Yasin1747 (talk+ ·tag ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·spi block ·block log ·CA ·CheckUser(log) ·investigate ·cuwiki)
Clerk note: original case name)Recreating articles created by other socks of Jaspreetsingh6, includingSiege of Ballabhgarh (1757),Battle of Herat (1749), andDurrani Campaign to Khorasan (1770) among others.ProtobowlAddicttalk!15:23, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk note: original case name)RecreatedDraft:Siege of Herat (1750) which was just G5 deletedlog.S0091 (talk) 20:26, 26 April 2025 (UTC)S0091 (talk)20:26, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have blocked this account for what appears to be obvious sock puppetry, seeing the creation of this account immediately after the last one was blocked, the recreation of the deleted page, and a similar area of interest. Ping me if you think I overstepped or messed up here.Fathoms Below(talk)20:38, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk note: original case name)PerUser talk:Pashtunov#Sockpuppetry.Izno (talk)16:00, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed to a bunch of socks from this group (e..g Yasin1747).--Ponyobons mots22:16, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply] Clerk note: originally filed under this user)RecreatedDraft:Battle of Khorramabad that was previously created (and recently deleted) by the sockUser:Iranshahriat. Also recreatedDraft:Battle of Ancedan, another draft that was created by that sock. Account was created 12 days after that sock was blocked. I think if it was one that could be a coincidence, but two is kind of obvious.Sophisticatedevening🍷(talk)18:41, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed.PhilKnight (talk)18:47, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Blocked and tagged. Closing.PhilKnight (talk)18:47, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]This case is being reviewed byasilvering as part of the clerk training process. Please allow them to process the entire case without interference, and pose any questions or concerns either on theirtalk page or on this page if more appropriate.
Clerk note: Reopening, as mentioned above, please also checkAhmadzeenee (talk+ ·tag ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·spi block ·block log ·CA ·CheckUser(log) ·investigate ·cuwiki). --asilvering (talk)09:03, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
CheckUser requested and endorsed by clerk -asilvering (talk)09:05, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Likely to these.dbeef [talk]12:14, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Clerk note: originally filed under this user)RecreatedDraft:Siege of Herat (1749) that has been repeatedly recreated by these socks, account was created on June 11 after the last socks were blocked, and making the same siege articles like (Siege of Kerman (1720)) and submitting to AfC like the rest. Requesting CU as they might be using proxies like in the last report.Sophisticatedevening🍷(talk)17:01, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk assistance requested: - Actually, I'm willing to take the above user's story into account here based on prior data. I think I'd suggest splitting out the Yasin line into its own SPI. That's the two 26 April 2025 and 30 April 2025 entries in the archive, as well as the two cases that are presently unarchived, and retag these socks (if you want, Yasin as suspected to Jaspreetsingh6, but currently the data doesn't support it all that much). Clerk note: retagged.asilvering (talk)02:32, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Requested actions completed, closing.asilvering (talk)02:33, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]Insistent request atWP:RFU to restore another sock's creation. Alt master isJaspreetsingh6 or vice versa. Please CU to confirm and check for sleepers. -UtherSRG(talk)17:26, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk note: originally filed under this user) Clerk note: originally filed under this user)Turkozai picks up editing onDraft:Battle of Herat (1719), created by master. ThenCapture of Farrahabad has overlaping moves[1] and AFC template removals[2] 6 minutes apart andConquest of Qazvin with the same ([3][4]) six minutes apart as well. See also overlapping contributions onBattle of Gulnabad.Bobby Cohn 🍁 (talk)16:36, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed to each other, however the sock master isJaspreetsingh6.PhilKnight (talk)18:53, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unrelated to the others. WhileZargha7 is
Unlikely.PhilKnight (talk)18:57, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Blocked and tagged.PhilKnight (talk)19:01, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Clerk assistance requested: - please move this section toWikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Jaspreetsingh6.PhilKnight (talk)19:04, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]Account created after the blocking of previous socks and deletion ofDraft:Siege of Kerman (1720), immediately recreates and submits.Bobby Cohn 🍁 (talk)12:58, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed, blocked and tagged along withMaturidiyya andYavuzSelim1514.--Ponyobons mots19:38, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]Of the articles created and editing styles:
Bobby Cohn 🍁 (talk)16:15, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This case is being reviewed byasilvering as part of the clerk training process. Please allow them to process the entire case without interference, and pose any questions or concerns either on theirtalk page or on this page if more appropriate.
CheckUser requested and endorsed by clerk - yep. Should CU to confirm and check for other accounts. --asilvering (talk)20:44, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]New socks created after block of last sockIranian.Shah. Contributions and interest in creating pages in same areas are similar.Special:Contributions/Iranian.ShahSpecial:Contributions/Eastern_aryanicSpecial:Contributions/NewHistory101Special:Contributions/Amankhan4.
