Punjabier

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

28 September 2019

Suspected sockpuppets

Similar TLDR ranting using primary sources at Talk:Saini soon after the master and another sock were blocked. Sitush (talk) 03:40, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Prior sock was Punjabi jatt1 (talk ·  · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). Please note that if proven it will probably be necessary to remove talk page and email access. Pinging Yunshui. - Sitush (talk) 03:42, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

@Bbb23: Thanks for grouping them. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 06:23, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

03 October 2019

Suspected sockpuppets

Same Saini/Mali fixation as Punjabier and other socks, & same phraseology. David Biddulph (talk) 02:39, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Added another IP. --David Biddulph (talk) 02:58, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And a third IP. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:06, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And yet another. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:08, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how many more of these we're going to get. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:09, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And another two today. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:56, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Two more IPs today, both have whom admitted to having posted previously. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:24, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The first? of today's batch. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:19, 7 October 2019 (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

  • There's not much more to be done here. The relevant pages are already protected. Blocking individual IP's clearly won't accomplish anything. Range blocks are not possible without collateral damage. Sir Sputnik (talk) 19:27, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

13 October 2019

Suspected sockpuppets

Sardar00 filed a DRN request saying that they had tried to resolve a dispute about the Saini caste with User:Sitush. The dispute was between Sitush and Punjabier, and Punjabier was indefinitely blocked for edit-warring about caste. Both editors are less than fluent in English and have the same stylistic affectations, such as using the phrase "respected sir". Both accounts focus also on the Mali caste. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:07, 13 October 2019 (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

  • Sardar00 is  Blocked and tagged.
  • Manmohansinh saini (talk ·  · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki), an unrelated account from the archive, has a very similar name to that which Sardar00 is claiming for themselves here, where they place a comment under the name Manmohan SINGH saini. This account hasn't edited recently, but I want to make that observation for the archive in case this account pops back up.
  • I don't know if there's any need for checkuser, but Bbb23 found a couple of "bonus" accounts last time, so I'll leave the case open for a CU or clerk to decide. ST47 (talk) 09:30, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
*grumbles* geez, straight to work, eh? Looking, but I already have some questions for you... ;) ST47 (talk) 20:34, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I see. Sardar00 is  Confirmed to group 1 in the archive, Manmohansinh saini is Red X Unrelated, and I don't see any other new accounts. ST47 (talk) 20:57, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

22 December 2019

Suspected sockpuppets


As reported by User:AlanM1 at ANI, "castecruft" behavior and weird profane postings. I noticed that they seem to be gaming extended confirmed and started to investigate. Wow what a mess. ST47 (talk) 08:46, 22 December 2019 (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

03 January 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Similar rants on Talk:Saini like all the other socks before.[1], [2] Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:24, 3 January 2020 (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

01 September 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Same rants on Talk:Saini:

  • Often writes in lowercase without any punctuation and addresses people as sir:
    • Punjabier: very very thanks Þjarkur sir i never forget what you have done for us [3]
    • Er. Hummy even you thjarkur sir not understand our feelings you spreading wrong information in whole world [4]
  • Only discusses the year 1937:
    • Punjabier: mali started using saini in 1937in rajasthan state [5]
    • Er. Hummy: mali caste started using surname Saini in 1937 [6]

Also overlaps in the section "Adoption of the surname Saini" in a related article [7][8], adding lowercase unsourced content.

Account created a couple of weeks after last SPI.

– Thjarkur (talk) 08:30, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Added another " Er. Singh saab". Diffs at Tarkhan article [9],[10]. Seems too interested in proving that Tarkahn is a backward caste. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:42, 4 September 2020 (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

08 September 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Posting the same kind of semi-coherent diatribes about their caste and the need for removal of the word "Mali" from the article Saini: [11]. Cf this from Flyengineer, who was CU blocked a few days ago: [12] bonadea contributions talk 17:28, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Added two more based on these diffs [13], [14] [15], and "Saini" POV push here [16] - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:49, 12 September 2020 (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

13 September 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Er. Hummy is one of the latest confirmed socks of the master & they got blocked on 5 September 2020. They recently added Saini-related claim at Jat Regiment ([18]), although the source cited by them doesn't mention anything about the recruitment. The suspected sock registered on 9 September and reinstated that claim: [19].

Tarsem jassar amloh is another latest blocked sock and they were replacing the Jat Sikh-related details with OR-based claims at Sikh Regiment: [20]. The rationale provided by them at the talk page is that all communities can join the regiment: [21]. And now this suspected sock is editing that article in the same vein: [22].

Sockpuppet Tarsem jassar amloh also made Saini-related request at Talk:Gurbachan Singh Salaria: [23]. And now the suspected sock has made the same request by providing the same source: [24]. And these are pretty much the only edits made by the suspect in the main space. NitinMlk (talk) 09:58, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Here is an obvious sock who started editing today: Proud Indian Army. In their very first edits on this project, they are claiming that they have warned me several times already: [25]. Their disruption is getting out of hand. Pinging GeneralNotability as they participated as a clerk in the last SPI & might want to have a look at this one. - NitinMlk (talk) 19:42, 15 September 2020 (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

22 September 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

My apologies if this is not the correct way of doing things, but I've never initiated a sock investigation and the instructions are not particularly helpful. Basically, the first account is a confirmed sockmaster (Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Punjabier/Archive), and the second account is a confirmed sock. The third account is what interests me. The sockmaster has shown a particular interest in inserting the caste of various Indian personalities into bios. On September 10, the confirmed sock, Manvir Malik attempted to add a precise caste designation in the article on Gurbachan Singh Salaria, which is on my watchlist. I reverted them for sources not supporting this statement, and they were soon thereafter blocked for being a sock (I had not been aware of this). An IP account had tried a similar stunt before them and then after them, both of which I reverted, and then I got an admin to semi protect the article. On September 19 the protection was removed and on September 21 Rajanrao Shankar went ahead and tried to re-add Gurbachan Singh Salaria's apparent caste/ethnic background without providing a new source ([26]). Suspicious, I checked into their editing history. They're a relatively new account and also seem to show an interest in inserting people's caste/oddly specific ethnic ancestry into Indian bios or otherwise discussing caste topics ([27], [28], [29], [30]). Also for a new account, it's quite strange of them after only a month of experience to know how to nominate an article for GAn ([31]). Per WP:DUCK, I'd like a clerk to investigate. Indy beetle (talk) 06:51, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Note that I've opened a separate SPI for the second suspected sock here another sockfarm, which seems more likely according to me comparing the other blocked socks' modus operandi. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:13, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I thought considering the similar rants in that talk page, a single diff will do. I've provided another diff by a confirmed sock. Please see the similarity in the comment/request. That is they try to remove the word "mali" from teh article. Also added another one. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:50, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

31 October 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Similar POVPUSH to equate Tarkhan caste with Lohar, see the edits and edit summaries by teh confirmed sock [32], [33], [34]. Comparing that with the new suspected sock [35], [36]. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:05, 31 October 2020 (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

01 January 2021

Suspected sockpuppets

Personal casteist attacks by IP socks of User:Punjabier. [37] by 2402:3A80:1004:C244:4E15:ABEE:65CA:E812, calling me a "kutta Tarkhan mistri". Kutta means dog in Indian languages and Tarkhan is a caste and 'mistri' means craftsman or worker and here by 2402:3A80:101F:3C75:D7AD:AF76:1FE7:5A07, making threats of finding my address and personal attacks/cusses again. Obvious attack by the sock here at my talk page. One can see how the socks are in a mission to establish that the Tarkhans are a lower caste [38], [39], and many edits like that. Kind of a revenge since Saini's are considered mali in the article with proper sources, which the user has problems with. They are very persistent in reverting/refuting it as can be seen in the article history with repeated requests in the talk page [40].

Adding source here source used is WP:CIRCULAR since in August 2019 (when the Times of India article was published), the Wikipedia article dated 21 August 2019 mentioned that the subject "Satinder Pal Singh Saini in a Punjabi Saini family" and it was unsourced.

Also added another [41] which is Wiki-like this WP:UGC here. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:16, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

  • Geolocation matches. Blocking is not going to be effective as they always jump between extremely wide IPv6 ranges. The page in question has now been protected, which is likely the only available deterrent. – Thjarkur (talk) 11:03, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hello. The following was blocked by the edit filter, apparently from the accused, User:2402:3A80:101C:D43F:B86C:B4E6:F5DA:9446. I realize this will have no impact here, especially since IPs will not be linked via CU, but I'm adding it for the record. Presented here exactly as was attempted by the user:

I got your mail today what is happening i am away from wikipedia from last one month

Why you are afraid to muchh frome me punjabier everyone you compared with me what is your sources that saini are mali

{Ping|Þjarkur}

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

17 June 2021

Suspected sockpuppets

The modus operandi of this sock master is to add OR and unsourced puffery about Saini caste. They also either blank well-sourced content about Jat Sikhs or replace it with OR/misrepresentations. Note that both Sainis and Jat Sikhs are communities of Punjab.

The main target of their latest socks has been along the same lines, i.e. to replace a Sikh Regiment's recruitment details about Jat Sikhs (which are based on scholarly/academic sources)[1][2] with their OR. And to achieve that, their socks have been disrupting the Sikh Regiment article for the last 10 months. When those socks got blocked by the CU, they tried to change the same detail through their usual IP hopper ([42]) who is also mentioned in the previous SPI (see here).

