Home • Search • Translate
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Dr.Jhingaadey

Dr.Jhingaadey ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Prior SSP or RFCU cases may exist for this user:

Report date June 8 2009, 23:42 (UTC)
Suspected sockpuppets


Evidence submitted by Enric Naval


Passes the WP:DUCK test: the IP made its second edit in the section where another sock of this user had just been announced as blocked [2]. Its first edit had been an (apparently) unsourced defence of the efficacy of homeopathy [3], and Dr.Jhingaadey does that all the time.

However, the IP is not from the same geographical location as the other suspected socks. Checkuser is needed to compare this IP to User:NootherIDAvailable, the latest checkuser-confirmed sock. -- Enric Naval ( talk) 23:42, 8 June 2009 (UTC) reply


Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.
Comments by other users


CheckUser requests
Checkuser request – code letter: E (Community ban/sanction evasion )
Current status – Declined, the reason can be found below.    Requested by Enric Naval ( talk) 23:42, 8 June 2009 (UTC) reply


Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

Additional information needed: Please provide a code letter. SPCUClerkbot ( talk) 23:43, 8 June 2009 (UTC) reply


  •  Clerk declined: CU seems unnecessary in this case; if the IP continues to edit it can be blocked, but since both accounts listed are indef-blocked (and the link between them is already confirmed) further use of checkuser is unlikely to be helpful. If you see other new accounts with similar activity in the next days and weeks, come on back. Nathan T 00:07, 9 June 2009 (UTC) reply
Conclusions

 Delisted no action required at present. Mayalld ( talk) 18:06, 9 June 2009 (UTC) reply

This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically.

Mayalld ( talk) 18:06, 9 June 2009 (UTC) reply



Report date July 30 2009, 14:30 (UTC)
Suspected sockpuppets



Evidence submitted by User:BullRangifer

Duck test. This multiple blocked user never can resist using registered and unregistered socks. See previous sockpuppet investigations and categories. He has recently been allowed (by one admin, with much disagreement from other editors) to edit using the name User:Avathaar, and only on the talk page. He hasn't been editing there for some time, and apparently couldn't resist the temptation. Incredible cluelessness is actually a characteristic of this user. He doesn't have much of a clue how to hide obvious sockpuppetry. Brangifer ( talk) 14:30, 30 July 2009 (UTC) reply

Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.
Comments by other users
  • Judging by the number of edits (2) and the type of user (IP), I’m going to give him the benefit of the doubt for the moment and presume that he was just logged out and didn’t notice. —  NRen2k5( TALK), 21:24, 30 July 2009 (UTC) reply
  • For me this does not pass the duck test because I don't recognise the internet provider as one previously used by this user (I may be wrong about this, I didn't really check), and because the IP seems to be even more clueless. But after a closer look at Avathaar's talk page I am beginning to understand why BullRangifer is suspicious in this case. Hans Adler 22:24, 30 July 2009 (UTC) reply
  • He has been known to use internet cafes, as well as other computers, so the provider can vary. The location, the subject, and the POV all point to him. He is not supposed to edit anywhere but his own userspace at User:Avathaar. Note that he has never been unblocked, and is allowed to edit there only because one admin allows it. He does seem to be active as a sock again. Brangifer ( talk) 05:12, 31 July 2009 (UTC) reply
Try this one. It's the most specific service I've found yet, and locates the IP to the same location (Bengaluru, Karnataka, India) as the other IPs he's used:
Brangifer ( talk) 19:16, 31 July 2009 (UTC) reply
CheckUser requests
Checkuser request – code letter: E (Community ban/sanction evasion )
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.    Requested by Brangifer ( talk) 14:30, 30 July 2009 (UTC) reply


This is a borderline situation, but endorse based on the fact that the IP geolocates to Bangalore as with the IPs listed at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Dr.Jhingaadey. MuZemike 22:42, 1 August 2009 (UTC) reply

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

I can't tell you much more than you already know, previous socks were from Bangalore, this IP comes from there too. No logged in edits there but since Dr was on a dynamic range before that doesn't mean much. You'll have to use your sense of smell on that one :). (I'm leaving the case open in case an other CU finds more) -- Luk talk 08:57, 3 August 2009 (UTC) reply

Might be him, might not be him. It's  Inconclusive at this point. Tracing IP location for BSNL is very unreliable at times. With geolocate, both show as Bangalore. With GeoBytes, you get two very different locations. Nishkid64 ( Make articles, not wikidrama) 13:57, 4 August 2009 (UTC) reply
Conclusions
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically.

OhanaUnited Talk page 18:18, 13 August 2009 (UTC) reply

26 January 2011
Suspected sockpuppets


Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters "~~~~"

  • Per DUCK on Talk:Homeopathy. His classic tells: (1) mispellings and poor grammar (Indian English); (2) objections to the use of the words quackery, pseudoscience, and placebo to describe homeopathy, even though numerous MEDRS and RS do so; (3) objections to the refusal of RS to publish bad research and anecdotes which he believes we SHOULD be using.
Comments by other users

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

Dr.Jhingaadey has generally not been particularly good at disguising himself. George1918 has problems with the editing interface that I don't remember observing in Dr.Jhingaadey, and I believe this user also has a much better command of English. (Occasional ungrammatical sentences can be the sign of an expert speaker writing quickly and not reading before posting, rather than poor command of the language. George1918's errors are of that type, Dr.Jhingaadey's are not.)

