HorseManJack (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

• Kevin055 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Simone2049 (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 • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Seemingly UPE socks. The master moved Talal Malik to a different title. Kevin055 created Talal Malik (entrepreneur) (A different Talal Malik) and Alpha1Corp, founded by Malik. Simone2049 is a brand new user who dived straight into !voting at AFDs, including !keep at Malik's. SmartSE (talk) 20:43, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

“Sockpuppet inquiry pages are only about account and IP misuse—nothing else. If the evidence is not there, then the case will be closed without any adverse finding of any kind.” Following the imminent exoneration, I hope an apology ensues. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk • contribs) 23:31, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Note I suspect that the first sockpuppet in this instance on the View AfD was user Saqib who from 10 April to 16 April was the sole delete contributor to the discussion, posting nine times. I did not engage him, he instigated the engagement with me, and was the sole person that week to repeatedly engage me. At the moment the week was to end, and there was a clear majority to 'keep' the article, I suspect Saqib contacted a more senior sockpuppet SmartSE who launched this sockpuppet investigation, bringing me into a discussion where I clearly do not long belong, a clear straw man tactic intended to distract. It is actually the definition of an Ad Hominem attack, which Spartaz is specifically advocating against, and [[1]] when calling for contributors to 'please stay in the top three' of Graham's Heirarchy of Disagreement.' Saqib has only resorted to either appeal to the stone or Ad Hominem attacks, which SmartSE took to a new level by bringing me into a sockpuppet investigation I have no part of. To be honest, it's shameful behaviour which attacks the very concept of Wikipedia as being a one-stop repository of knowledge. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simone2049 (talk • contribs)

OK I just stumbled upon this SPI (I'm curious why I did not get the notification even though I was mentioned above). @Simone2049: I would honestly advice you to avoid saying such a crap. I didn't asked anyone to chip in on this AfD or even initiate this SPI so avoid allegations without evidence. --Saqib (talk) 11:58, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Saqib: Pings only work when a post is signed. SmartSE (talk) 15:47, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Saqib: Kindly 'Keep Calm and Mind the Gap.' As SmartSE would concur because you look like you are embarrassing him/her, you cannot reply with 'I honestly advice you to avoid saying such a crap' instead of 'I honestly advise you to avoid saying such crap', managing to mix a noun with a verb and then adding an indefinite article to a noun which does not require it, and then be expected to be taken seriously as an authority on AfDs. In French, we'd refer to this whole issue as 'ça sent la merde'. As I am personally vindicated, can you and SmartSE extend me and all others an apology? Or will this not be forthcoming? Simone2049 (talk) 05:18, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Risker: Thank you for your loyal investigation, these guys are accusing us for none and they are even unaware of policies. They are old users that doesn't make them God. Please investigate there SPI as well, Smartse joined that article on special request of Saqib when he say he is failed. Also, they halted the AFD decision which should be completed within 7 days. Instead of encouraging and welcoming everyones efforts to contribute on Wikipedia they are accusing everyone. I think they have special agenda regarding Wikipedia. I have no personal issue with them and I don't know why they are taking it too seriously. He even deleted my article under A7 while it clearly falls under wp:significance even the article he jumped on meets this criteria. Please help, I expect 100% loyal and clean investigation from you keeping in mind Wikipedia policies, I am checking their comments and they are a group of people could be socks who are claiming to discuss everything via email and not publicly therefore, they have deep roots on Wikipedia nd playing with information. Kevin055 (talk) 13:17, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• @Risker: Thank you for the check. Exoneration and vindication, but no apology just yet.Simone2049 (talk) 05:22, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Checkuser comments: There is no technical or geographic link between HorseManJack (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki), Kevin055 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) or Simone2049 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki); none of the accounts appeared to have other socks, either. Despite this, all three accounts give a very solid appearance of returning editors with extensive experience onwiki. Recommend review by an independent administrator to give consideration to co-ordinated editing rather than socking. Risker (talk) 22:21, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• @Risker: Thanks for the check. I'm 100 % sure that Talal Malik (entrepreneur) is paid for (I will email you) and there have been other cases of votestacking in AFDs that have also come back negative recently from what I think is the same farm e.g. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Jasleen_Ahluwalia/Archive#03_March_2018. @TonyBallioni: The article has the same fingerprints we were discussing via email. SmartSE (talk) 10:23, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Smartse, I'm busy this weekend, but will look over it either tomorrow or Monday. I received your email as well. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:50, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Smartse, I've blocked Kevin055 for spam and UPE, that much is blatantly obvious regardless of the socking thing. While looking into Simone2049, I found another account that was recently CheckUser blocked today that I want to talk to the CheckUser about first. It is fishy, but she doesn't right now seem only focused on this AfD. I'm not currently sure if we need to take action on that account yet. Horsemanjack I think is unrelated and isn't doing anything currently, so I'm not blocking. Keeping this open (and I'd ask a clerk to ping me before closing.) TonyBallioni (talk) 14:37, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• After looking over all of these accounts, I also came across Alice1918 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki), which was CU blocked by DoRD today. He said it was unrelated technically. Given the history here, and the overlap on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Middlebrook, similar username format, similar userpages and claims made there, and similarities in communications styles, I think the possibility is greater than not that we have coordinated editing with the Simone2049 account trying to cover its tracks through participation in multiple AfDs. Because it isn't clear who is the master here and because CU turned up different, that account is now  Blocked without tags. Closing. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:12, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• @TonyBallioni: Thanks! SmartSE (talk) 06:58, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]