But then the page got semi-protected on 8 April: [43]. So it was beyond the IP hopper to edit it. So the latest suspected sock (Harmanjatt 00) registered on 20 April ([44]) and started in the same vein, e.g. compare the previous socks' edits – e.g., [45], [46], [47], [48], etc. – with that of the latest suspect: [49], [50], [51], etc. They have a peculiar habit of at times targeting Jat Sikh-related well-sourced content with the socks named after Jatts, e.g. compare their previous sock's name with that of the present suspect: Punjabi jatt1 & Harmanjatt 00

When Harmanjatt 00 got blocked for 2 weeks on 16 May ([52]), their usual IP hopper made the same edits 5 days later: [53], e.g. compare their edit summaries at Demographics of Punjab, India: [54] & [55]. Note that even these edits are as usual misrepresentation of the sources, as the Sikh Rajput are still OBC in Punjab, India: they are still listed at no. 74 in the latest official list: [56].

As usual, Harmanjatt 00 replaced the well-sourced content about Jat Sikh with OR/UGC: [57]. And they got reverted: [58]. Now their latest suspected sock (Harmanjatt123) has added the same content on that article's talk page: [59].

Finally, CU is needed for checking the sleeper accounts, even if these suspects are looking like DUCKs. - NitinMlk (talk) 20:00, 17 June 2021 (UTC) [reply]

References

References

  1. ^ Wilkinson, Steven I. (2015). Army and Nation: The Military and Indian Democracy Since Independence. Harvard University Press. p. 41. ISBN 978-0-674-72880-6. Some regiments, such as the Sikh Regiment and Sikh Light Infantry, are "single class," and therefore recruit combat troops only from members of a specified class, such as Jat Sikhs and Mazhabi and Ramdasia Sikhs.
  2. ^ Kundu, Apurba (1994). "The Indian Armed Forces' Sikh and Non-Sikh Officers' Opinions of Operation Blue Star". Pacific Affairs. 67 (1): 48. doi:10.2307/2760119. JSTOR 2760119. Moreover, with the exception of Gurkhas (recruited in Nepal), Sikhs remain the only community to have infantry regiments drawn exclusively from their own numbers: the Sikh Regiment (manned, though not officered, by high-caste Jat Sikhs) and the Sikh Light Infantry (manned entirely by Mazhabi, or Scheduled Caste, "untouchable" Sikhs.

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

  •  Clerk note: Oshwah - can I just check something with you? You've said that the accounts are unlikely - do you mean unlikely to the master only, or also unlikely to each other? The Harmanjatt usernames look ducky, and I note that the newer of the two has been indef blocked for disruption; if CU connects them, the older account should probably also be blocked. Cheers Girth Summit (blether) 14:05, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Girth Summit - Unlikely to each other. Let me know if you have more questions. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 14:26, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Oshwah, fair enough, thanks. Between the usernames and the article interests I still think it's pretty fishy, but they haven't edited in a couple of months so I guess there's no ongoing disruption from the account that we need to worry about. Closing. Girth Summit (blether) 14:28, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18 August 2021

Suspected sockpuppets

Grayson Indica:

  • User:Harmanjatt 00 tried multiple times to remove the well-sourced Jat-related detail from Baj Singh by providing misleading edit summaries, e.g. see this and their other edits at Baj Singh's revision history. And Grayson Indica did the same thing: [61]. Blanking well-sourced content related to Jats has been one of the peculiar habits of the socks of Punjabier.
There is a sourced claim in Tarkhan article which states that Tarkhans rank behind only Jat Sikhs in socio-economic hierarchy. This detail has been persistently targeted only by the socks of Punjabier, and they tried different ways to remove that content as well as the relevant source, e.g. here are the examples of CU-blocked socks of Punjabier removing that detail: Manvir Malik: [62] & [63]; Flyengineer: [64]; Er. Singh saab: [65]; and Er. Hummy: [66]. Now, unsurprisingly, Grayson Indica has also removed it: [67].
If that wasn't enough, Grayson Indica repeated exactly the same weird argument which were previously used by two socks, e.g. Manvir Malik previously stated that Castes exists in mind ...[68] & Flyengineer stated that No caste is first or second ...[69]. And now Grayson Indica combined both of their argument and stated in the edit summary that Caste exist in the minds no caste is first or second ...[70].
  • Just like a previous sock puppet, they copy-pasted a rare poem from 1910s – namely, Leisure (poem) – without attribution on their user page, although it has been revdel'd now:
User:Flykites: [71]
Grayson Indica: [72]
Note that two of their socks' name were also based on this poem: Leisure time & Leisure times. In fact, it seems one of the previous socks (Sukhpreetkaurmylove) also created an article about the poem: [73].
Adsmohali: [74] & [75]
Grayson Indica: [76], [77], [78], etc.
Note that one of their sock's username was also Fatehgarh Sahib: Fatehgarh Sahib
  • Just like previous socks, asking help for live animation and image uploading:
Adsmohali: [79] & [80]
Grayson Indica: [81] & [82]
  • They added "shoorsaini" claim in Porus article with this edit. The previous socks of Punjabier have also been making the same shoorsaini claim about Porus, e.g. see here. Note that members of Saini caste call themselves "shoorsaini" and try to appropriate major historical figures on that basis.
  • They call "sources" as "resources" in edit summaries, e.g. compare this edit summary of a previous sock with these edit summaries of Grayson: [83] & [84].
  • One of their other peculiar interests is to remove well-sourced Jat Sikh-related recruitment details from the armed force articles. I have explained that in one of the previous successful SPIs: see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Punjabier/Archive#13_September_2020. Harmanjatt did the same thing at President's Bodyguard (see [85]) and now Grayson Indica is editing there in the same vein: [86].
  • Just like the previous socks, they often create their own talk page, either with a malformed help template or a pointless edit, e.g. compare this edit of Grayson Indica with that of the blocked socks: [87], [88], [89], [90], [91], [92], [93], etc.
  • Same emoji in edit summaries:
Adsmohali: [94]
Grayson Indica: [95]

