Home • Search • Translate
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Shulinjiang

Shulinjiang ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
02 July 2014
Suspected sockpuppets


I had previously added sourced information on these 2 articles CAIC_Z-10 and Kamov. the user reverted my change without any explanation. he later started adding heavily biased inline comments to the article along with providing what he claimed are 2 "official sources" which happen to be nothing but news reports which do not agree with the point of view he was trying to include. The user began to start making disruptive edits with ip's after logging out. i left warnings on all 3 talk pages (main account and ip's), with links to wiki guidelines to follow while making edits, despite which he continued to engage in disruptive edits. the user also began to engage in derogatory name calling. i have not asked for a check user as i feel that the behavior evidence alone should be sufficient proof according to WP:DUCK (the suspected user has decided to reply with yet another ip, which i have added to the list of check ip's)

behaviour evidence provided is as follows.

going by the edit summary on some of the diffs provided, you will be able to notice a similar pattern of name calling and Ad hominem attacks ( which he continues to do so in his reply to the accusation below). he used the same derogatory terms while logged on his account as well as the ip's. his behaviour on removing sourced content and adding biased text with a pro-china and anti-russia also leads me to believe that it is the same user sock puppeting. further behaviour traits that match across all the accounts include making the same argument for his change, claiming his sources are "official" (despite them being only news articles) while other "western" sources are all lies, and a general inability to preserve NPOV.

update : The user claims as his defense that he was moving around a lot. however Geolocation tool on the 3 ip's ( [1], [2], [3] ) used reveal that the ip's are located in different states in the U.S. with google maps showing atleast 4 hrs and 30 mins travel time without traffic. however the timestamps on the diffs do not prove the claim made by the user that he was moving around a lot, since they fall within this period not to mention the fact that he would have to stay in one location long enough for his edits. i understand that geolocation is not 100% accurate, however the distances involved are great enough that in this case it does not have to be. To me this seems like a clear cut case of the user using a proxy service to make disruptive edits and therefore a valid case of sock puppetry. i.e WP:DUCK — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pvpoodle ( talk • contribs) 10:42, 3 July 2014 (UTC) reply

update 2 : user has returned to revert changes by using ip's added two new ip's (198.135.125.122 & 64.134.160.102) and their diffs below. Same behavior of removing sourced information with good faith claims which reads like propaganda, making ad hominem attacks, and refusal to discuss on talk. under the ip 64.134.160.102 he claims that his name is jon and that he is the original contributer to the article z-10, however the edit history revels no one by that name who was one of the original editors of that page and he has gone on to continue to make personal attacks and threats on both mine and other users talk pages. please review this case and ban the quacking ducks soon. i have added these new diffs to the pre-existing ones below. also if possible could an administrator ask for a check user on this case? i failed to do so when the case was created and i am unsure if i can do it now. Pvpoodle ( talk) 14:59, 7 July 2014 (UTC) reply

Update 3: further behaviour evidence for ip's (198.135.125.122 & 64.134.160.102), the user 198.135.125.122 has been engaged in disruptive editing where he reverts all my edits that i have done on diffrent pages over the last few days. he mentions in this post in the z-10 article that he has the "permission" of other wikipedians for reverting my edits [[ Special:Diff/615963931 however it is the same user under the ip 64.134.160.102 under the pseudonym jon that has been going around asking for permision / help from other editors. as in this example User_talk:The_Last_Arietta#CAIC_Z-10. in his haste i believe he has muddled up his different identities and has left a behavioral clue for this spi. Pvpoodle ( talk) 16:31, 7 July 2014 (UTC) reply


these diffs are provided below.

diffs on page CAIC Z-10 - 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 , 9, 10 , 11 , 12 , 13

diffs on page Kamov 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

he has also engaged in making a disruptive edit on the talk page of an article ,i have been improving recently by leaving further derogatory comments.

diffs on page Talk:2001 Bangladeshi-Indian border skirmish 1 Pvpoodle ( talk) 21:59, 2 July 2014 (UTC) reply

diffs on user and article talk pages

1 2 3 4 5 6

acts of vandalism on multiple pages by reverting all my edits over the last few days.

1 , 2, 2 cont, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Pvpoodle ( talk) 16:05, 7 July 2014 (UTC) reply


Comments by other users

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

Debunking Pvpoodle's claim by Shulin Jiang

I am Shulinjiang. I noticed Pvpoodle's anti-China and trolling behavior on the internet. He spends hours and hours posting on Wikipedia just to convince someone with his own opinions.

He used three sources from western media with the exact contents to mock China's WZ-10 chopper, that the chopper is designed by Russia's Kamov, which means that the Chinese are stupid and brainless and not able to design on their own!! When I debunked his false claims with real Chinese sources, he undid my sourced revisions.

I debunked his claims by adding real Chinese sources for actual Chinese military products, and I have added different sources with very different content. I also pointed out the inconstancies within his sources where the Russian chief designer of Kamov first saying that Kamov designed the WZ-10, then later recanted by saying that China was responsible for all the critical component design and testing, and that Kamov only produce a few pictures with English titles to backup their claims. If WZ-10 was indeed designed by Kamov, a Russian company, why would they post their pictures with English descriptions? Also, Pvpoodle's source cited pictures created in late 2000's, yet the source claimed that Kamov designed it in early 1990's. These inconstancies alone were enough to debunk his sources. At last, the Russian chief design Sergey Mikheev cannot even tell the basic performance parameter of WZ-10 such as roll rate, climb rate, top speed, empty weight and loaded weight. Let alone its capabilities such as air to air combat, ground attacks and situation awareness.

The sources I posted are from Chinese official news media, and since WZ-10 was a Chinese attack helicopter, then using them will be more creditable. There are no inconstancies in my sources.

At last, Pvpoodle spends hours posting and editing on Wikipedia arguing with others and removing other people's sourced contents. Yet ironically when someone debunks him with more creditable source he call them vandalizes. He was specially interested in political stuffs such as India-Bangladesh border skirmish, and other countries military products.

At last, I do not have multiple accounts. I post on my lab top at different locations, some times at coffee shop, sometimes at my house. Unlike Pvpoodle, I have a life and spend most of my time working and hanging out with my friends and family.

I rest my case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.228.208.86 ( talk) 22:22, 2 July 2014 (UTC) reply

i have not engaged in "anti-china" trolling. i mentioned to you that there clearly exists a difference between designed by and developed by. the links you provided themselves are based on the ones i posted. with one of them even plagiarizing the same graphics. the links you provided also continue to say that kamov was the initial designer, while further development was carried out by china, which was already included in both my links and in the article text on the z-10 itself. therefore you debunked nothing but only continued to vandalise the article. your behavior of using multiple ip's and continuing to add your own personal opinions with no valid proof was in violation of WP:NPOV and Wp:ISNOT, and launching a futher ad-hominem attacks only solidifies my case by providing further behavior proof. Pvpoodle ( talk) 23:14, 2 July 2014 (UTC) reply


Debunk Pvpoodle's claim once again by Shulinjiang

In your claim you said that WZ-10 was designed by Russia's Kamov, this means that every major components such as engines, rotor blades, avionics, weapons systems, missiles, radars, and overall system integration must have been done by Kamov! But this was proven completely wrong, since the major contents of the page clearly described how the Chinese spend nearly 20 years to complete all the works such as weapon designs and testing, avionics, engines, rotor blades, flight testing, and radars systems. These content sections also clearly indicated which Chinese companies designed which part and component and they are all Chinese companies, there was one Canadian company supplied an engine option but the finial production variant of WZ-10 used Chinese designed and build WoZ-9 engine as well. This means that China designed and build 100% of the WZ-10!

However, your own source said the exact opposite!! In your own source, Russian chief designer Sergey Mikheev of Kamov cannot even tell the basic performance parameter of WZ-10 such as roll rate, climb rate, top speed, empty weight and loaded weight. Let alone its capabilities such as air to air combat, ground attacks and situation awareness. He later even said that Kamov had no involvement in the development of any major components at all, even minor component such as the auto cannon was designed and build by China. The only prove from your groundless source was some picture drawn by Kamov and captioned in English! Why would a Russian military company publish their supposedly "design" work in the early 1990's in English using 21 century drawing software?

The source I provided was written in Chinese, and you failed to grasp or basically understand any thing it says. They contents of the source is to cite the false western media with the groundless Russian picture and prove them wrong. In fact, the title of the source in Chinese is: "Russia's state media deny any technical involvement in the Chinese WZ-10 project, WZ-10 was completely designed and developed by China". Since your source is from the western media and it does not contain any solid proof that Kamov was actually involoved in the WZ-10 program, and all of your three sources contain the exact same materials. They can not be used to prove anything, and can not be cited as multiple sources!!

At last, and most important of all. All your sources contained inconstancies which Sergey Mikheev first allege that Kamov designed the WZ-10, later he changed his mind by openly stating that Kamov's involvement in the project never got beyond drawing just a simple pictures, this does not constitute design work! To make your source even more unreliable, Sergey Mikheev claimed that he can not tell any performance data of the WZ-10. If Kamov did design the aircraft, why can not the chief designer of Kamov unable to even state the basic performance of WZ-10? If Russia's Kamov had the audacity and boldness to openly lie, why can't they back up with more concrete proof such as showing their work in the prototypes?

In my finial conclusion, I debunked your claim once again.

Also, you are a lair! You are very anti-China. You spend hours and hours if not days on the internet just to spread rumors to mock other countries specially China and India's neighbors. Your editing history tell such pattern, as you have made over 500 edits in the last 3 days alone! All of them political and military materials such as China's military products, India's navy, Pakistan's media, India's border war with Bangladesh, and many others!

On the other hand, I had only made few editions in the past month and mainly to debunk Indian internet trolls like your. Unlike you, I have a decent job in USA and family, therefore do not have the time or need to troll like you!

At last, I do not use multiple IPs because I post on my laptop as I stated previously. I post the first debunk during my break time at work and this one at home. Unlike you, you are an Indian internet troll and spend most of your day right in front of your computer just to troll and vandalize Wikipedia pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.228.208.86 ( talk) 03:14, 3 July 2014 (UTC) reply

before continuing on your tirade please please condsider reading WP:NOR and WP:NONENG. nowhere was it mentioned that kamov worked on the prototypes, it was clearly stated that kamov designed but further development work was done in china. you are debunking nothing but only putting across your own biased view. in an age of multiple translation reliable tools, thinking that no one will question your editing just by adding foreign language links is not such a wise move, since your links themselves clearly do not support what you are saying. you should also perhaps consider reading WP:RS, just because the link is in Chinese does not mean that it is the most reliable source for a Chinese article. also you mention that i have more than 500 edits in last 3 days? going by Special:Contributions/Pvpoodle reveals closer to 50 and no where near 500. with the only articles that even mention the word china being in the 2 articles in question on this post. how did this form "anti-china" trolling? if you were making the edits from different locations on your laptop as you claim? how does it get logged out and logged back in automatically ? one would assume it would stay logged in as the laptop itself is being moved around according to your claim? the diffs provided how you log out and log back in within short periods of time (much too fast to be automatic log out) lending further weight to my allegation that you are a sock puppet. and considering how you'r geolocation keeps jumping around all over the united states, i very seriously doubt the claim that you are in the united states and are more likely just hiding behind a proxy or vpn service. Pvpoodle ( talk) 03:46, 3 July 2014 (UTC) reply


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
  • This is more a case of disruptive editing than sockpuppetry. I've blocked the account and the IPs for 48 hours each for disruptive editing after they were reported to another board. PhilKnight ( talk) 06:43, 3 July 2014 (UTC) reply
  • information Administrator note In light of this outbreak I think it has become clear that Shulinjiang is not here to improve the encyclopedia and is not interested in any constructive discussion. I have therefore indeffed the registered account. De728631 ( talk) 18:19, 7 July 2014 (UTC) reply
08 July 2014
Suspected sockpuppets

[4] Claims to be "Jon", same as a previous IP sock, also the insistence on "debunking" pvpoodle. Darkness Shines ( talk) 04:53, 8 July 2014 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

  •  Comment: yea its the same guy as earlier. i had hoped the indef block and page protect on that article would have deterred him, but it appears i was wrong. behavioral evidence for this "jon" being the same guy is provided above. and as further proof both of them seem to think that since i added the "evil fake western" references, they have to "debunk" me and prove me wrong. Pvpoodle ( talk) 05:19, 8 July 2014 (UTC) reply
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 IP blocked per WP:DUCK. De728631 ( talk) 15:50, 8 July 2014 (UTC) reply

23 July 2014
Suspected sockpuppets


same modus operandi of vandalizing my talk page and articles i have contributed on by launching personal attacks and making the same edits to the CAIC Z-10 page. also leaving a fake warning on my page saying im suspected of sockpuppetry. obvious duck is obvious. Pvpoodle ( talk) 01:10, 23 July 2014 (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

information Administrator note These IPs haven't been active for two days now. Given the fact that Shulinjiang seems also to be hopping around with his IPs I don't see a reason to block them right now. I have, however, semi-protected the CAIC Z-10 article and will also consider Pvpoodle's request for protecting his user talk page because of persistent harrassment and impersonating like this. De728631 ( talk) 19:29, 25 July 2014 (UTC) reply

30 August 2014
Suspected sockpuppets


same pattern of racially motivated abuse. attacks coming from an ip that was reported earlier but only temporarily blocked. requesting permanent ban of 134.228.208.86 since all the edit logs from that ip prove that this is a static ip that is only accessible by the sock master.

72.241.236.117 and 64.134.160.61 have already been blocked but are included here to maintain consistency to previously reported ip puppets, in the hope that it may result in a range block.


additionally i would like to point out again that the ip addresses used always seem to be from different state, while using geolocation, which leads me to suspect a proxy service is being used.


note: i have asked for checkuser since 134.228.208.86 appears to be a static ip and may reveal other sock puppets under shulinjiang's control.


diffs

1

more recent diffs under contributions of the other 2 vandalism only ip addresses.

Pvpoodle ( talk) 16:08, 30 August 2014 (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

information Administrator note I have blocked IP 134.228.208.86 for three months for obvious and repeated harrassment, but as it appears to be static I wouldn't mind an indefinite block either. De728631 ( talk) 17:14, 30 August 2014 (UTC) reply

  •  Clerk note: I'm declining the CU request as unnecessary and unusual in the case of IPs. Two of the IPs are the same. The third is part of a range that has been used by this master before, so it's nothing new. I'm not blocking the two IPs as they were blocked briefly by another admin and haven't edited since. However, anyone should feel free to block them for longer if they resurface. De728631, if you feel it's justified to block that one IP for longer than three months, that's within your discretion, but an indefinite block of an IP is against policy. I see no reason at this point to block longer than three months.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 15:02, 1 September 2014 (UTC) reply
19 December 2014
Suspected sockpuppets


Same duck-like pattern of removing the same bit of sourced content about Kamov's involvement, on the CAIC Z-10 page and wiki hounding and reverting my edits on few other articles.

Considering the long term activity from this IP, I believe that this is a Static IP under the sole control of the Puppet Master and therefore may warrant a long term block.

Diffs

Removal of sourced content from the CAIC Z-10 page. 1, 2, 3

Reverting my old edits on other pages. 1, 2


Pvpoodle ( talk) 07:39, 19 December 2014 (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 IP seems keen on reverting the same revisions as past accounts. Also, the user is performing the trademark edit summary with a space before the exclamation point. I've blocked the IP for a week. Mike V • Talk 19:48, 19 December 2014 (UTC) reply


20 December 2014
Suspected sockpuppets


Same pattern of undoing revisions on articles. Requesting a temporary ban based on the fact that the IP was used over a period of days, suggesting that it is NOT a Dynamic IP.

diffs

1, 2, 3, 4, 5

pretty much all edits made by this account are the same. Pvpoodle ( talk) 08:57, 20 December 2014 (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 December 2014
Suspected sockpuppets


persistent vandalism, personal attacks and sock puppetry. Same pattern of artificially inflating figures relating to the Chinese military without providing any proof , removal of any sourced information that disagrees with his personal whims and fantasies , and the constant stream of abuse directed at anyone who disagrees.

diffs 1, 2, 3, 4

all of the IP's edits are similar acts of vandalism or personal attacks. As the IP is being used over several days requesting a block. Pvpoodle ( talk) 06:43, 30 December 2014 (UTC) reply


Copied from duplicate case, referring to 64.134.234.63:

same pattern of reverting my edits and grossly insulting racist personal attacks. not even going to bother with diffs as all edits made by ip are similar. also reported at WP:AIV Pvpoodle ( talk) 03:56, 31 December 2014 (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

information Administrator note IP was blocked for 24 hrs by User:Edgar181. -- Diannaa ( talk) 00:01, 31 December 2014 (UTC) reply

 Completed 64.134.234.63 blocked by Mike V for 24 hours for vandalism. At this point I don't see a need to extend the block. Pvpoodle do be sure to report directly to AIV when you see IPs make edits like this. I want to question why we would even bother opening another SPI, but I suppose there's value in collecting behaviorial evidence over time. Closing — MusikAnimal talk 06:22, 31 December 2014 (UTC) reply


31 December 2014
Suspected sockpuppets


Same pattern of repeated attempts to add his own point of view to the CAIC Z-10 and Kamov article. Pattern continues despite other user's attempts to correct this. Similar pattern of editing only China military specific articles. And addition of unsourced material and removal of sourced content to support and promote his own sino-centric pov.

Although this account does not engage in his trademark racist abuse and personal attacks, i believe this is due to him not wanting another one of his accounts banned when he has multiple disposable IP to carry out his personal attacks.

I believe he has brought out this account since the pages have been semi protected.

