pages over a year ago under my old user name. User:Marathi mulga It was a frustrating and unproductive exercise and I left. (I recently came back on and having forgotten my password, created a new user name nearly identical to my old).
I can recognize Mr. Shashwat Pandey from a mile away - User Cult uses the same abrasive style, tone, dismissiveness, belittlement and stubborn refusal to collaborate as he did as Shashwat Pandey (See response above - This is classic Shashwat). He does not care if he's accurate or not, he only cares to continue his blog POV type rant. For example, User Renee has pointed out at least three times I think that he has the external links wrong, and he won't even collaborate on that (and that's binary ... It's either right or wrong!! All he does is accuse her of POV when she does care about getting it right). For the amount of sheer needless toxicity he introduces, this user needs to be banned permanently from wikipedia in particular, but also from all contact with humans in general.Marathi_Mulgaa (talk) 22:49, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So you dream about him also ? --talk-to-me! (talk) 05:28, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

The person you are so scared of, is well known for his fearlessness, and is/was a role model for many youngsters, (he is just 27 !!!) Can we have a wikipedia page about him ? I found some newspaper reports about Shashwat in India.--talk-to-me! (talk) 09:02, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Request to all

Can we please refrain from the attitude and language of personal attacks? This case is against the actions of CFW / SP and not the individual(s). In all sincerity, I appreciate many qualities in Shashwat (for whatever little I have observed him here at WP), namely - his persistence, tenacity, determination and will to go against so many singlehandedly. Duty2love (talk) 04:08, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

<Note to reviewing admin: The following comments in this section were snipped as they were soapboxing and did not relate to the sockpuppetry case. To view them please look through the edit history.>¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 20:06, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting Attention[edit]

Kindly have a look at this policy [49], it states, Posting another person's personal information (legal name, date of birth, social security number, home or workplace address, telephone number, email address, or other contact information, regardless of whether or not the information is actually correct) is harassment. This report appears to me a clear case of WP:HA.--talk-to-me! (talk) 10:57, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear CFW, The only one who has posted personal information has been you here. All other information above is based on user names and what users have posted themselves, like this one. If you are SP as this report suggests, then obviously no problem but if you are NOT as you suggest, then please refrain from posting personal details about others, it can cause WP:HA. Duty2love (talk) 21:46, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Who has given link of a profile with picture and associated that with my work ? You are linking a person's profile with photograph, with a controversial subject, that I am dealing, this is risky business as i understand, i am behind internet on wikipedia, all you know about me is my IP address (thanks to stalking by Reneeholla), and i changed that too. This whole report appears to me a clear case of personal attack on me, by linking me with one of your old rival, I do not see any other reason for giving reference of a social networking site for SSP, given its volatile setup, I have not communicated much with you (other then your personal attack on me at MfD discussion), but what i can make out after carefully reading this report is, you want to settle some of your old revenge with some of your off wiki rivals. To me this report appears to be motivated by two factors:-
linking a person's photograph with a dangerous subject such as cult on wikipedia is not a good faith attempt link you have given is link of a community not profile of that person, here you have given link of public profile of a person on a social networking site, which is blocked by wikipedia as spam, this indicates something. Wikipedia is not the place for your personal revenge, if you have any problem with him, you should contact him where he is available, do not link my work (which is risky and controversial) with someone's off-wiki profile with pictures. --talk-to-me! (talk) 22:32, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And i am surprised as why all the link to orkut are not working here ?? I have a google account, but clicking your links returns error ? why ? --talk-to-me! (talk) 22:41, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That is because you have not read the Important Note above - replace orkut with www(dot)orkut(dot)com. And all this is to save us some time going through the same exercise we went through last sept. because of Shashwat and Rushmi's actions which were trying to use Wikipedia to spread a POV, submitting content not meeting WP standards. Duty2love (talk) 00:55, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you make life so complex ? [50] --talk-to-me! (talk) 09:21, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Only if we were able to implement our fantasies and imaginations. :), alas it doesn't work that way, did you missed the summary in the link you provided ? --talk-to-me! (talk) 16:21, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
One's man fun is another man's vandalism. I urge a ban on this puppet master and all of his puppets. Bearian (talk) 19:04, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you are making a claim[53] , you must support it with some evidence--talk-to-me! (talk) 07:59, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Embhee's Comment: I agree about disruptive editing. As an example, User:Cult free world edited my edit (!!!) [54] to request evidence. This is really not a nice way to request for evidence. Also, the tone with which the response was made by User:Cult free world [55] is not good, I had only made a simple observation [56]. Embhee (talk) 13:20, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Conclusions

User:Cult free world has been temporarily blocked for disruptive editing. Either they are disruptive, or they are not, and can be responded to accordingly. As for the hypothesis of sock puppetry, there is suggestive evidence, but not enough to convince me to issue a block. Jehochman Talk 19:03, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]


More