Home • Search • Translate
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Jagdeep singh bittu

Jagdeep singh bittu ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)

23 September 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Editors are adding copyvio images of Indian singers Kulwinder Billa, Amrit Maan, with similar edit summaries & tags (mobile web visual edit)

Possible related but stale accounts: User:Jagdeep singh chabhal, User: Sukhdev singh chabhal Jumpytoo Talk 02:54, 23 September 2020 (UTC) reply

Added additional username User:Raju singh chabhal. Jumpytoo Talk 08:06, 23 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

26 September 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Identical behaviour to previous socks (adding copyvio images of Indian singers with similar edit summaries & tags (mobile web visual edit) Jumpytoo Talk 07:47, 26 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

06 October 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Singh - Like prior socks, uploading copyright infringing images on commons and adding links to them here. Using similar edit summaries (image or IMAGE) as prior socks (see contribs for Veerjagdeep and Teshan chabhal. Most articles targetted prior socks are semi-protected, so no overlaps, just behavior. Ravensfire ( talk) 21:17, 6 October 2020 (UTC). There is overlap with Mahala singh on Sharry Mann where they both try to link to copyright infringing images they uploaded on commons, different images though. reply

Mahala - Also same behavioral characteristics with similar edit summaries (image). This account though does have one article overlap - Sunanda Sharma with Jagdeep singh chabhal, Sukhdev singh chabhal and Veerjagdeep. The edits aren't exact, but shows activity on at least one article previously hit by socks.

Behavior-wise, it's the same editor or someone just as clueless about copyright and not interested in learning. I can't give a diff where they've made similar edits, just not there, sorry. Ravensfire ( talk) 21:26, 6 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

09 October 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Created after prior socks blocked, quickly went to same articles as prior socks. Used similar edit summaries as prior socks. On commons, uploaded copyvio images that were added by IP (them logged out) Ravensfire ( talk) 15:35, 9 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

19 October 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Same articles as prior socks, linking to copyright infringing images as usual. Ravensfire ( talk) 16:43, 19 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

21 October 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Usual pattern, uploads copyvio to commons, adds it to article here, not the first time for this article. Ravensfire ( talk) 18:24, 21 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

26 October 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

First edit was to add copyright vio image [1], similar to edit from prior sock [2]. Will also need to be blocked on commons. Ravensfire ( talk) 17:23, 26 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

29 October 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Added link in Jordan Sandhu to copyvio image, same image prior socks have used before. Please consider semi-protection on this page. Ravensfire ( talk) 16:21, 29 October 2020 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

  • Thanks! The person behind this account is rather impressive in their focus and determination despite every image they've uploaded being removed and every edit reverted. And yet day after day (and sometimes multiple accounts in the same day!). Ravensfire ( talk) 18:24, 29 October 2020 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

30 October 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

On commons, uploaded multiple copyvio images for Kulwinder Billa, including one that was uploaded by prior socks. New account - [3], sock [4] same facebook url. Sock only has one edit to English wikipedia (for now), but it's to Kulwinder Billa page which is apparently the new target for JSB. Ravensfire ( talk) 15:45, 30 October 2020 (UTC) reply

NOTE - this report is moot, Ropuinder has been globally locked. [5] Ravensfire ( talk) 19:36, 2 November 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

09 November 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Uploading and linking to copyvio images uploaded by prior socks (see [6]), similar edit summary as prior socks. Ravensfire ( talk) 15:13, 9 November 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

02 December 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Uploading copyright infringing images on commons and linking here. See history of Kulwinder Billa with new sock [7] adding images. Earlier socks [8], [9]. They also have used similar edit summaries - Editing, Image Ravensfire ( talk) 22:05, 2 December 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 December 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Same modus, addition of images without proper copyright information. [10], [11] Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 08:23, 13 December 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

17 December 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Same copyvio image related vandalism [12] [13] [14]. Looks like a WP:DUCK. - Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 15:21, 17 December 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

28 December 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Uploaded multiple copyright violations on commons and has linked one of them here [15]. At least one of the files on commons has been uploaded by prior socks [16] and [17]. Ravensfire ( talk) 20:36, 28 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Looks like a WP:DUCK. Also note that their edits are mostly restricted to BLPs of Punjabi film actors and singers. - Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 06:12, 29 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

08 January 2021

Suspected sockpuppets


New account with strong overlap with other suspected sock, Crossmedia20. Cordless Larry ( talk) 18:35, 8 January 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

13 February 2021

Suspected sockpuppets

Similar addition of non-free screen grab from YT videos [18] [19] [20]. Looks like a WP:DUCK. Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 07:43, 13 February 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

18 February 2021

Suspected sockpuppets


New editor creating same article as previous sock Crossmedia20 did here, with similar content (including the BLP sources template). Cordless Larry ( talk) 08:50, 18 February 2021 (UTC) reply

If I've understood this comment correctly, Highlandhd is admitting to using multiple accounts due to being blocked, but is denying the link with Jagdeep singh bittu. Cordless Larry ( talk) 08:27, 22 February 2021 (UTC) reply
Compare with the comments left at User talk:Crossmedia20#Not a sockpuppet of Jagdeep singh bittu. Highlandhd is a WP:DUCK match for Crossmedia20. Cordless Larry ( talk) 08:31, 22 February 2021 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Below was copied from a duplicate report filed after this. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 23:19, 19 February 2021 (UTC) reply

This account has submitted two pages (article and draft) on The Kidd, which was previously deleted as created by another sock of Jagdeep. Definitely ducky, but suggest examination of the feathers. Robert McClenon ( talk) 23:11, 19 February 2021 (UTC) reply

CU might be useless in this case given the geolocation of the farm: ranges will be very wide as the ISPs in this country have a very large number of customers. Given that there are many cheap devices available, UAs can be easily varied. I suggest a behavioural investigation of this case. Based on the behavioural similarities shown (such as the BLP sources template in the recreation), I think this is a duck case and blockable. Java Hurricane 13:38, 20 February 2021 (UTC) reply


Crossmedia20 & Highlandhd

Hi, I am not able to login from my original account Crossmedia20 as it's globally blocked due to sockpuppet of User:Jagdeep singh bittu. However, I am using the same IP I used for my accounts for the clarification of not a sockpuppet of Jagdeep Singh Bittu. I firstly created Crossmedia20 in December 2020 but I was blocked citing the sockpuppet of Jagdeep singh bittu. I had put all my efforts to get it unblocked by giving clarifications and reasons on talk page and in unblock appeals but my requests were not addressed. I was so disappointed and even the genuine page of musician Navi Ferozpurwala, who is having significant coverages in reliable sources got deleted.

With no choice left, I created User:Chopra1995 and faced the same situation. Just these two were my Ids and I would request you to check the nature of my edits from these ids, you will find every thing similar but rest of Ids created by Jagdeep Singh Bittu have different nature of edits. He used mobile web to make edits, made copyright violations, never tried to interact with administrators from any of his sockpuppets. I am very keen to edit Wikipedia and keep it up to date. I wanted to invest my time by keeping this encyclopedia updated but my two months gone wasted just because of Jagdeep Singh Bittu's mistakes. The area of interest was similar but the intention and nature of edits were completely different.