Diffs.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

P.S. apologies for multiple cases being opened in a short duration, however this is only due to a recent spurt of activity from the sock master and to document long term pattern of sock puppetry. Pvpoodle ( talk) 10:46, 31 December 2014 (UTC) reply


A few more recent Diffs. 1, 2. Pvpoodle ( talk) 12:14, 1 January 2015 (UTC) reply
Comments by other users

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

  • Recently 107.204.38.215 ( talk · contribs) was blocked 24 hours by User:Edgar181. I'm guessing this might have been due to a complaint at AIV. The same IP appears above in this SPI, and was also reported at WP:AN3. This IP has the honor of having a number of his edits oversighted. Though I can't tell what the nature of those remarks was, it is surprising that we wouldn't take some action against someone who makes oversightable remarks. See also the 3RR report just mentioned where it is stated that the IP engages in 'incessant racially motivated personal remarks which have been going on for the last six months' ( User:Pvpoodle). I suggest that these reports add up to a rationale for a two-month block of this IP. EdJohnston ( talk) 02:26, 1 January 2015 (UTC) reply
He is using a proxy/vpn service for block evasion. Blocking individual IPs will not have the desired effect as he simply changes his ip. Someone has to identify which proxy/vpn service he is using (if at all) and block that range of IPs.
The reason i believe he is using a proxy service is due to the fact that his geolocation seems to be jumping all around the continental United States.
His latest ip 64.134.101.117 used on 31 Dec resolves to the city of Chantilly, Virginia ( 1)
The previous IP mentioned here 107.204.38.215 blocked on 30 Dec resolves to Fontana, California ( 2)
Another IP 198.135.125.28 blocked on 25 Dec resolves to Chicago, IL ( 3)
Another IP 107.139.240.12 also blocked on 25 Dec resolves to Riga, Michigan ( 4)
4 different IPs from 4 different states, all in the span of less than a 10 days. Considering each IP was used over several days, i find it hard to believe that he is a traveling salesman with a penchant for racial abuse, unless all he does is live out of the airport lounge. The picture only gets clearer the more you look into his other IPs documented in the archives. I am led to believe that geolocation is not an exact science and the results can be off by upto a couple of hundred miles, however the massive leaps in location, from the west coast to the east coast and everywhere in between provides damming evidence to the use of a proxy. I believe an In depth Investigation may be required to identify and block him. Pvpoodle ( talk) 09:14, 1 January 2015 (UTC) reply
  • I agree that there does not seem to be enough edits made by Shulinjiang to determine a pattern, however the edits made around the vicinity of the first week of June by Shulinjiang and his IPs and also later by his other IPs all have the same bone of contention which is the involvement of Kamov in the design. Tamlinwah has been repeatedly changing this ( tamlinwah's edits on z-10) which is what led me to suspect him. When not engaging in attacks, Shulinjiang's other IPs also seem to be editing other articles which are exclusively related to the Chinese military / its military industrial complex. All of these edits are also to either add unsourced and inflated facts and figures or to remove sourced information which may make be potentially embarrassing since it does not toe the official party line. Tamlinwah's edits also seem to be of a similar nature. While this may not be damming proof by itself, i was hoping a CU would be able to correlate the range of IPs being used. In Hindsight, given that he is almost certainly using a proxy, this might not be easy to achieve unless he slipped up somewhere and made a mistake. The other person with familiarity on this case was DarknessShines who has since been blocked himself. Pvpoodle ( talk) 08:28, 2 January 2015 (UTC) reply
  • [[ I believe that Tamlinwah created the Shulinjiang account on account of needing a disposable account to engage in the risky behavior of contesting edits likely to lead to an edit war. I think this post by him on my talk page hints at what his plan was. By using his other named account(s) and ip's each posturing with a different persona, the person(s) maintaining the article would have been banned for violating 3RR or for edit warring, and he could roll in and 'restore' the article. Unfortunately for him, his plan seems to have backfired when his disposable shulinjiang account got a temp banned for disruptive editing, which caused him to lose his temper and begin his campaign of hate speech which in turn caused the only known named account at the time to be perma banned for sockpuppeting. I understand that my theory is completely circumstantial, and that i was relying on having a CU correlate the IP data. I did not realize that this was not routinely done. And so if you must, please go ahead and close the case, but I intend to keep an eye out for any suspicious activity from the suspected sock master tamlinwah and I hope you do too. Pvpoodle ( talk) 08:12, 5 January 2015 (UTC) reply
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 Clerk note: There is no way to do a CU on the named account. The only named account to have been blocked is the master, and their data is too old. If the two accounts are related, then Tamlinwah would be the master as their account is significantly older than the current master and with far many more edits (although still only 428). There is also very little to compare between the two as the master made only a handful of edits on one day. Based on the little stylistic evidence we have between the two, they are quite different, and I'm not even taking into account the issue of attacks. Tamlinwah's edits are almost all marked minor; only one of the master's was. Very few of Tamlinwah's edits provide an edit summary. The master's few edits did. However, I did note that Tamlinwah did not edit on the one day that the master did, but Tamlinwah did not edit every day. The central question I have is why would Tamlinwah have created a sock account on July 2, 2014? Was there some problem at that time that might have triggered it? They've never been blocked. I'm leaving this open in case there are additional comments from anyone about what to do with this and why, including Pvpoodle, who has suffered the most, and EdJohnston.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 18:40, 1 January 2015 (UTC) reply

  • Pvpoodle, your comments do not address the central issue, whether Tamlinwah and Shulinjiang are the same person, and if so, why did Tamlinwah create the Shulinjiang account in early July? You keep connecting Shulinjiang and "his" IPs because that's been the status quo for some time now, but if I were to find that the two named accounts are the same individual, then we have to shift our thinking to Tamlinwah's IPs, etc. And unless a CU is willing to make an exception, we don't correlate named accounts to IPs, so that isn't an option.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 17:05, 2 January 2015 (UTC) reply

24 February 2015

Suspected sockpuppets


Personal attacks, Racially motivated abuse and a constant stream of drivel, all hallmarks of shulinjiang. Besides this IP was previously reported and had a short term block imposed back in December. Since the IP is being reused again, I am requesting a long term block.

As there have not been any intervening edits which seems to imply the IP is solely under the control of the sockmaster, i feel a long term block is justified.

I am not listing the diffs here. A quick look at the user contributions page will be revolting enough. Pvpoodle ( talk) 06:49, 24 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Added one more ip 199.116.175.21which has been carrying out attacks, which was also previously reported as a shulinjiang sock and blocked with a short term block. the first IP 107.139.240.12 has been blocked for 3 months, but considering that the time frame between the last attack which occurred in December and the latest attack now, i believe both IP's qualify for a significantly longer term block. Pvpoodle ( talk) 03:57, 26 February 2015 (UTC) reply


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

12 August 2015

Suspected sockpuppets


I will try to make the evidence as brief as possible so the hard working administrators can solve this problem as soon as possible. This is a 1+ year dispute that started on this page. The WZ-10 article is rarely edited so the start of Shulinjiang's indefinite ban is straightforward with him harassing a strong advocate of neutrality over the subject.

The above eight IP addresses show behavior that is akin to Shulinjiang and each other. Something I should note is that these are not all the IP addresses, just the ones I recall encountering. I believe that 8 IPs sharing certain unique characteristics is good enough for evidence. Behavioral examples include but are not limited to:

1) Explicit racism to Indians

  • Example from IP 2.
  • Example from IP 4
  • It's important to note that IP 4 and IP 6 have made exact remarks by vandalizing the user and talk page of User:Pvpoodle. However, due to what was written, the edit summaries were removed by an admin and the page was protected for a lengthy time.
  • The sock master does not have many contributions to his name. However, one of them refers to User:Pvpoodle as an "Indian internet troll". The accusations of his opposition being "trolls" are one of the most common insults among these socks.

2) Accusing others of trolling

  • Example by IP 3
  • IP 4 appears to provide the most damning evidence that it is Shulinjiang: 1 2 3 The key term is "Indian Internet troll".

3) Explicit racism to Jews (particularly me)

  • Humiliating examples demonstrated by IP 3: 1 2
  • Another one by IP 6. This IP is currently serving a year long ban and some of his disgusting edit summaries have been thankfully removed.

4) Spamming the talk pages of administrators with subjects attempting to invoke bans on users he is edit warring with ("Please stop Al Khazar" or "Please stop RovingConstructorPersonality"). This habit is somewhat new and is shared with 3 of the IP addresses

  • Examples from IP 1: 1 2 3
  • Example from IP 3: Although I am aware that Thomas.W is not an admin, I just wanted to give more evidence for this behaviour of baiting other users and running towards the admins (or users he thinks are admins) to get his opposition blocked.
  • Example from IP 6
  • Examples from IP 8: 1 2

5) An unhealthy obsession with the WZ-10 article and virtually every other Chinese military weapon article.

  • The primary focus is on the designer of the helicopter. A surge of source in 2013 indicated Russian Kamov. Some Chinese nationalists like Shulinjiang didn't like it and devoted a year long struggle to remove it. I prefer not to show any diffs since you can just look at about half of the IPs trying to remove/replace one specific detail; the designer.

In a short summary:

  • IP 2, 4, and 6 made racist comments to Indians
  • IP 3, 4, and others made accusations of trolling. IP 4 used a term Shulinjiang has used before.
  • IP 3 and 6 made anti-Semitic comments directed towards me on my own talk and user page.
  • IP 1, 3, 6, and 8 spam admins' pages.
  • All of them but IP 2 vandalize the WZ-10 article. However, IP 2 made racist comments.

This struggle by the sock master has been going on for more than a year. His fanaticism is limitless and I don't believe that any block on the sock puppets will be the right solution. I believe that the best solution is a permanent protection from IP addresses distributed on the article that he disruptively edits the most. I'd like to thank any admin who is reviewing in advance. Khazar ( talk) 00:49, 12 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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


I am not a sock-pocket, and don't know who shulinjiang is. I am just a user whom comment while working at my company. That is why it generates different IPs.

