Shikagami03 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

• Shikagami08 (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.

Sock resumed editing Priyanka Choudhary after master was indef-blocked for copyright violations and disruptive editing on the same article. --Finngall ^talk 14:37, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

•  In progress - -- RoySmith (talk) 21:20, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
•  Confirmed -- RoySmith (talk) 21:27, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Akb bhatia (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.

Created Draft:Priyanka chahar choudhary, moved it to mainspace, then immediately moved it back to draftspace after it was G4-tagged. Also copied the same content into Draft:Priyanka Chahar Choudhary, which was created as a sub-stub last September by a different account. As this account was created in August, it is older than the listed master--requesting CheckUser to check for other sleepers. --Finngall ^talk 17:27, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

• •  Unrelated based on the technical data. There may be other things going on, but from what I can see, they're not a sock, or at least not belonging to this case. -- RoySmith (talk) 21:31, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Rejoy2003 (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 · SPI Tools

There is unhealthy interest in Simba Nagpal, but I am not sure whether the master ought to be Pakistanpedia (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Pakistanpedia.

I'm requesting CU to seek to determine which (if any) master is appropriate. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 17:52, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I note the comments by the alleged sock. They all seem to come down to some personal belief of correctness and entitlement to create poor articles in mainspace. If they are correct then the process will show it. If they are, as I believe, both a sock and an undeclared paid editor then I am sure the process will show the sockpuppetry

@PravinGanechari: there is no inherent problem with their adding pictures nor with their uploading ther own unless licencing on Wikimedia Commons is inappropriate. It does give our hard working clerks some background information, though. Thank you for your useful comments and diligence. I have migrated the comments to the correct section. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 06:57, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The alleged sock's talk page now has a level 2 warning to declare paid editing or to state that they are not a paid editor. They are somewhat aggressive. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 22:20, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That warning has been answered directly with a clear statement that they are not paid 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 23:08, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

This same guy User:Timtrent has moved a published and reviewed article to draftspace without a warning tag and cited "AFC" lol. I suspect if you're really okay than making false claims against me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rejoy2003 (talk • contribs) 00:37, August 9, 2022 (UTC)

• I've got no doubt this is not their first account, and very probably this is socking to evade a block. Very new account with a VERY high editing rate. There's a feeling of badge-collecting, as they've already applied for pending reviewer status [1]. Using sources pretty quickly, alas some copyright issues at the start as well. The sheer rate of speed could help narrow down the possible sockmasters. The edit-warring over an image on Katrina Kaif and the utter lack of any article talk page posts is worrisome, but that also describes most of the active sockmasters in the Indian film/television area. Ravensfire (talk) 16:45, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm seems fine by me with any accusations against my work on Wikipedia. As you mentioned "speed" I'll take that as a compliment because I'm a maniac if I love something I do. And the rest outcome of this accusation, the time shall tell us. Rejoy2003 (talk)

• Hi Timtrent , All these images are uploaded by another user but this user is adding to the some pages.

*Special:Diff/1102837108 [2]

* Special:Diff/1102836519 [3]

*Special:Diff/1102835281 [4]

*Special:Diff/1102853026 [5]

* PravinGanechari (talk) 08:34, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• The user appears to be  Unrelated to Pakistanpedia; the socks in this case are stale.  Behavioural evidence needs evaluation Girth Summit _(blether) 10:59, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  @Girth Summit Forgive me, you have made no comment about the potential for Shikagami03 to be master here, or is that implied in the 'stale' comment? 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 15:12, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Timtrent Yes - the CU tool can only look back a certain amount of time; in this case, there is nothing left in the archives for me to compare Rejoy2003 against, so any connection to the socks in this case would need to be based upon the editing behaviour. Girth Summit _(blether) 15:46, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Rejoy2003 might well be a sock, though I'm unconvinced that it's of Shikagami03. Nothing else in their behaviour appears blockable at present. Closing. --Jack Frost (talk) 01:39, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]