Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Yogesh Khandke/Archive

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.


Yogesh Khandke

Yogesh Khandke (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
31 August 2011
Suspected sockpuppets


Yogesh Khandke is an editor in a loose trio of Indian editors that engage in protracted disputes on certain caste articles, such as Kurmi and Yadav. They are regularly brought before ANI for conduct concerns, and these threads often feature the same cast of characters on both sides. When a new thread was started on August 25 on the conduct of User:Thisthat2011, Yogesh Khandke was invited but conspicuously absent.

In Khandke's place, a series of IPs from mostly the same Indian locale, acting like a single user in the threaded discussions, started casting aspersions against Thisthat2011's accusers. Not only were the new IPs able to fluently reference Wikipedia's policies and fora, but they also have an unlikely background knowledge about the disputes. Stylistically, YK and the IPs share many idiosyncrasies, including the overuse of bold, italics, and parentheses (compare [1][2]); peculiar capitalization of policy shortcuts;[3][4] and use of expressions like "guv'nor"[5][6].

Yogesh Khandke's behavior in the thread is a violation of sockpuppetry policy on "editing logged out in order to mislead", because the logged-out editing was intentional (see edit summary), because it sought to disrupt a noticeboard and create an illusion of opposition to a community proposal, and because it sought to avoid scrutiny and sanctions against Yogesh Khandke's user account, which was recently blocked for one week for personal attacks. Quigley (talk) 22:12, 31 August 2011 (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
15 April 2014
Suspected sockpuppets