So, from the same disruption to the same love for a rare poem, this is clearly a WP:DUCK.


Give happiness to all (GHTA):

  • This suspect seems like a sleeper account of Punjabier. They have recently become active after a gap of over one and a half years. They created an article – namely, Ramgarh Sainian (Saini Majra) – which one of the previous socks have tried to create, e.g. see here and here.
  • They are asking the same weird question in their standard English which Punjabier socks used to ask about PDF files and referencing, e.g. compare this query of GHTA with this or this query of a confirmed sock of Punjabier.
  • On 26 July, both Grayson Indica and GHTA moved their respective drafts from draft space to Wikipedia namespace, rather than moving them to the mainspace: compare this edit of Grayson Indica with this edit of GHTA.
  • On 27 July, Grayson Indica created an article about Hansali village, and 3 days later, GHTA uploaded a couple of pics of Hansali village: see here and here.


Manvir Safedposh:

  • One of the main targets of Punjabier and his many socks has been to get the 'Mali' bit removed from the Saini article's hatnote. Although Talk:Saini's revision history is full of such requests by the master and their many socks, I am providing few such diffs here: [98], [99], [100], [101], [102], [103], etc. Manvir Safedposh registered on 15 February and became inactive on the same day after making the same request: [104].
They again became active on 9 August and posted a long rant about me along with again asking for removal of the 'Mali' bit: [105]. But what stands out in that post is that they used the term Admin Sahib, which was also used by Grayson a few days earlier: [106]. Their rest of ranting about the Sikh Regiment is also exactly the same as that of previous socks. NitinMlk (talk) 21:42, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @RegentsPark and TrangaBellam: I have just glanced over the edits of Juliana000 and Kimran999. Their writing styles and interest areas are very different from that of Punjabier. Having said that, there seems issue of WP:COI/WP:UPE with them. And there seems some connection between them, e.g. the Anjali Phougat's article was first created by Juliana000 in January in their userspace (see here), and it was copy-pasted by Kimran999 in draftspace in July after expanding its "Articles" section: [107]. These two have also uploaded personal pics of the subjects of the articles/drafts created by them: see here and here. Also, look how Juliana000 and Hwa Sangwook are defending the article created by Kimran999 at the AfD: [108]. So the CU seems like a good option for these three accounts. - NitinMlk (talk) 20:59, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, Kayle123 and Juliana000 were blocked as suspects. So I apologise for the oversight. In any case, the CU for Juliana000, Kimran999, Kayle123, & Hwa Sangwook will be helpful. - NitinMlk (talk) 21:06, 20 August 2021 (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

There's also Kayle123. But let's wait for a checkuser. --RegentsPark (comment) 21:35, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging @Bbb23:--RegentsPark (comment) 21:37, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not me.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:38, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies Bbb23, my bad (and old habits!). I'll just block these two accounts while waiting for a CU. --RegentsPark (comment) 21:53, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18 December 2021

Suspected sockpuppets


Seems like they are back to promote their favorite client, Draft:Anjali Phougat. Checkuser requested to pull out more accounts. 2A02:C7E:CA2:EB00:2186:E2D9:A591:9F92 (talk) 23:41, 18 December 2021 (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

  • Anjum Sharjeel was already checked and blocked here (no apparent relation to other accounts). Tiktokupdates might be a UPE but I don't think they're Punjabier, the behaviour is otherwise different. I'm not going to endorse a check based on vague suspicions of UPE, so closing. Suspected promotional editing can be dealt with through other venues such as WP:COIN. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 02:10, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Allikas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Punjabier/Archive
No tags for this post.