In the last, I request you to pls help me in unblocking Crossmedia20 so that I can give a fresh start and could learn more things from administrators like you. Removal of sockpuppet tag of Jagdeep Singh Bittu will help me a lot and I can continue happy editing. I hope you understand my situation and do the needful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.173.229.11 ( talk) 19:48, 23 February 2021 (UTC) reply


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

05 June 2021

Suspected sockpuppets

Behaviour similar to confirmed sockpuppet Special:Contributions/Jaejaedm; this account was also uploading copyright violations to Commons, though they were added to articles (example: Kulwinder Billa) by anonymous users. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 ( talk) 14:11, 5 June 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

  • Tvlmete has made a total of 2 edits, which really only add up to a single change, and it looks like a legitimate improvement to the article. I don't see any evidence that this is socking. If they're uploading copyvios to commons, that's something the admins on commons need to sort out. Closing with no action taken. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:28, 2 July 2021 (UTC) reply

26 July 2021

Suspected sockpuppets

Uploading copyvio images to Kulwinder Billa , common target for prior JSB socks. On commons, images are copyvios, seem to be for common targets. CU is for a sleeper check. I know Dtechjagdeep is also a sock, but they've only hit commons so far, but fair chance others here given past history. Ravensfire ( talk) 18:28, 26 July 2021 (UTC) reply

Added LedgeDigital as possible sock. Activity overlap in days, but having multiple active accounts is not unusual for JSB. They've uploaded copyvio's on commons then added them to articles here, especially to Kulwinder Billa [htthttps://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Kulwinder_Billa&diff=prev&oldid=1034765755], common article for JSB socks. Ravensfire ( talk) 21:04, 3 August 2021 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Suggest reporting to SRG as well, including the ones from Commons. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 ( talk) 19:30, 26 July 2021 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

18 January 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

As far as I can tell, prior socks are stale so this is based on behavior and actions on Commons (where they have even more accounts than here).

First clue is the Commons log for a particular file that has been uploaded by a prior sock and now TECHGOHIT.

They've attempted to add images to Ranjit Bawa which has been a common article for JSB socks to add an image ( [21] to [22]. Other signs are the edit summaries. Jagdeepname (fairly recent sock) used "Image edit", "Image add" [23], TECHGOHIT uses "Image add" [24] under various capitalizations very often. Prior sock Jaejaedm would use "Infobox" [25], lots of examples of TECHGOHIT using the same [26]. CELEBRITY bom also uses the "Image add" edit summary: [27] and has been adding copyvio images to Ranjit Bawa article.

Other prior sock contribs to see similar edit wummaries

  • Veerjagdeep contribs - [28], sometimes all caps, using IMAGE, TEC
  • JSB contribs - [29], sometimes all caps, sometimes not, but always short.

Requesting a CU check for other accounts, JSB will use multiple accounts and there's several that I think he's using besides what's listed. There's actually more I think active on Commons and I've created an SPI over there as well. Ravensfire ( talk) 16:55, 18 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Confirmed by Elcobbola on commons - [30]. Ravensfire ( talk) 19:55, 18 January 2022 (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

Blocking and requesting glocks -- RoySmith (talk) 14:56, 22 January 2022 (UTC) reply

01 February 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Started editing a few days after prior sock was blocked. Their first edit was to Ranjit Bawa, frequently hit by JSB socks, and adding a copyrighted image [31] they uploaded to commons. Same edit summaries "image add", "infobox editing" as prior socks. Ravensfire ( talk) 16:24, 1 February 2022 (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 February 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Exactly the same was declined twice before in the past 20 hours, one of which was JadUser, a sock of Jagdeep singh bittu, and another an IP. One and only contribution from this user, and the most recent IP on Punjab, India was to make this edit and it happened after JadUser was blocked. --- CX Zoom(he/him) ( let's talk| contribs) 10:11, 3 February 2022 (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 February 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Adding copyrighted image to Ranjit Bawa [34] similar to prior socks [35], [36]. As they have uploaded the image on commons, please also request a global block on this account. Ravensfire ( talk) 14:14, 15 February 2022 (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

Blocked and global lock requested. Cordless Larry ( talk) 17:05, 20 February 2022 (UTC) reply

21 February 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Continued to upload copyrighted images on Commons and add them to Ranjit Bawa article here. Ravensfire ( talk) 22:04, 21 February 2022 (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

19 March 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Adding screenshot of youtube video to Ranjit Bawa, [41] vs [42] and [43] (and just keep going through the history). Ravensfire ( talk) 15:33, 19 March 2022 (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

25 April 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Edit summaries consistent with prior JSB socks (Image add, caption, editor), adding image to Diljit Dosanjh, common JSB target, on Commons, added multiple images pulled from Youtube videos (often without license) which JSB has been doing of late. Ravensfire ( talk) 13:15, 25 April 2022 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

What, so just switching browsers takes a likely or confirmed to a Possible? I'm not a CU so I don't have access to the data, and I could be all wrong, but if it's the same IP range and the edits are similar, then I start to hear quacking... casualdejekyll 19:22, 26 April 2022 (UTC) reply
casualdejekyll, this may come as a shock, but CUs do understand complicated concepts like that. "I'm not a CU so I don't have access to the data" was the point in that statement where you should have stopped running your mouth. GeneralNotability ( talk) 21:18, 26 April 2022 (UTC) reply
Woahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh no need to be so aggressive casualdejekyll 23:23, 26 April 2022 (UTC) reply
Wait, I'm confused. What was "my tone"? What did I do wrong, besides be wrong about my assumption of them having the same IP? casualdejekyll 23:25, 26 April 2022 (UTC) reply
Interesting. Maybe a new mobile device? I'll try to put some decent diffs together this evening. Some of it will be based on their uploads to Commons as they have a pattern on their uploads there. Thanks for checking! Ravensfire ( talk) 22:08, 26 April 2022 (UTC) reply
Possibilities just in the mobile sphere could include, among others: difference in browsers (e.g., Chrome to Opera), difference in ecosystem (i.e., iOS to Android), difference in device by age (e.g., iPhone 11 to iPhone 13), and difference in device with same age (e.g., 2021 year Samsung to 2021 year Sony). Obviously, the impact of just these scenarios on a connection between accounts ranges from nominal (browser change) to significant. This is why the failure, especially after acknowledging not being a CU, to appreciate of the possibility that those of us who are may know something the public does not was particularly daft. This underscores the necessity and requirement of providing appropriate diffs, especially when requested. CUs are not clairvoyant and one cannot protest "but behaviour quacks!" when not a single diff evidencing the same have been provided. Consider, then, the following:
Related to single edit on Jordan Sandhu (also target of other socks, e.g., [48] [49])
Related to edits on Diljit Dosanjh:
Agree that this is a duck, especially when also considering Commons contribs. Эlcobbola  talk 15:10, 27 April 2022 (UTC) reply
Finally got the time this morning to put something together, come here and @ Elcobbola completely put my examples to shame. Thank you, thank you, thank you. And apologies to the CU, JSB sock are usually so cut-and-dried that I haven't been as good as I ought on including diffs. Ravensfire ( talk) 15:31, 27 April 2022 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

08 May 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Similar behavior, addition of images with unknown licenses [54] [55]. Would like to request CU. - Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 11:24, 8 May 2022 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