This diff is good lead, Iranian.shah addedBattle of Behgy (1766) in a template and new sock Eastern aryanic also did the same on another templatehere andcreated pageBattle of Behgy (1766).
Iranian.shah created page "Battle of Amritsar" or "Sack of Amritsar" (pages deleted by admins as created by sock account) that had identical edit onBattle of Behgy (1766), that said "The Sikhs under Charat Singh brought a force of 20,000 men near Lahore, resulting in Ahmad Shah bringing his own host of 50,000 in response and dispatching Jahan Khan toward Amritsar, forcing the Sikhs to withdraw."RangersRus (talk)14:45, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed to Iranian.Shah. Blocked and tagged.
CheckUser declined with respect to NewHistory101 and Amankhan4 because no evidence has been provided for those accounts, and they did not come up in my checks of Eastern aryanic and Iranian.Shah. (The only overlap is between Amankhan4 and Eastern aryanic onBattle of Jamrud, where Eastern aryanicreverted an edit made by Amankhan4.) Closing with no action against those two accounts due to insufficient evidence at this time. They can be re-reported here if additional evidence comes to light.Mz7 (talk)06:28, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply] Clerk note: originally filed under this user)RecreatedBattle of Meerut (1767) (User:Jisshu) and all other edits and contribution areas of interest (Afghan–Sikh wars) matches with the previous socks editing patterns.Agent 007 (talk)15:05, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed to Iranian.Shah, a sockpuppet ofWikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Yasin1747. I will move this case under that archive. Closing.Mz7 (talk)06:31, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]RecreatedBattle of Gokul (1757) (User:Jisshu and the above users) and all other edits and contribution areas of interest (Afghan–Sikh wars)again matches with the previous socks editing patterns. Please check if any sleepers are active.Agent 007 (talk)19:06, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unrelated.Amankhan5 is Likely.PhilKnight (talk)21:12, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No action with respect toAfghanParatrooper19891.Amankhan5 Blocked and tagged. Closing.PhilKnight (talk)21:15, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]RecreatedSiege of Herat (1749) with a new name (Siege of Herat (1749-50) and all other edits and contribution areas of interest (Durani campaigns to Khorasan) matches with the previous socks editing patternsIranian112 (talk)19:09, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
User:Salvio giuliano They still haven't been blocked.Kajmer05 (talk)12:01, 8 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
LikelySalviogiuliano06:38, 8 August 2025 (UTC)[reply] Blocked and tagged. Closing.asilvering (talk)00:02, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]RecreatedSiege of Herat (1749) with a new name (Siege of Herat (1749-1750) and I thinkthis references Yasin
Endorsed by acheckuser - I'm actually going to endorse this. I took a look at the user a month ago and couldn't get there for either of a couple of the related groups.Izno (talk)21:25, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply] Clerk note: original case name)I noticed while working at Copypatrol that both of these users had created pages on Indian milhist in the last few days through unattributed copy-pasting fromAhmad Shah Durrani.
Inthis edit, TurkishBaron drew attention on another user's talk page toBattle on the Sutlej, a page created by Sherekhalsa.
Sherekhalsa has alsoadded articles created by TurkishBaron toTemplate:Campaignbox Afghan-Sikh Wars and hascommented on the talk page of another of TurkishBaron’s articles shortly after its creation.MCE89 (talk)13:07, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I want that the Articles i publishedSack of Sirhind was my own work, but slightly inspiration from the Article fromAhmad Shah Durrani in the background section. In theAhmad shahs turkestan expedition it is noted it is heavily influence from the pageAhmad Shah Durrani and in the talk page. And in the topic of this guy sherekhalsa, he made an article where the results are diffrent from a known user Noorullah21, and i sent him a message about to correct it, but when i did more research I found thatBattle on the sutlejis compleatly copied from this website and not only that the battle was also previously made by a sockpuppet. I have noticed that this user is alsointerfiering with my article for example her with insulting afghans.— Precedingunsigned comment added byTurkishBaron (talk •contribs)14:17, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are some very strange things going on here, just look at these examples:[11][12] another sock master,Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MHD1234567890, requests the unblocking on September 7th, then immediately after TurkishBaron is blocked, they writes the same things MHD wrote.Kajmer05 (talk)21:30, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In progress - looking into potential link to HaughtonBrit (thank youCactusWriter).Girth Summit (blether)21:13, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply] Confirmed to various accounts from theYasin1747 case. I can't find a connection to HaughtonBrit - will move this case over to Yasin1747. I don't see a link to MHD1234567890 - Izno is right, it's probably an LLM-written unblock request to a similar prompt.Girth Summit (blether)21:28, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]