• Biclorf.kok (talk ·  · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Polutar (talk ·  · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

• User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
• Editor interaction utility

SPA accounts making unsourced, promotional, additions to GeoTV articles - especially adding programme times (despite numerous warnings of WP:NOTTVGUIDE and upcoming programmes (despite warnings of WP:V + WP:CRYSTAL. Editors are careful not to directly revert edits by others, but change incrementally to avoid notifications.

Best seen at Revision history of "List of programs broadcast by Geo TV" and Revision history of "Geo Kahani" where confirmed sock User:Hassaan201555 was replaced by User:Biclorf.kok who was then replaced by User:Polutar. Arjayay (talk) 11:32, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Polutaris  Confirmed to ANASKHAN777 sock Hassaan201555; I've blocked and tagged the account. --Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 17:26, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• DilHaiChhotaSaChhotiSiAasha (talk ·  · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) ( Clerk note: original case name)

• TheAnasKhan (talk ·  · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Tools: Editor interaction utility · Interaction Timeline · SPI Tools

Evidence will be provided shortly. M.Ashraf333 (talk) 14:10, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

1. The user @TheAnasKhan actively editing Pakistani TV serials and participating (using original username and IPs) somehow in different AfDs to increase vote count: AfD stat, suspected IPs usin in AfDs: @111.88.33.72, @111.88.44.11
2. @ZeeZaa112 and @TheAnasKhan: Same interest of edits
3. @DilHaiChhotaSaChhotiSiAasha and @TheAnasKhan: Same interest of edits
4. Another suspected sock must be inspected @Lillyput4455, as the same edit of interest appeared here between @TheAnasKhan and @Lillyput4455.
5. The other suspected SPI cases about @Lillyput4455 already here, and here.

Mere similarities between the users doesn't constitute a sock puppet. In-depth discussions have taken place before on my account pertaining to sock accounts which didn't constitute me as a sock puppet of any active users. I don't understand on what basis you've accused me of sock puppetry when you doesn't have any evidence. I have contributed in the category of Pakistani television since I created my account but User:TheAnasKhan doesn't have much contribution in the same. Seems like you have some agenda against me as you've nominated my articles for deletion multiple times where they passed the WP:Afd. I request the SPI Clerks to take into consideration User:M.Ashraf333 actions on Wikipedia as his mere objective is to nominate as much article for deletion as he can when there is space for improvement and there are sources available on search related to subject, demotivate new contributors like User:TheAnasKhan and User:Pllutin without giving them a chance to improve their articles. Thank you! Lillyput4455 (talk) 15:32, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

•  Confirmed by activity on March 9. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 18:02, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• I'm not sure about the connection to DilHaiChhotaSaChhotiSiAasha, the originally proposed master - previous socks are stale, CU logs show IPs that geolocate to the same city as TheAnasKhan's IPs, so it's certainly  Possible, but some behavioural analysis would be needed to be confident. What I am certain about is that TheAnasKhan and Lillyput4455 are  Confirmed to one another, and to Jaalkipoy, who is a confirmed sock of ANASKHAN777. Girth Summit _(blether) 20:14, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Avadh990 (talk ·  · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• 39.34.169.97 (talk ·  · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• Tools: Editor interaction utility · Interaction Timeline · SPI Tools

Editing area is limited to articles related to Pakistani TV industry. See editor interaction with Lillyput4455 (talk · contribs), who was blocked on 30 March 2023 as a confirmed sock. Account created on 5 June and started editing in the same area with non-beginner-like skill. Never leaves edit summaries as typical of these socks. Recreated Kacha Dhaga on 10 June which was deleted on 4 March after an AFD. The only keep vote was by Lillyput4455. The article was initially created by 39.34.169.97 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) on 24 February. Article was again speedy deleted immediately for being sufficiently identical to the IP's version. Idell (talk) 06:10, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The IP made nine similar edits between 1 and 3 January just like the other sockpuppets on articles about Pakistani TV series (from different channels), actors, a writer and a film. Left only one edit summary. Idell (talk) 06:32, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

@Idell: I would add 39.34.170.181 to this sock list as well. That IP appears to have been attempting to tag their own sock accounts (per the linked edit filter log entries). 2601:1C0:4401:F60:DBD:FB60:4192:856C (talk) 17:25, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Account is  Confirmed. No comment on the IP, but it hasn't edited for ages so wouldn't be worth asking someone else to investigate. Closing. Girth Summit _(blether) 14:42, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Avadh990 (talk ·  · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Tools: Editor interaction utility · Interaction Timeline · SPI Tools

Behavior very similar to another sock of the puppeteer, User:Lillyput4455, as well as sharing the same areas of interest, see this. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 09:42, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Duplicate of the report above; closing. Girth Summit _(blether) 14:42, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Sameeerrr (talk ·  · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Tools: Editor interaction utility · Interaction Timeline · SPI Tools

This has got to be @Lillyput4455. I mean, Lillyput4455 had a habit of deleting Indian-related TV series and voting to keep Pakistani TV series. Their editing behavior is the same here. They've just joined WP but seem pretty experienced with AfDs already. They're defending Pakistani TV series articles nominated for deletion with such enthusiasm as one see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tumhare Husn Ke Naam.