  • Comment Both Madjpeet123 and Jagdeepnh are already blocked as JSB socks on Commons. I'm working on asking for semi-protection on their most commonly edited article here. Ravensfire ( talk) 13:02, 10 May 2022 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  •  Confirmed to each other:

18 May 2022

Suspected sockpuppets


  • Uses edit summaries common with prior socks

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

19 June 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Both edits reflect the typical behaviour in edit summaries, using "editor" instead of "edit" and the phrase "image add" (cf. especially Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jagdeep singh bittu/Archive#Comments by other users 26). Account is also already CU-blocked on Commons. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 12:05, 19 June 2022 (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

23 June 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Adding image to Kulwinder Billa [58], common target for prior socks. Edit summary uses language similar to previous edits "Upload new image add". Ravensfire ( talk) 01:16, 23 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Checkuser-blocked on Commons (without specification of the master) already. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 22:59, 24 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

30 June 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

CU Blocked on commons - [60] Ravensfire ( talk) 04:19, 30 June 2022 (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 July 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Same "image add"/"new editor" pattern as always. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 22:42, 1 July 2022 (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

11 July 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Made the same edit [64] as prior sock [65]. Ravensfire ( talk) 22:16, 11 July 2022 (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

30 September 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Already blocked on commons as a LTA [66] by @ Elcobbola:. Here, added the same copyrighted image [67] as a prior sock [68]. CU check requested for sleepers / unblocked accounts here.

Their usual pattern has become create an account, upload to commons and use IP's here. As far as I can tell, it's in a really broad and really busy range though. I threw a super quick analysis together at User:Ravensfire/jsbSocks. It doesn't look like they stay on a consistent /64 range and anything bigger starts pulling in a fair number of unrelated and useful edits. Maybe partial block from the more common targets? Ravensfire ( talk) 18:35, 30 September 2022 (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 October 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

New account created after prior sock was blocked. As with prior sock Hjjajh, they have extensive edits on Diljit Dosanjh. They are also adding images to locations in Punjab [69], [70], [71] which was a common edit for prior socks [72], [73], [74].

User name is a somewhat random set of letters and numbers - see Sghjf122, Gjjhshjj as previous examples. Ravensfire ( talk) 17:01, 3 October 2022 (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

04 October 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Immediately went to Diljit_Dosanjh, made same trivial edit [75] as prior sock [76], name is random characters, as prior sock. Ravensfire ( talk) 00:17, 4 October 2022 (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

06 October 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Blocked on commons [77] after uploading an image that they pulled from a YouTube video, a common JSB image source, for Joginder Singh Ugrahan, a very common target for JSB socks of late. The new account is random characters, which has been typical for recent JSB socks. Their only edit so far is to Jordan Sandhu which has seen edits from prior socks [78]. Ravensfire ( talk) 15:04, 6 October 2022 (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

28 November 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Added same image to Amrit Maan here [79] as prior sock [80]. On commons, uploading same/similar image (with usual copyright issues) [81]. Pinging @ Elcobbola: as they tend to catch these on Commons. CU is for possible sleepers, JSB will sometimes have several accounts if it's been going on for a while. Ravensfire ( talk) 17:27, 28 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

@ Ravensfire: confirmed on Commons that Ghhsjjvb = Tredsg = Gjjhshjj (known sock) = Hshshs12 = (known sock). Эlcobbola  talk 17:35, 28 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

08 February 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Blocked on Commons after uploading a file previous uploaded by a sock [82]. User name is random characters, matching the last few socks. Added image to Amrit Maan [83] as have prior sock [84]. Ravensfire ( talk) 21:02, 8 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Adding Ghostra, already blocked on commons, similar copyright issues with images, added to article [85] which has seen edits from prior socks. Ravensfire ( talk) 21:10, 8 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Suggest to stop tagging per WP:DENY, active since 2020. -- Minorax«¦ talk¦» 14:33, 11 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

21 February 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Blocked on commons as a sock, [86], uploaded new version of image from prior sock [87], has similar articles/edits as prior socks here. Ravensfire ( talk) 14:45, 21 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Added Lkkhhbf and NlkxEOoC7, see recent history of image changes to Amrit_Maan [88], both accounts already CU blocked on commons. Ravensfire ( talk) 14:50, 21 February 2023 (UTC) reply
Added GhjJjnjj, usual random character username, similar articles as prior socks. Ravensfire ( talk) 17:07, 3 March 2023 (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 March 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Adding same images as prior socks [89] vs [90]. CU is for possible sleepers. Ravensfire ( talk) 16:08, 8 March 2023 (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 March 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Jogindersingh12 - Similar edits as prior socks, linking to (now deleted) copyright infringing images. See [91] vs [92]. Also see [93] vs [94].

Detguser - CU blocked on commons [95], image linked by Jogindersingh12. Ravensfire ( talk) 19:21, 13 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Adding Hhdhjna - blocked on Commons as JSB sock, uploaded image previously uploaded by JSB socks, then added to articles here by Detguser [96] and Jogindersingh12 [97]. Please consider semi-protection of this article. Ravensfire ( talk) 13:26, 14 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Adding Premiumd - new account blocked as JSB sock on commons [98], same stuff as Hhdhjna. Ravensfire ( talk) 13:05, 15 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Adding Jggyady, also a commmons CU block. Ravensfire ( talk) 01:48, 21 March 2023 (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

26 March 2023

Suspected sockpuppets


  • Sukhesingh1 - blocked on Commons, continuing edits on Amritsar similar to prior socks
  • Ludhianauser and JagtarUsar - blocked on commons, continuing edits on Ludhiana similar to prior socks

Please consider semi-protection on both of those articles (Amritsar and Ludhiana) at a minimum as well as Baghel Singh and Joginder Singh Ugrahan which have seen a fair number of edits from JSB socks. JSB is quite active right now uploading coyprighted images and adding them to articles here and that might slow them down some. Ravensfire ( talk) 16:22, 26 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Adding GhgbzUsar, same unusual ending to username as prior sock JagdeepUsar, restored image also used by prior socks [99] vs [100]
Adding LGjeety, restoring edits to Amritsar and Ludhiana. Ravensfire ( talk) 19:02, 29 March 2023 (UTC) reply
Honestly, JSB is creating new socks daily (and often more than one a day), so really needs a CU check for sleepers. I think JSB just always creates new accounts at this point, knowing that nearly every one gets blocked so why should they care about things like Terms of Use, copyright and other such nonsense. Ravensfire ( talk) 21:19, 29 March 2023 (UTC) reply
Latest accounts: Jaagdeepkl, FgjjzhJaa, Fajitadf, Dark-haired. List is not complete. Ravensfire ( talk) 19:11, 4 April 2023 (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 April 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Sock blocked on commons, has made same edits here [101] as prior sock [102]. Created mere hours after last set blocked. CU for the usual collection of sleepers and new accounts JSB creates. Ravensfire ( talk) 23:53, 8 April 2023 (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

10 April 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Usual reasons - new day, so new socks, random character names, CU blocked on commons, continuing to edit where prior socks were reverted. Ggsnkka1 ( talk · contribs) uploaded images to commoms that Hsh... subsequently used here. Ravensfire ( talk) 13:53, 10 April 2023 (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 April 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Restore same image as prior socks [103] vs [104], as well as [105] vs [106]. Ravensfire ( talk) 14:07, 13 April 2023 (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

19 April 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Restoring image used by prior socks here ( [107] vs [108], [109]) and ( [110] vs [111]). Strong focus on Sikh related topics, common to JSB socks. CU check for sleepers / abandoned accounts. Ravensfire ( talk) 16:27, 19 April 2023 (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

18 May 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Usual periodic list of JSB socks, all blocked on commons, need to be blocked here and check for sleepers that may not already be blocked on commons.

