Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Halud Foressa/Archive


Halud Foressa

01 July 2024

Suspected sockpuppets

This one first came to my attention on Tiger (2007 film), where both accounts used a colon in their edit summaries when attempting to edit-war against the result of the AFD, [1] [2]. Repetition of idiosyncratic edit summaries on the same page, even obscure ones, is not by itself that significant as new users may simply mimic other edit summaries they have seen, but this is not the only overlap. Both accounts are primarily interested in Indian cinema, but while that is not by itself a concern, the overlap across several different articles, some of them rather obscure, is. As some examples see [3] [4], [5] [6], [7] [8], [9] [10], or especially [11] [12], and that is just a sample. There is also filespace overlap where Paul is describing reverted files to the versions uploaded by Master of all cinemalovers [13] [14].

Given that it is a new user I don't believe the first account created needs a block, however as the two accounts have been used in conjunction to revert to preferred versions the second account may since they never responded to this disclosure request despite editing after it was made.

That is if they are indeed operated by the same person as all the evidence is circumstantial. Since that is probably not enough on its own for a block, I am requesting a check here to obtain firmer evidence one way or another, thanks. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:E966:F040:569C:CEDB (talk) 16:08, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

On the Shotru article, 'User:Master of all cinemalovers' made this edit, then it got reverted, after which 'User:Paul is describing' restored the same edit within a day or so: diff.

Both accounts are highly interested and seemingly only focussed on Indian Bengali-language films.

It would be great if a checkuser could find out the following things:

  1. if there are any other / 'sleeper' accounts, given the situation (these are recently created accounts all engaging in some form of disruption)
  2. what the master account is, if there is an older one (I am not familiar with this user so I haven't seen any other accounts that appear to be them)

Thanks! — AP 499D25 (talk) 11:36, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

03 July 2024

Suspected sockpuppets

Starts to remove remake information of Indian films from articles like previous socks after the block of Paul is describing yesterday. Mehedi Abedin 07:46, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Both the IP and the 'User:Paul is describing' account seem highly (almost solely) interested in Indian films, and on the Deewana (2013 film) if we compare diff by account to diff by IP, they both are trying to remove the fact that the film is based on 2007 'Deepavali' film in one way or another. Little to no use of edit summaries either. Looking at their edits in general, they like to remove claims that a film is based on another (see example 1 and example 2).

I would recommend blocking the 223.185.128.0/21 range based on the fact that there was IP address 223.185.133.42 engaging in the same large quantity of disruptive edits (example) back in June, and same thing with IP address 223.185.128.39 in May (example). — AP 499D25 (talk) 14:19, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

16 August 2024

Suspected sockpuppets

This IP range 223.185.128.0/21 was blocked twice in July 2024: for one week on the 7th following this ANI report, and for one month on the 14th after this ANI report. However, right after that one-month block expired a few days ago, the user is straight-up back at it again making disruptive edits to Indian film articles, including but not limited to restoring edits made by previous IP addresses from this range – compare diff 1 and diff 2, diff 3 and diff 4, diff 5 and diff 6, diff 7 and diff 8.

As before, when we compare edits from the IP range to a previous sock 'User:Paul is describing' account, both seem highly (almost solely) interested in Indian films, and on the Deewana (2013 film) if we compare diff by account to diff by IP, they both are trying to remove the fact that the film is based on 2007 'Deepavali' film in one way or another. Little to no use of edit summaries either. Looking at their edits in general, they like to remove claims that a film is based on another (see example 1 and example 2).

This looks like an obvious WP:DUCK situation to me. — AP 499D25 (talk) 02:34, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

17 August 2024

Suspected sockpuppets

Similar edits on Fighter (2011 film) [15] as prior sock [16]. They also like to add a excessive number of categories [17], as did a prior sock [18] - different categories, but you can see the trend. Ravensfire (talk) 20:05, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

I'd recommend that a Checkuser have a look for any sleepers, given that in the last case from July, a CU revealed they were abusing up to seven different accounts. — AP 499D25 (talk) 00:02, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

21 August 2024

Suspected sockpuppets

Continuing the same edits on Draft:Pratikar (1987 film) as previous sock, The 108th vigilante. Their edits [19] restored material removed here originally added by socks but using bad sources and formatting contrary to MOS. The edit summary "rvt unnecessary removals" has been used by prior sock [20], [21], [22]. Also see this edit which restored edit from prior sock [23]. Ravensfire (talk) 15:19, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

09 September 2024

Suspected sockpuppets

See [24] vs [25]. Also lots of edits changing film genres which is a habit of this account. The interaction with the last couple of socks [26] is interesting, especially on some obscure and older films like Thana Theke Aschi (1965 film) which has edits from multiple HF socks. Ravensfire (talk) 22:27, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

20 October 2024

Suspected sockpuppets

This is a 16 days old account and like the sockmaster and its socks, they are indiscriminately removing the category Category:Bengali remakes of Tamil films from Bengali-language films (especially, Indian Bengali films).

