Login
Login

Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Rohit tripathi60

{{SSPa}}

=[[User:Rohit tripathi60]]=

;Suspected sockpuppeteer

{{user5|1=Rohit tripathi60}}

;Suspected sockpuppets

{{user5|1=Raghvendra60}}

;Report submission by

Technobadger (talk) 08:12, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

;Evidence

This user stated that he is an employee of Nagarro Inc, in [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Rohit_tripathi60&diff=prev&oldid=130063088 this edit], which he then subsequently [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Rohit_tripathi60&diff=184961218&oldid=130063088 removed]. Both accounts appear to refer to a single person, Rohit Raghvendra Tripathi, who clearly identifies himself as a Nagarro employee [http://www.propeller.com/member/rohit_tripathi60/ here] (using the same ID as his first WP account), as well as [http://nagarro.blogspot.com/ here], [http://bookmarks.oneindia.in/2395/showthread.html here] and [http://www.google.com/search?q=rohit+raghvendra+tripathi elsewhere].

Following the deletion of info about his employer from his talk page, he counters a prod for his companies product in [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Projistics&diff=next&oldid=186784744 this edit], and claims to be a user of Projistics with no conflict of interest. On the same day he creates the User:Raghvendra60 account.

Using this new account, he then [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Projistics&diff=186781197&oldid=185603816 removes the prod] from the article where the COI lies (and which has been deleted 3 times as spam).

He then immediately [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Projistics&diff=next&oldid=186781197 logs back in under his old account], and resumes editing.

Also note numerous entries in COI and spam reports.

::

style="border:black solid 1px;background-color:#ffd8d8" width="80%"

|

;Comments

There is clearly suspicious behavior. However, the removal of prod is permitted by anyone. It does not have to be a different user. Actions that require a different user can manipulated by use of socks but this isn't such action. Archtransit (talk) 18:47, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

;Conclusions

SSP investigations are time consuming and backlogged. A case like this could be adjudicated simply based on Wikipedia rules that do not require guessing and uncertainty as sock investigations require. Suggest polite discussion with user(s) about the use of reliable sources WP:RS and notability WP:NN. If a prod is deleted, an AFD can be filed. If you file an AFD, carefully consider it first. Don't file one in retaliation for a deletion of a prod. Once an AFD is filed, the decision should be a discussion, not a vote. Therefore, the use of socks for voting is not an effective strategy. A more effective strategy to keep the article would be to improve it so notability is clear. Archtransit (talk) 18:47, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

;Case to be re-opened, reviewed and re-closed. Archtransit has been desysopped as an sockmaster, with an occasional sideline in unblocking socks, himself.

----