  • Hahhaj - CU blocked on commons, added copyvio image to Bhagwant Mann which has been a common article for JSB socks.
  • Najjskka - CU blocked on commons, added copyvio image to Bhagwant Mann which has been a common article for JSB socks.
  • Nxnnxm - CU blocked on commons
  • Punjabfg - CU blocked on commons

CU is for sleepers / missed accounts Ravensfire ( talk) 15:09, 18 May 2023 (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

21 May 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

For Hdhdkk: same short username of random letters (compare to known socks Gfdsjit, Gjjhshjj, Hjjajh, etc.) and playing with infobox images/adding copyvios on Jalandhar ( Hdhdkk, Gfdsjit; Gfdsjit, JajjajjaDf, etc.)
For Remindersy: confirmed on Commons (can provide data if needed) and playing with infobox images/adding copyvios on Jalandhar as per above ( Remindersy
For Gdeghyx: same short username of random letters, and:

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

14 June 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Confirmed on Commons (can provide data if needed); specific diffs for each:

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

24 June 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Already blocked on commons, restored edit here [112] for prior sock [113]. CU check for other accounts, please. Pretty sure there's 2 or 3 other ones. Ravensfire ( talk) 03:29, 24 June 2023 (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

Added another. same type of edits [114]. - Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 09:59, 24 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  •  Confirmed and blocked four non-locked accounts.
Courcelles ( talk) 23:06, 25 June 2023 (UTC) reply

26 June 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Another one it seems. same editing area and same type of image related edits [115]. Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 11:12, 26 June 2023 (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

  •  Confirmed Blocked and tagged 3.

Courcelles ( talk) 22:34, 26 June 2023 (UTC) reply

02 July 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

New ID re-added the same image [116] like the proven [117]. ID created recently, and a large amount of tehir edits are image related, a typical behaviour of the sockfarm. Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 10:17, 2 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Another, same type of image related edits [118]. - Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 11:05, 2 July 2023 (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

09 July 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

New one working in the same topic area (Punjab related) and making same type of edits (adding/replacing images with unclear copyright information). Commonly targeted pages [119] [120] [121] Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 11:14, 9 July 2023 (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

16 August 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Blocked on commons as a sock. [122] . Edits are to make images changes to articles commonly targetted by JSB socks.

CU check is for sleeper accounts and accounts recently used and abandoned here. JSB socks have been fairly actively blocked on Commons. Ravensfire ( talk) 21:18, 16 August 2023 (UTC) reply

Added several other accounts adding images to common JSB targets and already blocked as LTA accounts on Commons. Ravensfire ( talk) 21:26, 16 August 2023 (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

  •  Confirmed the following accounts belong to each other:

All now blocked. Sleeper check complete.  IP blocked - Mailer Diablo 13:15, 17 August 2023 (UTC) reply

28 August 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Latest whack-a-mole target. See [123] vs [124] from prior sock. They're also CU blocked on Commons [125]. From activity on the Economy of Ludhiana article, also should check Srtaj Singh, who added an image there and is CU blocked on commons. [126] Ravensfire ( talk) 14:32, 28 August 2023 (UTC) reply

Adding CU request for sleepers. Ravensfire ( talk) 14:37, 28 August 2023 (UTC) reply
New socks added after recent edits to Ludhiana [127]. Ravensfire ( talk) 15:09, 29 August 2023 (UTC) reply
And another after using image JSB socks prefer - [128]. Ravensfire ( talk) 21:32, 29 August 2023 (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

All  Confirmed, plus:

Blocking, will request locks. Girth Summit (blether) 12:08, 30 August 2023 (UTC) reply

06 September 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Two new accounts editing images on Ludhiana, a favorite target of JSB. [129], [130]. Both accounts already CU blocked on commons. Ravensfire ( talk) 14:01, 6 September 2023 (UTC) reply

Added Diljeet Singh1 to the list. On Economy of Amritsar, they restored an image [131] that was originally added by a sock [132]. Also see [133] which was also added by prior sock [134]. I didn't tag this as needing a CU check, but this account didn't really show up on my radar, so maybe one is warranted again. Ravensfire ( talk) 14:17, 6 September 2023 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

Similar behavior. Addition of images from videos and other sources without proper copyright information [135] [136] [137] [138] [139]. Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 16:18, 9 September 2023 (UTC) reply

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

13 October 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Created the day after the most recent batch of socks blocked. Added image [140] that was uploaded to commons by a now blocked sock [141]. Added infobox [142] that was also added by a prior sock [143]. Also fair number of edits to Ludhiana, which is a common JSB target. [144].

CU request is for sleepers. Ravensfire ( talk) 16:00, 13 October 2023 (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

The following are  Confirmed to one another, and  Technically indistinguishable from previous socks of this case:

Will block and request locks. Girth Summit (blether) 18:29, 13 October 2023 (UTC) reply

19 December 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

CU blocked on commons, pushing image changes on Ludhiana as prior socks have done (see history of the article). Ravensfire ( talk) 16:02, 19 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Restored same here here [145] as a previous sock [146]. Ravensfire ( talk) 16:05, 19 December 2023 (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

The latter two have minimal editing histories, but the Jag... username (cf. Category:Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Jagdeep_singh_bittu) and some aspects of the technical data make me fairly certain of the relation. Accounts  Blocked and tagged, Redirect arrow Global lock(s) requested, closing. Thanks, Spicy ( talk) 22:52, 19 December 2023 (UTC) reply

24 December 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Adding same image to article as prior socks - [147] vs [148]. [149] Ravensfire ( talk) 19:22, 24 December 2023 (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

28 December 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Restoring same image as prior socks - [150] vs [151] Ravensfire ( talk) 22:21, 28 December 2023 (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

  • Group 1  Confirmed to each other:
Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 22:06, 29 December 2023 (UTC) reply

11 February 2024

Suspected sockpuppets

Recreated the previously deleted Gurdwara Tibbi Sahib. Edits are similarly all on mobile. Several reverted edits don't help. TLA (talk) 11:27, 11 February 2024 (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

I'm assuming I'm tla meant to list GRoivvf as the suspected sock.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 15:27, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Yup, typo. Thanks. TLA tlak 06:57, 26 February 2024 (UTC) reply

02 April 2024

Suspected sockpuppets

Recreated Gurdwara Bibi Veero [152] (now at Draft:Gurdwara Bibi Veero which was originally created by a prior JSB sock. [153]. They've also made similar image changes to the infobox on Ludhiana [154] which has been a very common behavior for JSB socks - please see the article history for the number of times JSB socks have edited the images, and the archives of this SPI. CU is for possible sleepers. Ravensfire ( talk) 16:09, 2 April 2024 (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 April 2024

Suspected sockpuppets

Created talk page for a page that was repetitively created by sockpuppets and deleted. JustAnAmateurEditor1 ( talk) 04:39, 3 April 2024 (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

Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Jagdeep_singh_bittu/Archive&oldid=1221237519"
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Jagdeep singh bittu