-- 199.116.175.27 ( talk) 12:08, 17 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Judging by the insults you provided in this edit of January 28th using this exact IP address, that is highly unlikely. Mocking users in that manner is a characteristic shared by the majority of the IP addresses I've reported. Khazar ( talk) 23:13, 17 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

17 December 2015

Suspected sockpuppets


Despite consensus on talk page, a new IP [5] jumped to the article for edit warring, and claiming Indian sources to be biased, [6] that was also done by Greentea555. [7] I checked the block log and found that user was blocked as sock before, but I have found more similarities, it is that Shulinjiang [8] mentioned Sino-Indian War (1962) for justifying his edits, which is also done by Greentea555. [9] After Greentea555 got his version protected on Cho La incident, it was this IP 162.74.52.147, who went to promote new results edits on other articles. [10] [11] Capitals00 ( talk) 06:45, 17 December 2015 (UTC) reply

Read this latest edit, [12] of IP, "Restore back to accurate source. Remove Indian propaganda and mouth piece source", now reminds of Greentea555's "Other more accurate source that is not Indian propaganda." [13] WP:DUCK. Capitals00 ( talk) 13:54, 17 December 2015 (UTC) reply
IP's copypasting and canvassing [14] [15] is also similar to Greentea555. [16] [17] Capitals00 ( talk) 15:56, 17 December 2015 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

He falsely accuse me of being a sock of shulinjiang whom I do not know of.

Admin, please do not listen to him. I am not a sock, I got blocked for unjust reason and I do not know whom shulinjiang is. Capitals00 however, is a proven sock. Just go take a look at his block log. He has the exact same name! He has at least 6 accounts dedicated for vandalizing trolling and spreading pro Indian propaganda. Here are some of his other socks: User:D4iNa4, User:OwnDealers, User:Littleboygenius, User:Chipperdude15, User:D4iNa4, and urser:122.170.132.127

Here is his block log: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Special:Log/block&page=User%3ACapitals00

My guess is that he got block many time back in 2013 with this account user:Capitals00, and recently his main account got blocked for a long period of time and that he is back using this one again.

Look at who is the real sock here.

-- 162.74.52.147 ( talk) 22:26, 17 December 2015 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

"he source provided by Capitals00 and other Indians are from Hindustan news and other Indian mouth piece" is nowhere close to being a racial issue. Don't cloud the waters with obviously bad accusations. Nyttend ( talk) 15:00, 17 December 2015 (UTC) reply

02 January 2017

Suspected sockpuppets


Connecting the current account and IP takes a bit of digging through the IPs used since the last block, but it can be tracked due to the similar behaviour; edit comments ("adding source", ending with space and exclamation marks), talk post style, failure to adhere to WP:NPOV, ad hominem attacks on other editors (like accusations of vandalism), etc..

The last IP blocked was 162.74.52.147 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki) at the end of 2015. using this account, Shulinjiang made noticeable edits to CAIC Z-10, List of wars involving the People's Republic of China, Nathu La and Cho La incidents and Nuclear triad. Judging from the reaction of other edits, these were typically regarded as poor edits. In the following year, they returned to these articles using various IPs.

From a cursory investigation, I believe the following IPs have been used by Shulinjiang during 2015:

Shulinjiang has hopped away from most of these IPsm but they're used below to show the editor's habits through 2016.

50.207.191.155
  • CAIC Z-10 - typical Shulinjiang edit removing mention of Kamov being the designer.
  • List of wars involving the People's Republic of China
  • Nuclear triad - continuing the edit war with User:ScrapIronIV started in 2015 using 162.74.52.147, typical edit comments accusing others of being trolls and vandals
67.175.16.150
  • Confirmed to be Jon Hydro Jets during the time of editing [18]
  • Takes over editing Sino-Soviet border conflict, Sino-Vietnamese War from 206.167.71.30, with a general failure to adhere to NPOV in the style of edits to Nathu La and Cho La incidents; the edit comments are typical Shulinjiang as well
  • More " !" ending to comments returns
174.97.23.238
  • Nuclear triad - continuing the edit war with User:ScrapIronIV started in 2015 using 162.74.52.147, and picked up immediately afterward by 50.207.191.155
  • Also shows up on the Type 094 submarine and JL-2 articles, which have also been sore points for Shulinjiang in the past
174.97.109.201
  • List of wars involving the People's Republic of China - shows up to re-add material by 50.207.191.155
  • Nathu La and Cho La incidents - Both 162.74.52.147 and 174.97.109.201 make edit comments claiming "Indian propaganda" is being removed, or removing additions by "Indian mouth pieces" and somesuch
  • More the " !" ending to comments returns
206.167.71.30
  • CAIC Z-10 - yet another edit removing mention of Kamov being the designer.
  • Edits to Sino-Soviet border conflict and Sino-Vietnamese War in the same fashion as (and then continued by) 67.175.16.150 as noted in the above entry
  • More " !" ending to comments returns

Which brings us to Jon Hydro Jets, which exhibits the same general behaviour as the above IPs, and even older socks. But what stands out to me is the edit comment for this edit:

901 is indeed twice larger than 903. It seems Revelovingpersonalitycoduct lack basic brain capacity to do the calculation !!

Shulinjiang always had trouble duplicating my user name; combining it with the ad hominem attack is pretty much a Shulinjiang trademark. Prior blocked socks which exhibit this include:

I'm not sure if this report is detailed enough. I'm hoping a cursory look through the contrib lists (particularly the edit comments) may be sufficient, but if necessary I can dig for more specific examples and try linking them to the behaviour of prior socks. - RovingPersonalityConstruct ( talk, contribs) 08:41, 2 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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


This guy revelovingpersonalityconstruct is falsely accusing me of being a sock. He simply failed to prove that.

1. Just because I use "!" does not mean anything, many users including admins use this. 2. He keeps editing warring on 093 page, in fact he was blocked twice for that. Last time he removed my sourced materials without any justifications. After closely watching him for several days, I discovered that he has a strong anti China agenda and he vandalized may pages for his own agenda. 3. There is no connection what so ever between me and the other links. The links he provided are a bunch of random IPs, I am an auto confirmed user. 4. At last, I never even edited nor even visited most of the pages he pointed out. 5. He has a strange and almost sock like name "Revelovingpersonalityconstruct". How many people will use all three words put in one as a name? Also, why would he have such a strange name like this?

My conclusion is that he has trouble proving any actual points and now is frustrated and try to get me blocked by falsely accusing me of being a sock so that he can then go back to those pages and revert them in his own personal favor ! Also, I suspect that he is a real sock. He has demonstrated this traits and he has been on many many Chinese military related pages, doing one thing and one thing only, that is to disrupt and vandal those pages by removing many sourced materials by saying things like: "This source is not credible". Source materials "This does not have source to back up". He however, NEVER ever finds any good sources and contribute the any of the pages he edits.

-- Jon Hydro Jets ( talk) 18:44, 2 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

26 September 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Similarities to previous socks:

- - RovingPersonalityConstruct ( talk, contribs) 07:17, 26 September 2020 (UTC) reply

- - RovingPersonalityConstruct ( talk, contribs) 23:37, 27 September 2020 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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


A laughable claim that I am a "100% puppet". I don't mind running a Check User, no matter how ridiculous and trollish is the accusation against myself.

To clarify the reason why I contacted Keith_D. First of all, I did not find Keith_D on the J-10 page. I found him on the WS-10 page. I saw his edits and noticed that he is an admin so I went on and asking him for help first. Keith was busy at the time and could not add me so I went on and notified Airplaneman, an admin I know since last year. I rarely edit on Wikipedia.

I was recently intriggued by the possible of Chinese arms sells to Iran which might include the J-10 fighter and that is where I came across the WS-10 engine and encountered "RovingPersonalityConstruct."

Sincerely, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.72.222.15 ( talk) 08:23, 27 September 2020 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

15 January 2021

Suspected sockpuppets

Recent interaction on Talk:Shenyang WS-10 seems illuminating. Same style of prose. Same WP:BURDEN and WP:NOTGETTINGIT problems to put everything in the best possible light ( WP:NPOV); this too is the usual WP:CRYSTALBALL or claiming intended future events have already happened.

Edit summaries have the same style with the usual reasons ("vandalism", "removal/removed/etc, sourced material".)

Lots of emphasis on adding "important" tidbits, and describing any sources found as "very reliable/credible". - RovingPersonalityConstruct ( talk, contribs) 08:10, 15 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Added a new IP. Seems to be rapidly hopping around that range right now.

Classic misspelling of my username as well: [27]. - RovingPersonalityConstruct ( talk, contribs) 16:22, 15 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Added 2601:152:4400:5580:4578:972:E657:D697.

Surreptitiously tinkering with data seems to be something the editor likes to do, especially if it means increasing values for China and decreasing them for India. Recent exampels with the above IPs:

  • [28] (replace previously verified values with unverified values)
  • [29] (at least referenced)
  • [30] (replaces one unverified number with another smaller unverified number)

At this point, may as well keep an eye on 2601:152:4400:5580:0:0:0:0/64 ( talk + · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser ( log)).

- RovingPersonalityConstruct ( talk, contribs) 09:06, 16 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

03 March 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

The above IP/IP range edit in similar areas to each other. Particularly, changing earnings value for the movies The Battle at Lake Changjin and The Battle at Lake Changjin II, with related edits on other pages like 2021 in film. There's also been editing on Circular Electron Positron Collider, and plagiarism by both on Pan Jianwei. Independent of anything else, I strongly suspect they are the same editor.

Notes for future investigations: the editor has really branched Chinese entertainment, education, and entertainment.