They're also trying to sneak in the same unreliable and spammy links into articles related to Pakistani TV series, just like @@Lillyput4455 or their sockpuppets would do. Passes WP:DUCKTEST. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:16, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

• I'm defending Pakistani television series? Where? Except Tumhare Husn Ke Naam and Fatima Feng which I feel meets WP: Notability (television), which other shows I defended. As for your claim if that would have been the case I'd not have voted in favour of WP:AfD for Chamak Damak, Daurr. And which Indian series I'm keen to delete? Just look at Bhagyavidhaata and Aurat (TV series), are you suggesting they're WP:Notable? Infact I have added references to Indian television shows. Also, I asked for reliability of spammy links you mentioned, not that I disruptively used them. Provided you have quite a controversial edit history, you have been WP:Bludgeoning in your WP:AfD's without understanding rationale of other users. You're the one nominating articles enthusiastically without considering WP:GNG. That's your pattern, you target users who voted in opposition of your WP:AfD.Sameeerrr (talk) 10:28, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sameeerrr, Just because you voted delete in some of my AfD doesn't mean you're not associated with previous socks. It seems like a new tactic to appear neutral. Any newbie voting in AfD on Pakistani articles related to TV series and actors should be considered suspicious because there are many UPEs editing this area for a long time. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 10:34, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    You can check my status if I'm a WP:UPE, by email to the concerned person. Good luck!

    I have a lot of things to look into my personal life. My professional exams are approaching so I'll already be going on a break from editing. As far as, sock is concerned, it's UpTo administrators to decide. Since you've been accusing multiple editors for being UPE. Even after being warned by User:Liz. Sameeerrr (talk) 10:41, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Sameeerrr, How do you know Liz warned me? —Saqib (talk I contribs) 10:55, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    When I saw one of your WP:AfD, cause you're arguing with almost everyone in your WP:AfD. Since there's no authenticity in your rationales. Sameeerrr (talk) 11:00, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Sameeerrr, Alright, this pretty much confirms that my suspicions were justified. BTW, I never directly accused you of being a UPE. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 11:09, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    You just did in this discussion. Anyways, I don't want to waste my time with you, you can carry on with your agenda's. Good luck! Sameeerrr (talk) 11:11, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Sameeerrr is fairly  Likely to various socks of ANASKHAN777; they have also engaged in an alarming amount of WP:LOUTSOCKing. Blocking, tagging as suspected. Girth Summit _(blether) 12:04, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• TahaaShah (talk ·  · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Tools: Editor interaction utility · Interaction Timeline · SPI Tools

Recently created account generating the same garbage redirects and generating the same sort of articles about Pakistani tv series. Yamla (talk) 15:02, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yamla, We both found them at exactly the same time, I guess. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:04, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

• This was originally filed with Nauman335 as the sockmaster.  Confirmed to Sameeerrr who belongs to a different sockmaster, ANASKHAN777. Also, confirmed WP:LOUTSOCK, but the IP address in question was already caught by another admin. I'll move this report and tag and block. --Yamla (talk) 15:12, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Fokket (talk ·  · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Tools: Editor interaction utility · Interaction Timeline · SPI Tools

So @ANASKHAN777 created this new account @Fokket just recently and created some nicely crafted bios on Pakistani lawmakers - and that's how they caught my attention since I also contribute in that area. But as soon they created a BLP for some non-notable WP:ROTM professor Rasul Bakhsh Rais, I became concerned because the BLP cited some unreliable and user-generated sources and was clearly WP:UPE. So when I added notability tags to the BLP, @Fokket simply reverted it and suggested I take it to WP:AFD and also expressed indifference towards the potential deletion of the BLP via AFD process. But instead of nominating it for deletion, I draftified it, but my draftification was reverted, too, with insistence from @Fokket to take it to AFD and their this eagerness to pursue AFD raised suspicions, especially considering their ability to influence AFD outcomes with LOUTSOCKING, and sleeper accounts. This behavior seemed unusual for a newcomer so when I reached out to an admin about my concerns, they simply blanked their user tp. Based on past behavior, I suspect this account might belong to @ANASKHAN777, who has previously created fresh accounts to initially establish credibility and later influence AFD discussions related to Pakistani actors, and drama/TV series, where there is known activity by UPE sock farms. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:33, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Vanamonde93: Since filing the SPI in June, the editor has ceased editing, which might suggest potential socking. However, as the account has been inactive for a while and I am not inclined to investigate further, it seems appropriate to close the SPI now. On a related note, it’s unfortunate that this SPI took such a long time to review. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 07:24, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

•  Additional information needed - A CU did not turn up anything. There is heavy proxy use involved here, so I did not do an exhaustive check - but I find it extremely unlikely that an exhaustive check would find anything more. This will need to proceed on behavior, and the evidence presented so far shows suspicious behavior but no clear connection to another user. Vanamonde93 (talk) 02:37, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• @Saqib: SPI is seriously backlogged, and in any case the behavioral evidence you've provided isn't enough to block. There is zero article overlap between the suspected sock and master. CUs and admins are likely to handle the reports with the strongest evidence first: if the best we have is a suspicion of a returning user, the report is likely to languish, as this one did. I'm not blaming you for a slow response - the backlog is indeed unfortunate - but you can help future reports get actioned quickly by making them as clear-cut as possible. Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:00, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]