Jagdeep singh bittu ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)

23 September 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Editors are adding copyvio images of Indian singers Kulwinder Billa, Amrit Maan, with similar edit summaries & tags (mobile web visual edit)

Possible related but stale accounts: User:Jagdeep singh chabhal, User: Sukhdev singh chabhal Jumpytoo Talk 02:54, 23 September 2020 (UTC) reply

Added additional username User:Raju singh chabhal. Jumpytoo Talk 08:06, 23 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

26 September 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Identical behaviour to previous socks (adding copyvio images of Indian singers with similar edit summaries & tags (mobile web visual edit) Jumpytoo Talk 07:47, 26 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

06 October 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Singh - Like prior socks, uploading copyright infringing images on commons and adding links to them here. Using similar edit summaries (image or IMAGE) as prior socks (see contribs for Veerjagdeep and Teshan chabhal. Most articles targetted prior socks are semi-protected, so no overlaps, just behavior. Ravensfire ( talk) 21:17, 6 October 2020 (UTC). There is overlap with Mahala singh on Sharry Mann where they both try to link to copyright infringing images they uploaded on commons, different images though. reply

Mahala - Also same behavioral characteristics with similar edit summaries (image). This account though does have one article overlap - Sunanda Sharma with Jagdeep singh chabhal, Sukhdev singh chabhal and Veerjagdeep. The edits aren't exact, but shows activity on at least one article previously hit by socks.

Behavior-wise, it's the same editor or someone just as clueless about copyright and not interested in learning. I can't give a diff where they've made similar edits, just not there, sorry. Ravensfire ( talk) 21:26, 6 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

09 October 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Created after prior socks blocked, quickly went to same articles as prior socks. Used similar edit summaries as prior socks. On commons, uploaded copyvio images that were added by IP (them logged out) Ravensfire ( talk) 15:35, 9 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

19 October 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Same articles as prior socks, linking to copyright infringing images as usual. Ravensfire ( talk) 16:43, 19 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

21 October 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Usual pattern, uploads copyvio to commons, adds it to article here, not the first time for this article. Ravensfire ( talk) 18:24, 21 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

26 October 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

First edit was to add copyright vio image [1], similar to edit from prior sock [2]. Will also need to be blocked on commons. Ravensfire ( talk) 17:23, 26 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

29 October 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Added link in Jordan Sandhu to copyvio image, same image prior socks have used before. Please consider semi-protection on this page. Ravensfire ( talk) 16:21, 29 October 2020 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

  • Thanks! The person behind this account is rather impressive in their focus and determination despite every image they've uploaded being removed and every edit reverted. And yet day after day (and sometimes multiple accounts in the same day!). Ravensfire ( talk) 18:24, 29 October 2020 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

30 October 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

On commons, uploaded multiple copyvio images for Kulwinder Billa, including one that was uploaded by prior socks. New account - [3], sock [4] same facebook url. Sock only has one edit to English wikipedia (for now), but it's to Kulwinder Billa page which is apparently the new target for JSB. Ravensfire ( talk) 15:45, 30 October 2020 (UTC) reply

NOTE - this report is moot, Ropuinder has been globally locked. [5] Ravensfire ( talk) 19:36, 2 November 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

09 November 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Uploading and linking to copyvio images uploaded by prior socks (see [6]), similar edit summary as prior socks. Ravensfire ( talk) 15:13, 9 November 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

02 December 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Uploading copyright infringing images on commons and linking here. See history of Kulwinder Billa with new sock [7] adding images. Earlier socks [8], [9]. They also have used similar edit summaries - Editing, Image Ravensfire ( talk) 22:05, 2 December 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 December 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Same modus, addition of images without proper copyright information. [10], [11] Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 08:23, 13 December 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

17 December 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Same copyvio image related vandalism [12] [13] [14]. Looks like a WP:DUCK. - Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 15:21, 17 December 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

28 December 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Uploaded multiple copyright violations on commons and has linked one of them here [15]. At least one of the files on commons has been uploaded by prior socks [16] and [17]. Ravensfire ( talk) 20:36, 28 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Looks like a WP:DUCK. Also note that their edits are mostly restricted to BLPs of Punjabi film actors and singers. - Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 06:12, 29 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

08 January 2021

Suspected sockpuppets


New account with strong overlap with other suspected sock, Crossmedia20. Cordless Larry ( talk) 18:35, 8 January 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

13 February 2021

Suspected sockpuppets

Similar addition of non-free screen grab from YT videos [18] [19] [20]. Looks like a WP:DUCK. Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 07:43, 13 February 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

18 February 2021

Suspected sockpuppets


New editor creating same article as previous sock Crossmedia20 did here, with similar content (including the BLP sources template). Cordless Larry ( talk) 08:50, 18 February 2021 (UTC) reply

If I've understood this comment correctly, Highlandhd is admitting to using multiple accounts due to being blocked, but is denying the link with Jagdeep singh bittu. Cordless Larry ( talk) 08:27, 22 February 2021 (UTC) reply
Compare with the comments left at User talk:Crossmedia20#Not a sockpuppet of Jagdeep singh bittu. Highlandhd is a WP:DUCK match for Crossmedia20. Cordless Larry ( talk) 08:31, 22 February 2021 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Below was copied from a duplicate report filed after this. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 23:19, 19 February 2021 (UTC) reply

This account has submitted two pages (article and draft) on The Kidd, which was previously deleted as created by another sock of Jagdeep. Definitely ducky, but suggest examination of the feathers. Robert McClenon ( talk) 23:11, 19 February 2021 (UTC) reply

CU might be useless in this case given the geolocation of the farm: ranges will be very wide as the ISPs in this country have a very large number of customers. Given that there are many cheap devices available, UAs can be easily varied. I suggest a behavioural investigation of this case. Based on the behavioural similarities shown (such as the BLP sources template in the recreation), I think this is a duck case and blockable. Java Hurricane 13:38, 20 February 2021 (UTC) reply


Crossmedia20 & Highlandhd

Hi, I am not able to login from my original account Crossmedia20 as it's globally blocked due to sockpuppet of User:Jagdeep singh bittu. However, I am using the same IP I used for my accounts for the clarification of not a sockpuppet of Jagdeep Singh Bittu. I firstly created Crossmedia20 in December 2020 but I was blocked citing the sockpuppet of Jagdeep singh bittu. I had put all my efforts to get it unblocked by giving clarifications and reasons on talk page and in unblock appeals but my requests were not addressed. I was so disappointed and even the genuine page of musician Navi Ferozpurwala, who is having significant coverages in reliable sources got deleted.

With no choice left, I created User:Chopra1995 and faced the same situation. Just these two were my Ids and I would request you to check the nature of my edits from these ids, you will find every thing similar but rest of Ids created by Jagdeep Singh Bittu have different nature of edits. He used mobile web to make edits, made copyright violations, never tried to interact with administrators from any of his sockpuppets. I am very keen to edit Wikipedia and keep it up to date. I wanted to invest my time by keeping this encyclopedia updated but my two months gone wasted just because of Jagdeep Singh Bittu's mistakes. The area of interest was similar but the intention and nature of edits were completely different.