For Shulinjiang-like behaviour:

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/Shulinjiang/Archive&oldid=1079534735"
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Shulinjiang

Shulinjiang ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
02 July 2014
Suspected sockpuppets


I had previously added sourced information on these 2 articles CAIC_Z-10 and Kamov. the user reverted my change without any explanation. he later started adding heavily biased inline comments to the article along with providing what he claimed are 2 "official sources" which happen to be nothing but news reports which do not agree with the point of view he was trying to include. The user began to start making disruptive edits with ip's after logging out. i left warnings on all 3 talk pages (main account and ip's), with links to wiki guidelines to follow while making edits, despite which he continued to engage in disruptive edits. the user also began to engage in derogatory name calling. i have not asked for a check user as i feel that the behavior evidence alone should be sufficient proof according to WP:DUCK (the suspected user has decided to reply with yet another ip, which i have added to the list of check ip's)

behaviour evidence provided is as follows.

going by the edit summary on some of the diffs provided, you will be able to notice a similar pattern of name calling and Ad hominem attacks ( which he continues to do so in his reply to the accusation below). he used the same derogatory terms while logged on his account as well as the ip's. his behaviour on removing sourced content and adding biased text with a pro-china and anti-russia also leads me to believe that it is the same user sock puppeting. further behaviour traits that match across all the accounts include making the same argument for his change, claiming his sources are "official" (despite them being only news articles) while other "western" sources are all lies, and a general inability to preserve NPOV.

update : The user claims as his defense that he was moving around a lot. however Geolocation tool on the 3 ip's ( [1], [2], [3] ) used reveal that the ip's are located in different states in the U.S. with google maps showing atleast 4 hrs and 30 mins travel time without traffic. however the timestamps on the diffs do not prove the claim made by the user that he was moving around a lot, since they fall within this period not to mention the fact that he would have to stay in one location long enough for his edits. i understand that geolocation is not 100% accurate, however the distances involved are great enough that in this case it does not have to be. To me this seems like a clear cut case of the user using a proxy service to make disruptive edits and therefore a valid case of sock puppetry. i.e WP:DUCK — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pvpoodle ( talk • contribs) 10:42, 3 July 2014 (UTC) reply

update 2 : user has returned to revert changes by using ip's added two new ip's (198.135.125.122 & 64.134.160.102) and their diffs below. Same behavior of removing sourced information with good faith claims which reads like propaganda, making ad hominem attacks, and refusal to discuss on talk. under the ip 64.134.160.102 he claims that his name is jon and that he is the original contributer to the article z-10, however the edit history revels no one by that name who was one of the original editors of that page and he has gone on to continue to make personal attacks and threats on both mine and other users talk pages. please review this case and ban the quacking ducks soon. i have added these new diffs to the pre-existing ones below. also if possible could an administrator ask for a check user on this case? i failed to do so when the case was created and i am unsure if i can do it now. Pvpoodle ( talk) 14:59, 7 July 2014 (UTC) reply

Update 3: further behaviour evidence for ip's (198.135.125.122 & 64.134.160.102), the user 198.135.125.122 has been engaged in disruptive editing where he reverts all my edits that i have done on diffrent pages over the last few days. he mentions in this post in the z-10 article that he has the "permission" of other wikipedians for reverting my edits [[ Special:Diff/615963931 however it is the same user under the ip 64.134.160.102 under the pseudonym jon that has been going around asking for permision / help from other editors. as in this example User_talk:The_Last_Arietta#CAIC_Z-10. in his haste i believe he has muddled up his different identities and has left a behavioral clue for this spi. Pvpoodle ( talk) 16:31, 7 July 2014 (UTC) reply


these diffs are provided below.

diffs on page CAIC Z-10 - 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 , 9, 10 , 11 , 12 , 13

diffs on page Kamov 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

he has also engaged in making a disruptive edit on the talk page of an article ,i have been improving recently by leaving further derogatory comments.

diffs on page Talk:2001 Bangladeshi-Indian border skirmish 1 Pvpoodle ( talk) 21:59, 2 July 2014 (UTC) reply

diffs on user and article talk pages

1 2 3 4 5 6

acts of vandalism on multiple pages by reverting all my edits over the last few days.

1 , 2, 2 cont, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Pvpoodle ( talk) 16:05, 7 July 2014 (UTC) reply


Comments by other users

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

Debunking Pvpoodle's claim by Shulin Jiang

I am Shulinjiang. I noticed Pvpoodle's anti-China and trolling behavior on the internet. He spends hours and hours posting on Wikipedia just to convince someone with his own opinions.

He used three sources from western media with the exact contents to mock China's WZ-10 chopper, that the chopper is designed by Russia's Kamov, which means that the Chinese are stupid and brainless and not able to design on their own!! When I debunked his false claims with real Chinese sources, he undid my sourced revisions.

I debunked his claims by adding real Chinese sources for actual Chinese military products, and I have added different sources with very different content. I also pointed out the inconstancies within his sources where the Russian chief designer of Kamov first saying that Kamov designed the WZ-10, then later recanted by saying that China was responsible for all the critical component design and testing, and that Kamov only produce a few pictures with English titles to backup their claims. If WZ-10 was indeed designed by Kamov, a Russian company, why would they post their pictures with English descriptions? Also, Pvpoodle's source cited pictures created in late 2000's, yet the source claimed that Kamov designed it in early 1990's. These inconstancies alone were enough to debunk his sources. At last, the Russian chief design Sergey Mikheev cannot even tell the basic performance parameter of WZ-10 such as roll rate, climb rate, top speed, empty weight and loaded weight. Let alone its capabilities such as air to air combat, ground attacks and situation awareness.

The sources I posted are from Chinese official news media, and since WZ-10 was a Chinese attack helicopter, then using them will be more creditable. There are no inconstancies in my sources.

At last, Pvpoodle spends hours posting and editing on Wikipedia arguing with others and removing other people's sourced contents. Yet ironically when someone debunks him with more creditable source he call them vandalizes. He was specially interested in political stuffs such as India-Bangladesh border skirmish, and other countries military products.

At last, I do not have multiple accounts. I post on my lab top at different locations, some times at coffee shop, sometimes at my house. Unlike Pvpoodle, I have a life and spend most of my time working and hanging out with my friends and family.

I rest my case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.228.208.86 ( talk) 22:22, 2 July 2014 (UTC) reply

i have not engaged in "anti-china" trolling. i mentioned to you that there clearly exists a difference between designed by and developed by. the links you provided themselves are based on the ones i posted. with one of them even plagiarizing the same graphics. the links you provided also continue to say that kamov was the initial designer, while further development was carried out by china, which was already included in both my links and in the article text on the z-10 itself. therefore you debunked nothing but only continued to vandalise the article. your behavior of using multiple ip's and continuing to add your own personal opinions with no valid proof was in violation of WP:NPOV and Wp:ISNOT, and launching a futher ad-hominem attacks only solidifies my case by providing further behavior proof. Pvpoodle ( talk) 23:14, 2 July 2014 (UTC) reply


Debunk Pvpoodle's claim once again by Shulinjiang

In your claim you said that WZ-10 was designed by Russia's Kamov, this means that every major components such as engines, rotor blades, avionics, weapons systems, missiles, radars, and overall system integration must have been done by Kamov! But this was proven completely wrong, since the major contents of the page clearly described how the Chinese spend nearly 20 years to complete all the works such as weapon designs and testing, avionics, engines, rotor blades, flight testing, and radars systems. These content sections also clearly indicated which Chinese companies designed which part and component and they are all Chinese companies, there was one Canadian company supplied an engine option but the finial production variant of WZ-10 used Chinese designed and build WoZ-9 engine as well. This means that China designed and build 100% of the WZ-10!

However, your own source said the exact opposite!! In your own source, Russian chief designer Sergey Mikheev of Kamov cannot even tell the basic performance parameter of WZ-10 such as roll rate, climb rate, top speed, empty weight and loaded weight. Let alone its capabilities such as air to air combat, ground attacks and situation awareness. He later even said that Kamov had no involvement in the development of any major components at all, even minor component such as the auto cannon was designed and build by China. The only prove from your groundless source was some picture drawn by Kamov and captioned in English! Why would a Russian military company publish their supposedly "design" work in the early 1990's in English using 21 century drawing software?

The source I provided was written in Chinese, and you failed to grasp or basically understand any thing it says. They contents of the source is to cite the false western media with the groundless Russian picture and prove them wrong. In fact, the title of the source in Chinese is: "Russia's state media deny any technical involvement in the Chinese WZ-10 project, WZ-10 was completely designed and developed by China". Since your source is from the western media and it does not contain any solid proof that Kamov was actually involoved in the WZ-10 program, and all of your three sources contain the exact same materials. They can not be used to prove anything, and can not be cited as multiple sources!!

At last, and most important of all. All your sources contained inconstancies which Sergey Mikheev first allege that Kamov designed the WZ-10, later he changed his mind by openly stating that Kamov's involvement in the project never got beyond drawing just a simple pictures, this does not constitute design work! To make your source even more unreliable, Sergey Mikheev claimed that he can not tell any performance data of the WZ-10. If Kamov did design the aircraft, why can not the chief designer of Kamov unable to even state the basic performance of WZ-10? If Russia's Kamov had the audacity and boldness to openly lie, why can't they back up with more concrete proof such as showing their work in the prototypes?

In my finial conclusion, I debunked your claim once again.