Also, it is funny because their name is "Izno Paglu" (means Izno is a mad person) and on the last investigation on 9 September 2024, it was @Izno: who commented as patrolling admin. But jokes aside, it is a clear WP:DUCK case. Mehedi Abedin 16:53, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • The following accounts are  Confirmed:
PhilKnight (talk) 18:00, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have mass rollbacked the edits of Izno Paglu (talk · contribs) and Main Duniya Mein Akela Hoon (talk · contribs). The other sock edits don't seem to fit the pattern. PhilKnight (talk) 18:20, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

05 November 2024

Suspected sockpuppets

Same edits [27] as prior sock [28]. Also [29] vs [30]. Ravensfire (talk) 01:34, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
If this is a sock then User:Kataariveera may be another sock considering this edit. @Ravensfire: What do you think?. TornadoLGS (talk) 03:41, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think User:Kataariveera assumed good faith and was trying to revery Ek Shey Akash 's faulty edits. Looking at Ek Shey Akash's edits, he added three sources that Simhada Mari was a remake but none of the sources confirmed his claim [31] whereas the sources that Kataariveera sourced that Jamaibabu Jindabad is a remake of Anuraga Aralithu explicitly give credit to the original film. DareshMohan (talk) 06:49, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi... In response to accusation made by other person Ek Shey Akash that I am editing without sources, I mentioned that I reverted his edits backed by sources Kataariveera (talk) 07:49, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Concur with DareshMohan, Kataariveera edits are sourced, reasonable and they've been editing for ~3 years with 5k edits and their talk page has good thoughtful discussions with multiple other editors. Ravensfire (talk) 13:50, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

04 December 2024

Suspected sockpuppets

Similar edit here [32] as a prior sock [33]. Adding Ritwick Chakraborty, similar formating for region/language and same genre changes. Ravensfire (talk) 18:45, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

10 December 2024

Suspected sockpuppets

Recreated Draft:Shatru (1984 film) [34], same as prior socks [35] and [36]. Ravensfire (talk) 17:45, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

16 December 2024

Suspected sockpuppets

Restoring edits [37] from prior sock [38]. Also here [39] vs [40]. Ravensfire (talk) 04:49, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

05 January 2025

Suspected sockpuppets

Created after last sock blocked, restored edit [41] from prior socks [42]. Ravensfire (talk) 04:55, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See also [43] where another editor noticed the similar edits of Ayaasho to prior HF socks. Ravensfire (talk) 05:20, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

24 January 2025

Suspected sockpuppets

Restoring edits from prior socks - [44] vs [45] and [46]. Ravensfire (talk) 19:09, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

04 March 2025

Suspected sockpuppets

This sock was created 2 days ago and like its sockmaster Halud Foressa, it has obsession on Bengali-language films. It is removing remake-related categories like its sockmaster, for example - this, this, and this. Mehedi Abedin 07:54, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]


@MarioGom
  1. see this edit by Paul is describing, one of the proven sock of the sockmaster.
  2. see this edit of the suspected
  3. They like removing categories related to film remake language.
Mehedi Abedin 22:01, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I also added an ip address as the ip removed categories from an film article right after the suspected sock edited the same article (see this and this). Mehedi Abedin 22:13, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  •  Additional information needed. In order to facilitate and expedite your request, please provide diffs to support your case. Please give two or more diffs meeting the following format:
  1. At least one diff is from the sockmaster (or an account already blocked as a confirmed sockpuppet of the sockmaster), showing the behaviour characteristic of the sockmaster.
  2. At least one diff per suspected sockpuppet, showing the suspected sockpuppet emulating the behaviour of the sockmaster given in the first diff.
  3. In situations where it is not immediately obvious from the diffs what the characteristic behaviour is, a short explanation must be provided. Around one sentence is enough for this. MarioGom (talk) 21:28, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you. I'm not sure what to make of it, but I restored the original CU request (not an endorsement). MarioGom (talk) 19:28, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • no No comment with respect to IP address(es).  Confirmed:
Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 00:47, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

30 March 2025

Suspected sockpuppets

Obvious misstep at Special:Diff/1283060295, so I'll block, but because previous checks have tended to turn up a bunch of other accounts that weren't in the original filing, I'm also requesting CU to check for any of those. -- asilvering (talk) 19:26, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Halud_Foressa/Archive&oldid=1284159830"
Uses material from the Wikipedia article Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Halud Foressa/Archive, released under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license.