In the last, I request you to pls help me in unblocking Crossmedia20 so that I can give a fresh start and could learn more things from administrators like you. Removal of sockpuppet tag of Jagdeep Singh Bittu will help me a lot and I can continue happy editing. I hope you understand my situation and do the needful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.173.229.11 ( talk) 19:48, 23 February 2021 (UTC) reply


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

05 June 2021

Suspected sockpuppets

Behaviour similar to confirmed sockpuppet Special:Contributions/Jaejaedm; this account was also uploading copyright violations to Commons, though they were added to articles (example: Kulwinder Billa) by anonymous users. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 ( talk) 14:11, 5 June 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

  • Tvlmete has made a total of 2 edits, which really only add up to a single change, and it looks like a legitimate improvement to the article. I don't see any evidence that this is socking. If they're uploading copyvios to commons, that's something the admins on commons need to sort out. Closing with no action taken. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:28, 2 July 2021 (UTC) reply

26 July 2021

Suspected sockpuppets

Uploading copyvio images to Kulwinder Billa , common target for prior JSB socks. On commons, images are copyvios, seem to be for common targets. CU is for a sleeper check. I know Dtechjagdeep is also a sock, but they've only hit commons so far, but fair chance others here given past history. Ravensfire ( talk) 18:28, 26 July 2021 (UTC) reply

Added LedgeDigital as possible sock. Activity overlap in days, but having multiple active accounts is not unusual for JSB. They've uploaded copyvio's on commons then added them to articles here, especially to Kulwinder Billa [htthttps://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Kulwinder_Billa&diff=prev&oldid=1034765755], common article for JSB socks. Ravensfire ( talk) 21:04, 3 August 2021 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Suggest reporting to SRG as well, including the ones from Commons. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 ( talk) 19:30, 26 July 2021 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

18 January 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

As far as I can tell, prior socks are stale so this is based on behavior and actions on Commons (where they have even more accounts than here).

First clue is the Commons log for a particular file that has been uploaded by a prior sock and now TECHGOHIT.

They've attempted to add images to Ranjit Bawa which has been a common article for JSB socks to add an image ( [21] to [22]. Other signs are the edit summaries. Jagdeepname (fairly recent sock) used "Image edit", "Image add" [23], TECHGOHIT uses "Image add" [24] under various capitalizations very often. Prior sock Jaejaedm would use "Infobox" [25], lots of examples of TECHGOHIT using the same [26]. CELEBRITY bom also uses the "Image add" edit summary: [27] and has been adding copyvio images to Ranjit Bawa article.

Other prior sock contribs to see similar edit wummaries

  • Veerjagdeep contribs - [28], sometimes all caps, using IMAGE, TEC
  • JSB contribs - [29], sometimes all caps, sometimes not, but always short.

Requesting a CU check for other accounts, JSB will use multiple accounts and there's several that I think he's using besides what's listed. There's actually more I think active on Commons and I've created an SPI over there as well. Ravensfire ( talk) 16:55, 18 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Confirmed by Elcobbola on commons - [30]. Ravensfire ( talk) 19:55, 18 January 2022 (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

Blocking and requesting glocks -- RoySmith (talk) 14:56, 22 January 2022 (UTC) reply

01 February 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Started editing a few days after prior sock was blocked. Their first edit was to Ranjit Bawa, frequently hit by JSB socks, and adding a copyrighted image [31] they uploaded to commons. Same edit summaries "image add", "infobox editing" as prior socks. Ravensfire ( talk) 16:24, 1 February 2022 (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 February 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Exactly the same was declined twice before in the past 20 hours, one of which was JadUser, a sock of Jagdeep singh bittu, and another an IP. One and only contribution from this user, and the most recent IP on Punjab, India was to make this edit and it happened after JadUser was blocked. --- CX Zoom(he/him) ( let's talk| contribs) 10:11, 3 February 2022 (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 February 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Adding copyrighted image to Ranjit Bawa [34] similar to prior socks [35], [36]. As they have uploaded the image on commons, please also request a global block on this account. Ravensfire ( talk) 14:14, 15 February 2022 (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

Blocked and global lock requested. Cordless Larry ( talk) 17:05, 20 February 2022 (UTC) reply

21 February 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Continued to upload copyrighted images on Commons and add them to Ranjit Bawa article here. Ravensfire ( talk) 22:04, 21 February 2022 (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

19 March 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Adding screenshot of youtube video to Ranjit Bawa, [41] vs [42] and [43] (and just keep going through the history). Ravensfire ( talk) 15:33, 19 March 2022 (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

25 April 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Edit summaries consistent with prior JSB socks (Image add, caption, editor), adding image to Diljit Dosanjh, common JSB target, on Commons, added multiple images pulled from Youtube videos (often without license) which JSB has been doing of late. Ravensfire ( talk) 13:15, 25 April 2022 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

What, so just switching browsers takes a likely or confirmed to a Possible? I'm not a CU so I don't have access to the data, and I could be all wrong, but if it's the same IP range and the edits are similar, then I start to hear quacking... casualdejekyll 19:22, 26 April 2022 (UTC) reply
casualdejekyll, this may come as a shock, but CUs do understand complicated concepts like that. "I'm not a CU so I don't have access to the data" was the point in that statement where you should have stopped running your mouth. GeneralNotability ( talk) 21:18, 26 April 2022 (UTC) reply
Woahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh no need to be so aggressive casualdejekyll 23:23, 26 April 2022 (UTC) reply
Wait, I'm confused. What was "my tone"? What did I do wrong, besides be wrong about my assumption of them having the same IP? casualdejekyll 23:25, 26 April 2022 (UTC) reply
Interesting. Maybe a new mobile device? I'll try to put some decent diffs together this evening. Some of it will be based on their uploads to Commons as they have a pattern on their uploads there. Thanks for checking! Ravensfire ( talk) 22:08, 26 April 2022 (UTC) reply
Possibilities just in the mobile sphere could include, among others: difference in browsers (e.g., Chrome to Opera), difference in ecosystem (i.e., iOS to Android), difference in device by age (e.g., iPhone 11 to iPhone 13), and difference in device with same age (e.g., 2021 year Samsung to 2021 year Sony). Obviously, the impact of just these scenarios on a connection between accounts ranges from nominal (browser change) to significant. This is why the failure, especially after acknowledging not being a CU, to appreciate of the possibility that those of us who are may know something the public does not was particularly daft. This underscores the necessity and requirement of providing appropriate diffs, especially when requested. CUs are not clairvoyant and one cannot protest "but behaviour quacks!" when not a single diff evidencing the same have been provided. Consider, then, the following:
Related to single edit on Jordan Sandhu (also target of other socks, e.g., [48] [49])
Related to edits on Diljit Dosanjh:
Agree that this is a duck, especially when also considering Commons contribs. Эlcobbola  talk 15:10, 27 April 2022 (UTC) reply
Finally got the time this morning to put something together, come here and @ Elcobbola completely put my examples to shame. Thank you, thank you, thank you. And apologies to the CU, JSB sock are usually so cut-and-dried that I haven't been as good as I ought on including diffs. Ravensfire ( talk) 15:31, 27 April 2022 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

08 May 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Similar behavior, addition of images with unknown licenses [54] [55]. Would like to request CU. - Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 11:24, 8 May 2022 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

  • Comment Both Madjpeet123 and Jagdeepnh are already blocked as JSB socks on Commons. I'm working on asking for semi-protection on their most commonly edited article here. Ravensfire ( talk) 13:02, 10 May 2022 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  •  Confirmed to each other:

18 May 2022

Suspected sockpuppets


  • Uses edit summaries common with prior socks

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

19 June 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Both edits reflect the typical behaviour in edit summaries, using "editor" instead of "edit" and the phrase "image add" (cf. especially Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jagdeep singh bittu/Archive#Comments by other users 26). Account is also already CU-blocked on Commons. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 12:05, 19 June 2022 (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

23 June 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Adding image to Kulwinder Billa [58], common target for prior socks. Edit summary uses language similar to previous edits "Upload new image add". Ravensfire ( talk) 01:16, 23 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Checkuser-blocked on Commons (without specification of the master) already. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 22:59, 24 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

30 June 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

CU Blocked on commons - [60] Ravensfire ( talk) 04:19, 30 June 2022 (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 July 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Same "image add"/"new editor" pattern as always. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 22:42, 1 July 2022 (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

11 July 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Made the same edit [64] as prior sock [65]. Ravensfire ( talk) 22:16, 11 July 2022 (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

30 September 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Already blocked on commons as a LTA [66] by @ Elcobbola:. Here, added the same copyrighted image [67] as a prior sock [68]. CU check requested for sleepers / unblocked accounts here.

Their usual pattern has become create an account, upload to commons and use IP's here. As far as I can tell, it's in a really broad and really busy range though. I threw a super quick analysis together at User:Ravensfire/jsbSocks. It doesn't look like they stay on a consistent /64 range and anything bigger starts pulling in a fair number of unrelated and useful edits. Maybe partial block from the more common targets? Ravensfire ( talk) 18:35, 30 September 2022 (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 October 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

New account created after prior sock was blocked. As with prior sock Hjjajh, they have extensive edits on Diljit Dosanjh. They are also adding images to locations in Punjab [69], [70], [71] which was a common edit for prior socks [72], [73], [74].

User name is a somewhat random set of letters and numbers - see Sghjf122, Gjjhshjj as previous examples. Ravensfire ( talk) 17:01, 3 October 2022 (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

04 October 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Immediately went to Diljit_Dosanjh, made same trivial edit [75] as prior sock [76], name is random characters, as prior sock. Ravensfire ( talk) 00:17, 4 October 2022 (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

06 October 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Blocked on commons [77] after uploading an image that they pulled from a YouTube video, a common JSB image source, for Joginder Singh Ugrahan, a very common target for JSB socks of late. The new account is random characters, which has been typical for recent JSB socks. Their only edit so far is to Jordan Sandhu which has seen edits from prior socks [78]. Ravensfire ( talk) 15:04, 6 October 2022 (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

28 November 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Added same image to Amrit Maan here [79] as prior sock [80]. On commons, uploading same/similar image (with usual copyright issues) [81]. Pinging @ Elcobbola: as they tend to catch these on Commons. CU is for possible sleepers, JSB will sometimes have several accounts if it's been going on for a while. Ravensfire ( talk) 17:27, 28 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

@ Ravensfire: confirmed on Commons that Ghhsjjvb = Tredsg = Gjjhshjj (known sock) = Hshshs12 = (known sock). Эlcobbola  talk 17:35, 28 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

08 February 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Blocked on Commons after uploading a file previous uploaded by a sock [82]. User name is random characters, matching the last few socks. Added image to Amrit Maan [83] as have prior sock [84]. Ravensfire ( talk) 21:02, 8 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Adding Ghostra, already blocked on commons, similar copyright issues with images, added to article [85] which has seen edits from prior socks. Ravensfire ( talk) 21:10, 8 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Suggest to stop tagging per WP:DENY, active since 2020. -- Minorax«¦ talk¦» 14:33, 11 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

21 February 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Blocked on commons as a sock, [86], uploaded new version of image from prior sock [87], has similar articles/edits as prior socks here. Ravensfire ( talk) 14:45, 21 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Added Lkkhhbf and NlkxEOoC7, see recent history of image changes to Amrit_Maan [88], both accounts already CU blocked on commons. Ravensfire ( talk) 14:50, 21 February 2023 (UTC) reply
Added GhjJjnjj, usual random character username, similar articles as prior socks. Ravensfire ( talk) 17:07, 3 March 2023 (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 March 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Adding same images as prior socks [89] vs [90]. CU is for possible sleepers. Ravensfire ( talk) 16:08, 8 March 2023 (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 March 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Jogindersingh12 - Similar edits as prior socks, linking to (now deleted) copyright infringing images. See [91] vs [92]. Also see [93] vs [94].

Detguser - CU blocked on commons [95], image linked by Jogindersingh12. Ravensfire ( talk) 19:21, 13 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Adding Hhdhjna - blocked on Commons as JSB sock, uploaded image previously uploaded by JSB socks, then added to articles here by Detguser [96] and Jogindersingh12 [97]. Please consider semi-protection of this article. Ravensfire ( talk) 13:26, 14 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Adding Premiumd - new account blocked as JSB sock on commons [98], same stuff as Hhdhjna. Ravensfire ( talk) 13:05, 15 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Adding Jggyady, also a commmons CU block. Ravensfire ( talk) 01:48, 21 March 2023 (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

26 March 2023

Suspected sockpuppets


  • Sukhesingh1 - blocked on Commons, continuing edits on Amritsar similar to prior socks
  • Ludhianauser and JagtarUsar - blocked on commons, continuing edits on Ludhiana similar to prior socks

Please consider semi-protection on both of those articles (Amritsar and Ludhiana) at a minimum as well as Baghel Singh and Joginder Singh Ugrahan which have seen a fair number of edits from JSB socks. JSB is quite active right now uploading coyprighted images and adding them to articles here and that might slow them down some. Ravensfire ( talk) 16:22, 26 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Adding GhgbzUsar, same unusual ending to username as prior sock JagdeepUsar, restored image also used by prior socks [99] vs [100]
Adding LGjeety, restoring edits to Amritsar and Ludhiana. Ravensfire ( talk) 19:02, 29 March 2023 (UTC) reply
Honestly, JSB is creating new socks daily (and often more than one a day), so really needs a CU check for sleepers. I think JSB just always creates new accounts at this point, knowing that nearly every one gets blocked so why should they care about things like Terms of Use, copyright and other such nonsense. Ravensfire ( talk) 21:19, 29 March 2023 (UTC) reply
Latest accounts: Jaagdeepkl, FgjjzhJaa, Fajitadf, Dark-haired. List is not complete. Ravensfire ( talk) 19:11, 4 April 2023 (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 April 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Sock blocked on commons, has made same edits here [101] as prior sock [102]. Created mere hours after last set blocked. CU for the usual collection of sleepers and new accounts JSB creates. Ravensfire ( talk) 23:53, 8 April 2023 (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

10 April 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Usual reasons - new day, so new socks, random character names, CU blocked on commons, continuing to edit where prior socks were reverted. Ggsnkka1 ( talk · contribs) uploaded images to commoms that Hsh... subsequently used here. Ravensfire ( talk) 13:53, 10 April 2023 (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 April 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Restore same image as prior socks [103] vs [104], as well as [105] vs [106]. Ravensfire ( talk) 14:07, 13 April 2023 (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

19 April 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Restoring image used by prior socks here ( [107] vs [108], [109]) and ( [110] vs [111]). Strong focus on Sikh related topics, common to JSB socks. CU check for sleepers / abandoned accounts. Ravensfire ( talk) 16:27, 19 April 2023 (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

18 May 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Usual periodic list of JSB socks, all blocked on commons, need to be blocked here and check for sleepers that may not already be blocked on commons.