Also, you are a lair! You are very anti-China. You spend hours and hours if not days on the internet just to spread rumors to mock other countries specially China and India's neighbors. Your editing history tell such pattern, as you have made over 500 edits in the last 3 days alone! All of them political and military materials such as China's military products, India's navy, Pakistan's media, India's border war with Bangladesh, and many others!

On the other hand, I had only made few editions in the past month and mainly to debunk Indian internet trolls like your. Unlike you, I have a decent job in USA and family, therefore do not have the time or need to troll like you!

At last, I do not use multiple IPs because I post on my laptop as I stated previously. I post the first debunk during my break time at work and this one at home. Unlike you, you are an Indian internet troll and spend most of your day right in front of your computer just to troll and vandalize Wikipedia pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.228.208.86 ( talk) 03:14, 3 July 2014 (UTC) reply

before continuing on your tirade please please condsider reading WP:NOR and WP:NONENG. nowhere was it mentioned that kamov worked on the prototypes, it was clearly stated that kamov designed but further development work was done in china. you are debunking nothing but only putting across your own biased view. in an age of multiple translation reliable tools, thinking that no one will question your editing just by adding foreign language links is not such a wise move, since your links themselves clearly do not support what you are saying. you should also perhaps consider reading WP:RS, just because the link is in Chinese does not mean that it is the most reliable source for a Chinese article. also you mention that i have more than 500 edits in last 3 days? going by Special:Contributions/Pvpoodle reveals closer to 50 and no where near 500. with the only articles that even mention the word china being in the 2 articles in question on this post. how did this form "anti-china" trolling? if you were making the edits from different locations on your laptop as you claim? how does it get logged out and logged back in automatically ? one would assume it would stay logged in as the laptop itself is being moved around according to your claim? the diffs provided how you log out and log back in within short periods of time (much too fast to be automatic log out) lending further weight to my allegation that you are a sock puppet. and considering how you'r geolocation keeps jumping around all over the united states, i very seriously doubt the claim that you are in the united states and are more likely just hiding behind a proxy or vpn service. Pvpoodle ( talk) 03:46, 3 July 2014 (UTC) reply


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
  • This is more a case of disruptive editing than sockpuppetry. I've blocked the account and the IPs for 48 hours each for disruptive editing after they were reported to another board. PhilKnight ( talk) 06:43, 3 July 2014 (UTC) reply
  • information Administrator note In light of this outbreak I think it has become clear that Shulinjiang is not here to improve the encyclopedia and is not interested in any constructive discussion. I have therefore indeffed the registered account. De728631 ( talk) 18:19, 7 July 2014 (UTC) reply
08 July 2014
Suspected sockpuppets

[4] Claims to be "Jon", same as a previous IP sock, also the insistence on "debunking" pvpoodle. Darkness Shines ( talk) 04:53, 8 July 2014 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

  •  Comment: yea its the same guy as earlier. i had hoped the indef block and page protect on that article would have deterred him, but it appears i was wrong. behavioral evidence for this "jon" being the same guy is provided above. and as further proof both of them seem to think that since i added the "evil fake western" references, they have to "debunk" me and prove me wrong. Pvpoodle ( talk) 05:19, 8 July 2014 (UTC) reply
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 IP blocked per WP:DUCK. De728631 ( talk) 15:50, 8 July 2014 (UTC) reply

23 July 2014
Suspected sockpuppets


same modus operandi of vandalizing my talk page and articles i have contributed on by launching personal attacks and making the same edits to the CAIC Z-10 page. also leaving a fake warning on my page saying im suspected of sockpuppetry. obvious duck is obvious. Pvpoodle ( talk) 01:10, 23 July 2014 (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

information Administrator note These IPs haven't been active for two days now. Given the fact that Shulinjiang seems also to be hopping around with his IPs I don't see a reason to block them right now. I have, however, semi-protected the CAIC Z-10 article and will also consider Pvpoodle's request for protecting his user talk page because of persistent harrassment and impersonating like this. De728631 ( talk) 19:29, 25 July 2014 (UTC) reply

30 August 2014
Suspected sockpuppets


same pattern of racially motivated abuse. attacks coming from an ip that was reported earlier but only temporarily blocked. requesting permanent ban of 134.228.208.86 since all the edit logs from that ip prove that this is a static ip that is only accessible by the sock master.

72.241.236.117 and 64.134.160.61 have already been blocked but are included here to maintain consistency to previously reported ip puppets, in the hope that it may result in a range block.


additionally i would like to point out again that the ip addresses used always seem to be from different state, while using geolocation, which leads me to suspect a proxy service is being used.


note: i have asked for checkuser since 134.228.208.86 appears to be a static ip and may reveal other sock puppets under shulinjiang's control.


diffs

1

more recent diffs under contributions of the other 2 vandalism only ip addresses.

Pvpoodle ( talk) 16:08, 30 August 2014 (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

information Administrator note I have blocked IP 134.228.208.86 for three months for obvious and repeated harrassment, but as it appears to be static I wouldn't mind an indefinite block either. De728631 ( talk) 17:14, 30 August 2014 (UTC) reply

  •  Clerk note: I'm declining the CU request as unnecessary and unusual in the case of IPs. Two of the IPs are the same. The third is part of a range that has been used by this master before, so it's nothing new. I'm not blocking the two IPs as they were blocked briefly by another admin and haven't edited since. However, anyone should feel free to block them for longer if they resurface. De728631, if you feel it's justified to block that one IP for longer than three months, that's within your discretion, but an indefinite block of an IP is against policy. I see no reason at this point to block longer than three months.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 15:02, 1 September 2014 (UTC) reply
19 December 2014
Suspected sockpuppets


Same duck-like pattern of removing the same bit of sourced content about Kamov's involvement, on the CAIC Z-10 page and wiki hounding and reverting my edits on few other articles.

Considering the long term activity from this IP, I believe that this is a Static IP under the sole control of the Puppet Master and therefore may warrant a long term block.

Diffs

Removal of sourced content from the CAIC Z-10 page. 1, 2, 3

Reverting my old edits on other pages. 1, 2


Pvpoodle ( talk) 07:39, 19 December 2014 (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 IP seems keen on reverting the same revisions as past accounts. Also, the user is performing the trademark edit summary with a space before the exclamation point. I've blocked the IP for a week. Mike V • Talk 19:48, 19 December 2014 (UTC) reply


20 December 2014
Suspected sockpuppets


Same pattern of undoing revisions on articles. Requesting a temporary ban based on the fact that the IP was used over a period of days, suggesting that it is NOT a Dynamic IP.

diffs

1, 2, 3, 4, 5

pretty much all edits made by this account are the same. Pvpoodle ( talk) 08:57, 20 December 2014 (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 December 2014
Suspected sockpuppets


persistent vandalism, personal attacks and sock puppetry. Same pattern of artificially inflating figures relating to the Chinese military without providing any proof , removal of any sourced information that disagrees with his personal whims and fantasies , and the constant stream of abuse directed at anyone who disagrees.

diffs 1, 2, 3, 4

all of the IP's edits are similar acts of vandalism or personal attacks. As the IP is being used over several days requesting a block. Pvpoodle ( talk) 06:43, 30 December 2014 (UTC) reply


Copied from duplicate case, referring to 64.134.234.63:

same pattern of reverting my edits and grossly insulting racist personal attacks. not even going to bother with diffs as all edits made by ip are similar. also reported at WP:AIV Pvpoodle ( talk) 03:56, 31 December 2014 (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

information Administrator note IP was blocked for 24 hrs by User:Edgar181. -- Diannaa ( talk) 00:01, 31 December 2014 (UTC) reply

 Completed 64.134.234.63 blocked by Mike V for 24 hours for vandalism. At this point I don't see a need to extend the block. Pvpoodle do be sure to report directly to AIV when you see IPs make edits like this. I want to question why we would even bother opening another SPI, but I suppose there's value in collecting behaviorial evidence over time. Closing — MusikAnimal talk 06:22, 31 December 2014 (UTC) reply


31 December 2014
Suspected sockpuppets


Same pattern of repeated attempts to add his own point of view to the CAIC Z-10 and Kamov article. Pattern continues despite other user's attempts to correct this. Similar pattern of editing only China military specific articles. And addition of unsourced material and removal of sourced content to support and promote his own sino-centric pov.

Although this account does not engage in his trademark racist abuse and personal attacks, i believe this is due to him not wanting another one of his accounts banned when he has multiple disposable IP to carry out his personal attacks.

I believe he has brought out this account since the pages have been semi protected.