I can also see no connection between the anonymous user signing "Jan Erik Sigdell" and George1918. There simply isn't enough data, and just both being pro homeopathy is definitely not enough to connect them. If they are the same, the user should be quietly warned not to alternate between editing logged in and logged out, not outed. Hans Adler 13:40, 26 January 2011 (UTC) reply

I tend to agree with Hans. As I mention above, an alternate explanation exists. Similarity doesn't equal connection. If the CU doesn't pan out, then doing as Hans suggests would still be wise.
My main point is that a CU should compare the (unknown to us mortals) IP(s) being used by George1918 with those used by Dr. Jhingaadey, which are usually from Karnataka, Mumbai, India. The tells are similar enough to Dr. Jhingaadey's to be worth an investigation. He has done this type of thing numerous times and it just wastes our time. If it's not him, then we'll just have to be patient with George1918. He has made rather few comments on Talk:Homeopathy which can be examined. The tells I mention are there. -- Brangifer ( talk) 20:35, 26 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Dr.Jhingaadey hasn't edited in three years, so there's no data left for us to use in a comparison. Similarly, all of his confirmed socks are also stale. And per the privacy policy, checkuser is not allowed to compare a username to a bunch of IPs. As such, we cannot use CU in this case. If we are to draw comparisons, it will be done by behavioral evidence - hence the reason why I asked for diffs. I need specific evidence aside from a bunch of misspellings. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 00:25, 27 January 2011 (UTC) reply
That's not true. Xdjq ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is the latest active sock and was blocked by Roger Davies. Jhingaadey makes regular appearances, but not as much as before. Note that the list of IPs is NOT to be compared with Jhingaadey. George1918 is editing from some IP. A CU can see if that or those IPs are from Karnataka. It's just that simple. -- Brangifer ( talk) 07:25, 27 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Maybe, but CU will not be able to tell us if the IPs are from Karnataka - that would violate the privacy policy. I had been talking about comparing against confirmed socks, not suspected ones - but I'll endorse for a check against that user anyway. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 14:11, 27 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Thanks TN. I guess we'll just have to be patient because the user is now running through the same types of nonsensical, stonewalling, circular arguments that Dr.Jhingaadey used, all the while claiming not be a pro-homeopathy editor, but constantly proving the opposite to be the case. It's going to be a long, long week........ all preventing us from doing more constructive things. -- Brangifer ( talk) 01:07, 28 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments


03 February 2011
Suspected sockpuppets

Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters "~~~~"

There was a recent Dr.Jhingaadey SPI case that was probably unfounded, but I believe this one has more merit. The user is still editing on Citizendium and has made similar contributions there. [4] This might be an accident, though, so maybe a checkuser wants to double-check. I note that the IP is from the same country, but not at all from Dr.Jhingaadey's usual geographic area, and there are many homeopaths in India. Hans Adler 10:28, 3 February 2011 (UTC) reply

It is a well established fact that the user who made the edit on Citizendium is the same person as Dr.Jhingaadey. (On his websites, in press interviews and on Wikipedia he uses various different spellings of his last name and various combinations and spellings of his first names and modes of address.) For the record, we have the following development over time:
  1. 16 December [5] Article appears in the Times of India.
  2. 16 December [6] An IP from Andhra Pradesh proposes material for inclusion on Talk:Homeopathy.
  3. 17 December [7] Dr.Jhingaadey protests about developments at Citizendium's homeopathy article.
  4. 1 January [8] Dr.Jhingaadey adds basically the IP's material condensed to a single sentence to a related Citizendium article (on water memory).
  5. 31 January Periodically active account shah.milan.p is reactivated after almost a year, to redo basically the IP's talk page edit. Account subsequently tries to recruit an ally in much the same way that was typical for Dr.Jhingaadey.
The communication styles are similar. There are also differences: Coming from the eastern or western coast of the country, and only one of the users apparently being interested in shipping. I wasn't aware of the last point. The coincidence 16/17 December is natural since the article appeared on 16 December. Combining this with the fact that the account is probably styled after a real name, I am withdrawing this report. Hans Adler 16:04, 3 February 2011 (UTC) reply


Comments by other users

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

I agree with Hans Adler's choice to withdraw this SPI. I too suspected the user was Dr. J., and he is known to edit from places other than the usual Karnataka location, but since the username is possibly a real name, it's likely another person who happens to believe the same things.

As to the objection regarding the relevance of what's happening at Citizendium, it is very relevant. The collection of evidence about the activities of well-known individuals often takes us off-wiki because they are doing things in the real world which they also import to Wikipedia, so that is very relevant information. In this case it's rather interesting that Dr. J. was also posting the same stuff at Citizendium. If you're curious about Dr. J's thinking, take a look at his userpage at Citizendium. Even they are concerned about his obvious misuse of Citizendium to promote himself and he likely won't last long there either. Also look at his contribution history there. I am concerned about the seemingly nonchallant nature of dealing with this notorious sockmaster who is very deceptive (very in-your-face lying) and persistent. He reappears quite often, but now that he's at Citizendium, it seems he's using his time there more and here less, but he'll always be around. He can't help it. -- Brangifer ( talk) 17:24, 3 February 2011 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Dr.Jhingaadey/Archive&oldid=1075152549"

Top Of Page

Home • Search • Translate

© CSE