  • Hahhaj - CU blocked on commons, added copyvio image to Bhagwant Mann which has been a common article for JSB socks.
  • Najjskka - CU blocked on commons, added copyvio image to Bhagwant Mann which has been a common article for JSB socks.
  • Nxnnxm - CU blocked on commons
  • Punjabfg - CU blocked on commons

CU is for sleepers / missed accounts Ravensfire ( talk) 15:09, 18 May 2023 (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

21 May 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

For Hdhdkk: same short username of random letters (compare to known socks Gfdsjit, Gjjhshjj, Hjjajh, etc.) and playing with infobox images/adding copyvios on Jalandhar ( Hdhdkk, Gfdsjit; Gfdsjit, JajjajjaDf, etc.)
For Remindersy: confirmed on Commons (can provide data if needed) and playing with infobox images/adding copyvios on Jalandhar as per above ( Remindersy
For Gdeghyx: same short username of random letters, and:

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

14 June 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Confirmed on Commons (can provide data if needed); specific diffs for each:

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

24 June 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Already blocked on commons, restored edit here [112] for prior sock [113]. CU check for other accounts, please. Pretty sure there's 2 or 3 other ones. Ravensfire ( talk) 03:29, 24 June 2023 (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

Added another. same type of edits [114]. - Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 09:59, 24 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  •  Confirmed and blocked four non-locked accounts.
Courcelles ( talk) 23:06, 25 June 2023 (UTC) reply

26 June 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Another one it seems. same editing area and same type of image related edits [115]. Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 11:12, 26 June 2023 (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

  •  Confirmed Blocked and tagged 3.

Courcelles ( talk) 22:34, 26 June 2023 (UTC) reply

02 July 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

New ID re-added the same image [116] like the proven [117]. ID created recently, and a large amount of tehir edits are image related, a typical behaviour of the sockfarm. Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 10:17, 2 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Another, same type of image related edits [118]. - Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 11:05, 2 July 2023 (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

09 July 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

New one working in the same topic area (Punjab related) and making same type of edits (adding/replacing images with unclear copyright information). Commonly targeted pages [119] [120] [121] Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 11:14, 9 July 2023 (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

16 August 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Blocked on commons as a sock. [122] . Edits are to make images changes to articles commonly targetted by JSB socks.

CU check is for sleeper accounts and accounts recently used and abandoned here. JSB socks have been fairly actively blocked on Commons. Ravensfire ( talk) 21:18, 16 August 2023 (UTC) reply

Added several other accounts adding images to common JSB targets and already blocked as LTA accounts on Commons. Ravensfire ( talk) 21:26, 16 August 2023 (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

  •  Confirmed the following accounts belong to each other:

All now blocked. Sleeper check complete.  IP blocked - Mailer Diablo 13:15, 17 August 2023 (UTC) reply

28 August 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Latest whack-a-mole target. See [123] vs [124] from prior sock. They're also CU blocked on Commons [125]. From activity on the Economy of Ludhiana article, also should check Srtaj Singh, who added an image there and is CU blocked on commons. [126] Ravensfire ( talk) 14:32, 28 August 2023 (UTC) reply

Adding CU request for sleepers. Ravensfire ( talk) 14:37, 28 August 2023 (UTC) reply
New socks added after recent edits to Ludhiana [127]. Ravensfire ( talk) 15:09, 29 August 2023 (UTC) reply
And another after using image JSB socks prefer - [128]. Ravensfire ( talk) 21:32, 29 August 2023 (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

All  Confirmed, plus:

Blocking, will request locks. Girth Summit (blether) 12:08, 30 August 2023 (UTC) reply

06 September 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Two new accounts editing images on Ludhiana, a favorite target of JSB. [129], [130]. Both accounts already CU blocked on commons. Ravensfire ( talk) 14:01, 6 September 2023 (UTC) reply

Added Diljeet Singh1 to the list. On Economy of Amritsar, they restored an image [131] that was originally added by a sock [132]. Also see [133] which was also added by prior sock [134]. I didn't tag this as needing a CU check, but this account didn't really show up on my radar, so maybe one is warranted again. Ravensfire ( talk) 14:17, 6 September 2023 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

Similar behavior. Addition of images from videos and other sources without proper copyright information [135] [136] [137] [138] [139]. Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 16:18, 9 September 2023 (UTC) reply

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

13 October 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Created the day after the most recent batch of socks blocked. Added image [140] that was uploaded to commons by a now blocked sock [141]. Added infobox [142] that was also added by a prior sock [143]. Also fair number of edits to Ludhiana, which is a common JSB target. [144].

CU request is for sleepers. Ravensfire ( talk) 16:00, 13 October 2023 (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

The following are  Confirmed to one another, and  Technically indistinguishable from previous socks of this case:

Will block and request locks. Girth Summit (blether) 18:29, 13 October 2023 (UTC) reply

19 December 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

CU blocked on commons, pushing image changes on Ludhiana as prior socks have done (see history of the article). Ravensfire ( talk) 16:02, 19 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Restored same here here [145] as a previous sock [146]. Ravensfire ( talk) 16:05, 19 December 2023 (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

The latter two have minimal editing histories, but the Jag... username (cf. Category:Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Jagdeep_singh_bittu) and some aspects of the technical data make me fairly certain of the relation. Accounts  Blocked and tagged, Redirect arrow Global lock(s) requested, closing. Thanks, Spicy ( talk) 22:52, 19 December 2023 (UTC) reply

24 December 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Adding same image to article as prior socks - [147] vs [148]. [149] Ravensfire ( talk) 19:22, 24 December 2023 (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

28 December 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Restoring same image as prior socks - [150] vs [151] Ravensfire ( talk) 22:21, 28 December 2023 (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

  • Group 1  Confirmed to each other:
Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 22:06, 29 December 2023 (UTC) reply

11 February 2024

Suspected sockpuppets

Recreated the previously deleted Gurdwara Tibbi Sahib. Edits are similarly all on mobile. Several reverted edits don't help. TLA (talk) 11:27, 11 February 2024 (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

I'm assuming I'm tla meant to list GRoivvf as the suspected sock.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 15:27, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Yup, typo. Thanks. TLA tlak 06:57, 26 February 2024 (UTC) reply

02 April 2024

Suspected sockpuppets

Recreated Gurdwara Bibi Veero [152] (now at Draft:Gurdwara Bibi Veero which was originally created by a prior JSB sock. [153]. They've also made similar image changes to the infobox on Ludhiana [154] which has been a very common behavior for JSB socks - please see the article history for the number of times JSB socks have edited the images, and the archives of this SPI. CU is for possible sleepers. Ravensfire ( talk) 16:09, 2 April 2024 (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 April 2024

Suspected sockpuppets

Created talk page for a page that was repetitively created by sockpuppets and deleted. JustAnAmateurEditor1 ( talk) 04:39, 3 April 2024 (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

Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Jagdeep_singh_bittu/Archive&oldid=1221237519"

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook




Top Of Page

Home • Search • Translate

© CSE