Diffs.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

P.S. apologies for multiple cases being opened in a short duration, however this is only due to a recent spurt of activity from the sock master and to document long term pattern of sock puppetry. Pvpoodle ( talk) 10:46, 31 December 2014 (UTC) reply


A few more recent Diffs. 1, 2. Pvpoodle ( talk) 12:14, 1 January 2015 (UTC) reply
Comments by other users

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

  • Recently 107.204.38.215 ( talk · contribs) was blocked 24 hours by User:Edgar181. I'm guessing this might have been due to a complaint at AIV. The same IP appears above in this SPI, and was also reported at WP:AN3. This IP has the honor of having a number of his edits oversighted. Though I can't tell what the nature of those remarks was, it is surprising that we wouldn't take some action against someone who makes oversightable remarks. See also the 3RR report just mentioned where it is stated that the IP engages in 'incessant racially motivated personal remarks which have been going on for the last six months' ( User:Pvpoodle). I suggest that these reports add up to a rationale for a two-month block of this IP. EdJohnston ( talk) 02:26, 1 January 2015 (UTC) reply
He is using a proxy/vpn service for block evasion. Blocking individual IPs will not have the desired effect as he simply changes his ip. Someone has to identify which proxy/vpn service he is using (if at all) and block that range of IPs.
The reason i believe he is using a proxy service is due to the fact that his geolocation seems to be jumping all around the continental United States.
His latest ip 64.134.101.117 used on 31 Dec resolves to the city of Chantilly, Virginia ( 1)
The previous IP mentioned here 107.204.38.215 blocked on 30 Dec resolves to Fontana, California ( 2)
Another IP 198.135.125.28 blocked on 25 Dec resolves to Chicago, IL ( 3)
Another IP 107.139.240.12 also blocked on 25 Dec resolves to Riga, Michigan ( 4)
4 different IPs from 4 different states, all in the span of less than a 10 days. Considering each IP was used over several days, i find it hard to believe that he is a traveling salesman with a penchant for racial abuse, unless all he does is live out of the airport lounge. The picture only gets clearer the more you look into his other IPs documented in the archives. I am led to believe that geolocation is not an exact science and the results can be off by upto a couple of hundred miles, however the massive leaps in location, from the west coast to the east coast and everywhere in between provides damming evidence to the use of a proxy. I believe an In depth Investigation may be required to identify and block him. Pvpoodle ( talk) 09:14, 1 January 2015 (UTC) reply
  • I agree that there does not seem to be enough edits made by Shulinjiang to determine a pattern, however the edits made around the vicinity of the first week of June by Shulinjiang and his IPs and also later by his other IPs all have the same bone of contention which is the involvement of Kamov in the design. Tamlinwah has been repeatedly changing this ( tamlinwah's edits on z-10) which is what led me to suspect him. When not engaging in attacks, Shulinjiang's other IPs also seem to be editing other articles which are exclusively related to the Chinese military / its military industrial complex. All of these edits are also to either add unsourced and inflated facts and figures or to remove sourced information which may make be potentially embarrassing since it does not toe the official party line. Tamlinwah's edits also seem to be of a similar nature. While this may not be damming proof by itself, i was hoping a CU would be able to correlate the range of IPs being used. In Hindsight, given that he is almost certainly using a proxy, this might not be easy to achieve unless he slipped up somewhere and made a mistake. The other person with familiarity on this case was DarknessShines who has since been blocked himself. Pvpoodle ( talk) 08:28, 2 January 2015 (UTC) reply
  • [[ I believe that Tamlinwah created the Shulinjiang account on account of needing a disposable account to engage in the risky behavior of contesting edits likely to lead to an edit war. I think this post by him on my talk page hints at what his plan was. By using his other named account(s) and ip's each posturing with a different persona, the person(s) maintaining the article would have been banned for violating 3RR or for edit warring, and he could roll in and 'restore' the article. Unfortunately for him, his plan seems to have backfired when his disposable shulinjiang account got a temp banned for disruptive editing, which caused him to lose his temper and begin his campaign of hate speech which in turn caused the only known named account at the time to be perma banned for sockpuppeting. I understand that my theory is completely circumstantial, and that i was relying on having a CU correlate the IP data. I did not realize that this was not routinely done. And so if you must, please go ahead and close the case, but I intend to keep an eye out for any suspicious activity from the suspected sock master tamlinwah and I hope you do too. Pvpoodle ( talk) 08:12, 5 January 2015 (UTC) reply
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 Clerk note: There is no way to do a CU on the named account. The only named account to have been blocked is the master, and their data is too old. If the two accounts are related, then Tamlinwah would be the master as their account is significantly older than the current master and with far many more edits (although still only 428). There is also very little to compare between the two as the master made only a handful of edits on one day. Based on the little stylistic evidence we have between the two, they are quite different, and I'm not even taking into account the issue of attacks. Tamlinwah's edits are almost all marked minor; only one of the master's was. Very few of Tamlinwah's edits provide an edit summary. The master's few edits did. However, I did note that Tamlinwah did not edit on the one day that the master did, but Tamlinwah did not edit every day. The central question I have is why would Tamlinwah have created a sock account on July 2, 2014? Was there some problem at that time that might have triggered it? They've never been blocked. I'm leaving this open in case there are additional comments from anyone about what to do with this and why, including Pvpoodle, who has suffered the most, and EdJohnston.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 18:40, 1 January 2015 (UTC) reply

  • Pvpoodle, your comments do not address the central issue, whether Tamlinwah and Shulinjiang are the same person, and if so, why did Tamlinwah create the Shulinjiang account in early July? You keep connecting Shulinjiang and "his" IPs because that's been the status quo for some time now, but if I were to find that the two named accounts are the same individual, then we have to shift our thinking to Tamlinwah's IPs, etc. And unless a CU is willing to make an exception, we don't correlate named accounts to IPs, so that isn't an option.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 17:05, 2 January 2015 (UTC) reply

24 February 2015

Suspected sockpuppets


Personal attacks, Racially motivated abuse and a constant stream of drivel, all hallmarks of shulinjiang. Besides this IP was previously reported and had a short term block imposed back in December. Since the IP is being reused again, I am requesting a long term block.

As there have not been any intervening edits which seems to imply the IP is solely under the control of the sockmaster, i feel a long term block is justified.

I am not listing the diffs here. A quick look at the user contributions page will be revolting enough. Pvpoodle ( talk) 06:49, 24 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Added one more ip 199.116.175.21which has been carrying out attacks, which was also previously reported as a shulinjiang sock and blocked with a short term block. the first IP 107.139.240.12 has been blocked for 3 months, but considering that the time frame between the last attack which occurred in December and the latest attack now, i believe both IP's qualify for a significantly longer term block. Pvpoodle ( talk) 03:57, 26 February 2015 (UTC) reply


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

12 August 2015

Suspected sockpuppets


I will try to make the evidence as brief as possible so the hard working administrators can solve this problem as soon as possible. This is a 1+ year dispute that started on this page. The WZ-10 article is rarely edited so the start of Shulinjiang's indefinite ban is straightforward with him harassing a strong advocate of neutrality over the subject.

The above eight IP addresses show behavior that is akin to Shulinjiang and each other. Something I should note is that these are not all the IP addresses, just the ones I recall encountering. I believe that 8 IPs sharing certain unique characteristics is good enough for evidence. Behavioral examples include but are not limited to:

1) Explicit racism to Indians

  • Example from IP 2.
  • Example from IP 4
  • It's important to note that IP 4 and IP 6 have made exact remarks by vandalizing the user and talk page of User:Pvpoodle. However, due to what was written, the edit summaries were removed by an admin and the page was protected for a lengthy time.
  • The sock master does not have many contributions to his name. However, one of them refers to User:Pvpoodle as an "Indian internet troll". The accusations of his opposition being "trolls" are one of the most common insults among these socks.

2) Accusing others of trolling

  • Example by IP 3
  • IP 4 appears to provide the most damning evidence that it is Shulinjiang: 1 2 3 The key term is "Indian Internet troll".

3) Explicit racism to Jews (particularly me)

  • Humiliating examples demonstrated by IP 3: 1 2
  • Another one by IP 6. This IP is currently serving a year long ban and some of his disgusting edit summaries have been thankfully removed.

4) Spamming the talk pages of administrators with subjects attempting to invoke bans on users he is edit warring with ("Please stop Al Khazar" or "Please stop RovingConstructorPersonality"). This habit is somewhat new and is shared with 3 of the IP addresses

  • Examples from IP 1: 1 2 3
  • Example from IP 3: Although I am aware that Thomas.W is not an admin, I just wanted to give more evidence for this behaviour of baiting other users and running towards the admins (or users he thinks are admins) to get his opposition blocked.
  • Example from IP 6
  • Examples from IP 8: 1 2

5) An unhealthy obsession with the WZ-10 article and virtually every other Chinese military weapon article.

  • The primary focus is on the designer of the helicopter. A surge of source in 2013 indicated Russian Kamov. Some Chinese nationalists like Shulinjiang didn't like it and devoted a year long struggle to remove it. I prefer not to show any diffs since you can just look at about half of the IPs trying to remove/replace one specific detail; the designer.

In a short summary:

  • IP 2, 4, and 6 made racist comments to Indians
  • IP 3, 4, and others made accusations of trolling. IP 4 used a term Shulinjiang has used before.
  • IP 3 and 6 made anti-Semitic comments directed towards me on my own talk and user page.
  • IP 1, 3, 6, and 8 spam admins' pages.
  • All of them but IP 2 vandalize the WZ-10 article. However, IP 2 made racist comments.

This struggle by the sock master has been going on for more than a year. His fanaticism is limitless and I don't believe that any block on the sock puppets will be the right solution. I believe that the best solution is a permanent protection from IP addresses distributed on the article that he disruptively edits the most. I'd like to thank any admin who is reviewing in advance. Khazar ( talk) 00:49, 12 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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


I am not a sock-pocket, and don't know who shulinjiang is. I am just a user whom comment while working at my company. That is why it generates different IPs.

-- 199.116.175.27 ( talk) 12:08, 17 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Judging by the insults you provided in this edit of January 28th using this exact IP address, that is highly unlikely. Mocking users in that manner is a characteristic shared by the majority of the IP addresses I've reported. Khazar ( talk) 23:13, 17 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

17 December 2015

Suspected sockpuppets


Despite consensus on talk page, a new IP [5] jumped to the article for edit warring, and claiming Indian sources to be biased, [6] that was also done by Greentea555. [7] I checked the block log and found that user was blocked as sock before, but I have found more similarities, it is that Shulinjiang [8] mentioned Sino-Indian War (1962) for justifying his edits, which is also done by Greentea555. [9] After Greentea555 got his version protected on Cho La incident, it was this IP 162.74.52.147, who went to promote new results edits on other articles. [10] [11] Capitals00 ( talk) 06:45, 17 December 2015 (UTC) reply

Read this latest edit, [12] of IP, "Restore back to accurate source. Remove Indian propaganda and mouth piece source", now reminds of Greentea555's "Other more accurate source that is not Indian propaganda." [13] WP:DUCK. Capitals00 ( talk) 13:54, 17 December 2015 (UTC) reply
IP's copypasting and canvassing [14] [15] is also similar to Greentea555. [16] [17] Capitals00 ( talk) 15:56, 17 December 2015 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

He falsely accuse me of being a sock of shulinjiang whom I do not know of.

Admin, please do not listen to him. I am not a sock, I got blocked for unjust reason and I do not know whom shulinjiang is. Capitals00 however, is a proven sock. Just go take a look at his block log. He has the exact same name! He has at least 6 accounts dedicated for vandalizing trolling and spreading pro Indian propaganda. Here are some of his other socks: User:D4iNa4, User:OwnDealers, User:Littleboygenius, User:Chipperdude15, User:D4iNa4, and urser:122.170.132.127

Here is his block log: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Special:Log/block&page=User%3ACapitals00

My guess is that he got block many time back in 2013 with this account user:Capitals00, and recently his main account got blocked for a long period of time and that he is back using this one again.

Look at who is the real sock here.

-- 162.74.52.147 ( talk) 22:26, 17 December 2015 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

"he source provided by Capitals00 and other Indians are from Hindustan news and other Indian mouth piece" is nowhere close to being a racial issue. Don't cloud the waters with obviously bad accusations. Nyttend ( talk) 15:00, 17 December 2015 (UTC) reply

02 January 2017

Suspected sockpuppets


Connecting the current account and IP takes a bit of digging through the IPs used since the last block, but it can be tracked due to the similar behaviour; edit comments ("adding source", ending with space and exclamation marks), talk post style, failure to adhere to WP:NPOV, ad hominem attacks on other editors (like accusations of vandalism), etc..

The last IP blocked was 162.74.52.147 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki) at the end of 2015. using this account, Shulinjiang made noticeable edits to CAIC Z-10, List of wars involving the People's Republic of China, Nathu La and Cho La incidents and Nuclear triad. Judging from the reaction of other edits, these were typically regarded as poor edits. In the following year, they returned to these articles using various IPs.

From a cursory investigation, I believe the following IPs have been used by Shulinjiang during 2015:

Shulinjiang has hopped away from most of these IPsm but they're used below to show the editor's habits through 2016.

50.207.191.155
  • CAIC Z-10 - typical Shulinjiang edit removing mention of Kamov being the designer.
  • List of wars involving the People's Republic of China
  • Nuclear triad - continuing the edit war with User:ScrapIronIV started in 2015 using 162.74.52.147, typical edit comments accusing others of being trolls and vandals
67.175.16.150
  • Confirmed to be Jon Hydro Jets during the time of editing [18]
  • Takes over editing Sino-Soviet border conflict, Sino-Vietnamese War from 206.167.71.30, with a general failure to adhere to NPOV in the style of edits to Nathu La and Cho La incidents; the edit comments are typical Shulinjiang as well
  • More " !" ending to comments returns
174.97.23.238
  • Nuclear triad - continuing the edit war with User:ScrapIronIV started in 2015 using 162.74.52.147, and picked up immediately afterward by 50.207.191.155
  • Also shows up on the Type 094 submarine and JL-2 articles, which have also been sore points for Shulinjiang in the past
174.97.109.201
  • List of wars involving the People's Republic of China - shows up to re-add material by 50.207.191.155
  • Nathu La and Cho La incidents - Both 162.74.52.147 and 174.97.109.201 make edit comments claiming "Indian propaganda" is being removed, or removing additions by "Indian mouth pieces" and somesuch
  • More the " !" ending to comments returns
206.167.71.30
  • CAIC Z-10 - yet another edit removing mention of Kamov being the designer.
  • Edits to Sino-Soviet border conflict and Sino-Vietnamese War in the same fashion as (and then continued by) 67.175.16.150 as noted in the above entry
  • More " !" ending to comments returns

Which brings us to Jon Hydro Jets, which exhibits the same general behaviour as the above IPs, and even older socks. But what stands out to me is the edit comment for this edit:

901 is indeed twice larger than 903. It seems Revelovingpersonalitycoduct lack basic brain capacity to do the calculation !!

Shulinjiang always had trouble duplicating my user name; combining it with the ad hominem attack is pretty much a Shulinjiang trademark. Prior blocked socks which exhibit this include:

I'm not sure if this report is detailed enough. I'm hoping a cursory look through the contrib lists (particularly the edit comments) may be sufficient, but if necessary I can dig for more specific examples and try linking them to the behaviour of prior socks. - RovingPersonalityConstruct ( talk, contribs) 08:41, 2 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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


This guy revelovingpersonalityconstruct is falsely accusing me of being a sock. He simply failed to prove that.

1. Just because I use "!" does not mean anything, many users including admins use this. 2. He keeps editing warring on 093 page, in fact he was blocked twice for that. Last time he removed my sourced materials without any justifications. After closely watching him for several days, I discovered that he has a strong anti China agenda and he vandalized may pages for his own agenda. 3. There is no connection what so ever between me and the other links. The links he provided are a bunch of random IPs, I am an auto confirmed user. 4. At last, I never even edited nor even visited most of the pages he pointed out. 5. He has a strange and almost sock like name "Revelovingpersonalityconstruct". How many people will use all three words put in one as a name? Also, why would he have such a strange name like this?

My conclusion is that he has trouble proving any actual points and now is frustrated and try to get me blocked by falsely accusing me of being a sock so that he can then go back to those pages and revert them in his own personal favor ! Also, I suspect that he is a real sock. He has demonstrated this traits and he has been on many many Chinese military related pages, doing one thing and one thing only, that is to disrupt and vandal those pages by removing many sourced materials by saying things like: "This source is not credible". Source materials "This does not have source to back up". He however, NEVER ever finds any good sources and contribute the any of the pages he edits.

-- Jon Hydro Jets ( talk) 18:44, 2 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

26 September 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Similarities to previous socks:

- - RovingPersonalityConstruct ( talk, contribs) 07:17, 26 September 2020 (UTC) reply

- - RovingPersonalityConstruct ( talk, contribs) 23:37, 27 September 2020 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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


A laughable claim that I am a "100% puppet". I don't mind running a Check User, no matter how ridiculous and trollish is the accusation against myself.

To clarify the reason why I contacted Keith_D. First of all, I did not find Keith_D on the J-10 page. I found him on the WS-10 page. I saw his edits and noticed that he is an admin so I went on and asking him for help first. Keith was busy at the time and could not add me so I went on and notified Airplaneman, an admin I know since last year. I rarely edit on Wikipedia.

I was recently intriggued by the possible of Chinese arms sells to Iran which might include the J-10 fighter and that is where I came across the WS-10 engine and encountered "RovingPersonalityConstruct."

Sincerely, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.72.222.15 ( talk) 08:23, 27 September 2020 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

15 January 2021

Suspected sockpuppets

Recent interaction on Talk:Shenyang WS-10 seems illuminating. Same style of prose. Same WP:BURDEN and WP:NOTGETTINGIT problems to put everything in the best possible light ( WP:NPOV); this too is the usual WP:CRYSTALBALL or claiming intended future events have already happened.

Edit summaries have the same style with the usual reasons ("vandalism", "removal/removed/etc, sourced material".)

Lots of emphasis on adding "important" tidbits, and describing any sources found as "very reliable/credible". - RovingPersonalityConstruct ( talk, contribs) 08:10, 15 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Added a new IP. Seems to be rapidly hopping around that range right now.

Classic misspelling of my username as well: [27]. - RovingPersonalityConstruct ( talk, contribs) 16:22, 15 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Added 2601:152:4400:5580:4578:972:E657:D697.

Surreptitiously tinkering with data seems to be something the editor likes to do, especially if it means increasing values for China and decreasing them for India. Recent exampels with the above IPs:

  • [28] (replace previously verified values with unverified values)
  • [29] (at least referenced)
  • [30] (replaces one unverified number with another smaller unverified number)

At this point, may as well keep an eye on 2601:152:4400:5580:0:0:0:0/64 ( talk + · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser ( log)).

- RovingPersonalityConstruct ( talk, contribs) 09:06, 16 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

03 March 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

The above IP/IP range edit in similar areas to each other. Particularly, changing earnings value for the movies The Battle at Lake Changjin and The Battle at Lake Changjin II, with related edits on other pages like 2021 in film. There's also been editing on Circular Electron Positron Collider, and plagiarism by both on Pan Jianwei. Independent of anything else, I strongly suspect they are the same editor.

Notes for future investigations: the editor has really branched Chinese entertainment, education, and entertainment.

For Shulinjiang-like behaviour:

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/Shulinjiang/Archive&oldid=1079534735"

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook




Top Of Page

Home • Search • Translate

© CSE