New account, which I believe was created to get around YK`s topic ban. This is what set the sock radar off, YK uses the term discrete As does the suspected sock. Given YK was blocked for a few months following my reporting his TBAN violations would also explain why the sock has followed me around like a bad smell. The socks first edits being to deprod a bunch of NN books I had prodded. Darkness Shines (talk) 20:50, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Added D4iNa4 to the list, as that user has been essentially matching the editing pattern of Calypsomusic, including a lot of edits to the rather obscure deletion discussions on books by Koenrad Elst, such as this and this. Has also been displaying a remarkable coordination with Calypsomusic on the Narendra Modi Talk. An example would be here and here. Vanamonde93 (talk) 21:26, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Yawn, your excuses to continue using your battleground mentality on wikipedia are getting better and better, or should I say more discrete and discrete. But just continue to waste more and more of the community's time.
Why do you say I'm following your edits? Because I took a look at your block log? Everyone is allowed to do that. Or because I was voting against your mass deletions? This is my good right. Or maybe you are just desperately trying to get everyone blocked who is too inconvenient for you?
This is the second time this user has dragged me here, and from looking at his edit history, he tries to drag all editors that are inconvenient for him to such boards, like personal attacks, pov-pushing, sockpuppet or edit warring boards, even though he himself is engaging in such behaviour all the time, just recently he has personally attacked an admin, calling him a "tit" and "fucking dense".
And he is again dishonest. My first edits were not deprodding his mass deletions of notable books. --Calypsomusic (talk) 10:06, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The link to the personal attack I mentionend above, "Calls admin a tit and **** dense" --Calypsomusic (talk) 10:17, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, this wording - battleground etc - certainly looks a bit like Yogesh and not like a new user. That said, Yogesh was always adamant that he would never use anything other than his real name. Calypsomusic also turned up at the Narendra Modi (BJP leader) talk page yesterday - Yogesh was a Bharatiya Janata Party activist with Hindutva leanings, and Calypsomusic has also been pushing the Koenraad Elst Hindutva agenda. Could be just coincidence, I suppose, but it is odd. - Sitush (talk) 10:48, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, what a coincidence. Is this supposed to be a sarcastic comment, making a little fun of Darkness Shines, or are you serious?
This user (Sitush) has also reverted my talkpage comment I just did minutes ago. --Calypsomusic (talk) 10:56, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I reverted your comment at YK's talk page, yes. You were either canvassing or playing good hand/bad hand, depending on one's point of view. And I am being serious in my comment above but, sock or not, you are clearly not here to build the encyclopedia according to the tenets established by the community. Yogesh had the same problem asnd if it turns out that you're not socking then you'll still find yourself going the way that he did before much longer. - Sitush (talk) 11:29, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
YK may have said they would never sock, but they have before. I have been of the view that Calypsomusic has been following Darkness shine's edits, espcially at AfD discussions - posting the same or similar walls of text in sequence. From the veracity of discussions at AfD for the articles that Darkness shines nominated, there appears to be a prior history. Also, this post is either evidence they are not Yogesh Khandke or evidence they are, depending on which way you look at it. Style is similar and it was clear to me early on that Calypsomusic was unlikely to be a new editor. Flat Out let's discuss it 11:09, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)@Sitush outing is a serious misuse of editing privileges, regardless of whether off/on the target, I've told you earlier that I'm not the socking type. Also use words like "Hindutva agenda pusher" only if you are happy to be called "Christian agenda pusher" or having "Christian leanings" or "Labour party activist". I am busy in real life and can't handle the extra work of editing Wikipedia, also had trouble in the great password failure a few months ago. Regarding Calypsomusic, without even looking up the argument, as I don't have the stomach, I think it is pathetic that the tradition of browbeating is maintained, the fellow's dragged here as usual just because he disagrees with you. I'm here because I was informed on my talkpage. For whom so ever it may concern: I'm not gone completely cold, having edited regarding amongst them Gulzar's Phalke award, a few days ago and the Jashodaben declaration on Modi's page, and plan to keep editing as and when I can. @Flat outlet: if you look further you would know that it was later accepted that the alleged sock wasn't me, and my resultant block was undone. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 11:28, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And now the style similarities come to fore, both attack other editors and failing to assume good faith. On the contrary, the editor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bob1781 is still blocked as your sock]. Flat Out let's discuss it 11:34, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
They are blocked, they were an obvious sock, but not of me, I was unblocked, can't share diff, on a hand held device. Too cumbersome. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 11:40, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Yogesh, you were outed ages ago at ANI and, IIRC, on Jimbo's page. That was at the time you organised the Mumbai protest against Wikipedia's use of neutral maps, at which newspapers reported several arrests (ironically, of BJP activists although by that time you were in the conference hall having a go at Jimbo). You've made no secret of your Hindutva leanings on Wikipedia. Once it is out, it is out. I, on the other hand, have made no secret of being an apolitical atheist - feel free to call me one. I'm pretty sure that you have not been found socking, despite appearances, and seem to recall saying as much at the time when the block to which FlatOut linked happened. - Sitush (talk) 11:47, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Sitush (1) I request you to desist from outing, please don't connect a real world personality with a Wikipedia account, other Wikipedia editors are not supposed to do so. (2) One is not ones own judge, you may after all claim to be a Gandhian. (3) With what you "say", don't go to Saudi Arabia, Pakistan,..[7] Yogesh Khandke (talk) 03:53, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@all user:Yogesh Khandke is the only named account I've ever edited using, I've never edited anonymously to sock, and that is all that is pertinent as my say in this SPI. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 03:53, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@all/@@MezzoMezzo: I'm not sure whether we need a statement like this, but since you want me to, I declare that I'd be more than happy with a checkuser being run, I can's say whether Calypsomusic is a sock or not, but I repeat that I'm not the sock master. I'm happy with one account. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 17:05, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The behavioral evidence is enough to support the checkuser here. The manner of writing, vocabulary habits and tendetious editing are all the same. Even without the obvious behavioral issue, we have new accounts stalking Darkness Shines on the same exact topics the older account did, somehow searching out the Prods on very specific topics and removing them. Plus, it is clear from the talk archive above that Yogesh was only unblocked based on doubt as stated by admins; the blocking admin was convinced that he was socking and the other admins simply stated that he hadn't socked before so the benefit of the doubt could be given, in addition to the fact that the topic ban the user had made the block redundant.
If this really isn't a sock of Yogesh, he should agree to a checkuser. I was once falsely accused of sockpuppetry and actually requested the checkuser myself because I know I don't sock (it later turned out the accuser was a sock of a banned user out for revenge). It would simply end the issue quickly. MezzoMezzo (talk) 06:38, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have forgotten the password for D4iNa4, so it is unactive for over a week, whenever I would be on real internet connection, I will try to recover it. I never knew about sock puppetery, but I knew that same account cannot be used for pushing same opinion. Now I have read about sock puppetry, I would mention that none of these accounts have been abused for sock puppetry and they haven't even edited the same page. You had a Checkuser, so you also know that these accounts are not even related with account;- Rafikhsk. So that means that ban on other account was wrong, because it was blocked right away. For now, I have tagged all 3 accounts, after knowing those wikipedia socking guidelines, but I would mention again, that there was no abuse of socks. It is ok User:DoRD? Aciddery (talk) 01:33, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Yogesh_Khandke/Archive&oldid=1053331347"