Misplaced Pages

:Sockpuppet investigations/Zhanzhao - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Vanjagenije (talk | contribs) at 08:05, 24 March 2015 (→Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments: Fixing style/layout errors). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 08:05, 24 March 2015 by Vanjagenije (talk | contribs) (→Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments: Fixing style/layout errors)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Zhanzhao

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

For archived investigations, see Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Zhanzhao/Archive.



23 March 2015

– An SPI clerk has endorsed a request for CheckUser. A checkuser will shortly review the case.

Suspected sockpuppets

I don't think that anyone else other than Zhanzhao on this article(Rape in India) could ignore the guidelines like WP:BLPCRIME, WP:NOTABILITY and continuously edit war over undiscussed edits. I am sure that the sole purpose of this account as well as the IP is just to restore the edits of Zhanzhao, and lend support to the arguments of Zhanzhao.

One of the main evidence is that Zhanzhao was recently told to stop violating the WP:ILLEGIT. It was 14 March, and right after a few hours, this IP edit warred on this article. Another evidence is that the IP and the account have used edit summaries for discussion and ignored the ATP.

72 says "This article is about Rape in India", TCKTKtool says "This article is about Rape in India". Zhanzhao says "it IS about rape in india".

Argument is not different, TCKTKtool says "major news", and Zhanzhao says "significant news coverage".

Considerably same edit warring over the ratio/percentage.

After two downed, Zhanzhao came and restored it. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 07:41, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

TCKTKtool says "major news around the world". Zhanzhao says "news agencies around the world". OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 08:35, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Added Resaltador, previously he was blocked for evading his block with 96.231.161.128, an IP that shows same geolocation as 72.196.235.154. Resaltador's edit summary also matches with TCKTKtool.

@Vanjagenije: Resaltador's previous block evasion matches with this IP address. Resaltador's mentions only usernames in the edit summaries and mentions the section title in edit summaries, similar to the IP and TCKTKtool. Check again, they are not automatically filled. The automatically filled ones reads differently. See the difference:-
(→‎Unproven/non-notable allegations), by Padenton, it was automatically filled. Font was grey.
(Unproven/non-notable allegations), by TCKTKtool and Resaltador. Not automatically filled, and the font is black.
OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 03:35, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
Comments by other users

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

Defendant's word in

I don't know if there's any relationship between TCKTKtool and the IP, but do go ahead to run a Checkuser on me against them. But since this SPI has been raised against me by OccultZone, can I at least expect the gentlemanly response of an apology from OccultZone after its been decisively proven that I'm not either one of them? Cos its unfair that he keeps firing popshots at me which leaves a record while he gets to keep his own record clean. Zhanzhao (talk) 07:57, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

I also have no relationship between TCKTKtool, 72.196.235.154, or Zhanzhao. I agree that OccultZone seems to attack anyone that disagrees with him. I try and stay neutral but he is going over board on this. I think a Admin should review his actions not only here but other edits and request as well. Resaltador (talk) 17:56, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Categories: