Knowledge (XXG):Sockpuppet investigations/JournalmanManila/Archive

1405:) as i learned my mistakes i appologized to them and never engage in a argument plus i have no idea of why these users had been blocked and my mistake was also same to what have they done? but i admit on what i done so i learned it as i repeat. As i read and know the policies , i carefully check the references i doing some checks on articles (specialy in Philippine-related) are doubtful if i found the statments are legit i just put a references on it of course based on academic works (you can check it up) and suddenly i encountered a sub sections to indonesia and thailand of some articles here in wikipedia with lack of references and citation just a statements so i put a unreferenced-tag (Maintenance tags) on to it (as wikipedeia demands a legal source on any statements) then on this day 8/21/17 i found my self being called up to an SPI investigation, honestly all what i said is the only thing ive done, Maybe this spi are only a 4308:

the time since this N0n3up's removing a source statements which i always keeping back, "he is also the one who started the SPI case and poke me up here! so they have connection and he calling the Philippine sections as " vandalism ". even you turn this matter upside down, Gunkarta i really never did a problematic editing here like what you all insists. maybe it was seems problematic on your side because your opinions where challenged by the Sources. but nothing personal just because of "Grammar issues" you can poke my name up here, since i never did a disruptive editing, vandalism, "Pseudo History insistance" or Undue NPOV pushing etc. which is what we called "fairytales" , just an Academically Cited Source per Sentences. (

3774:'s observations regarding user:Skyrim9 , user:Reign05, and user:Pricedelink. The edit pattern and telltale sentence construction provide strong evidence that they are likely sockpuppets. (I am less sure about the other account mentioned - user:Keroscene777, whose behavior is somewhat similar to JournalManManila's, but whose grammar seems to be somewhat better than the other accounts. I also concur that a more permanent solution is needed to prevent JournalManManila from creating new sockpuppets. Perhaps more expereinced editors can advise? JournalManManila's POV-pushing edits really are extremely disruptive. - 4280:. While discarding Biag ni Lam-ang and Singkil/Daragen that is not related to Ramayana at all, which was much added by JournalmanManila's sockpuppets, and later retrieved by Skyrim9. By that, time status quo on Ramayana reached, but the strong suspicion that Skyrim9 is one of many sockpuppets of JournalmanManila was not yet being satisfiedly addressed yet. I would like to use this opportunity for us to address this highly possible (yet another) sockpuppet infringement done by JournalmanManila. Thank you. 4193:

not a reason to poke me up here just because of "identical factor" well i am certainly not for undue pov or pushing non academic sourcing like what you trying to tell, These statements have a cited source i make sure of it , As if UP and JR Fransico are making fairytale. But for now i can prove it, because it was from UP and the root of this issue was the removal and restoration of Philippine section in Ramayana which is an indian litrature with an influence in southeast Asia.

3923:], or even message me about it . i guess these complainants are refusing to deal with it fairly by examining sentences per cited references mentioned in Philippine part, as what i did before i put it there. Admins can check these references, i hope they can examine this carefully As “ they just only forced to deal it fairy” and accusing a member with good intentions, "i will never make an undue POV pushing here because i believe in references must be cited per sentences". ( 4014:

reason for the removal since it was supported by a book references, plus give them the proof "i never receive any reply from them, not even a single period on the talk pages "specially from this N0n3up . i think it was reasonable to be get rants when someone here keeps removing a sections supported by academic source isn't? i told to check it if it was a "pseudo history pushing" or WP Undue. this is seems fishy my question was "Whats wrong with you?" (

802: 5859: 2813: 2380:, according to evidences as presented by N0n3up. My suspicion is those newly created account seems to support, rescue, and retrieve the reverted edits of his previous sockpuppets. If proven sockpuppet positive (as I strongly suspect), we are dealing with persistent chronic sockpuppet whom did not learn his lesson and shows no remorse. An ultimate solution is needed to avoid disruptive editings by these sockpuppets. — 1499: 5157: 4512: 2867: 1586: 1494: 5891: 4410:

when non3up removed ph section because it was a vandalism or disruptive edits, where are you? You just let him and i keep on restoring a source statements because it was reasonable. And then after i revert non3ups doing you and your friends file and spi case and poke me up here? And you keep insisting of that thing on me so i smell something's fishy on you (

5868: 4479: 3835:. So i do not understand why these complainants are bring this matter up here, and why they are trying to push the removal of the Philippine sections in what so they called "clean up", that even if the statements / sentences there have a supporting references resulting to series of reverts and also cause of my rants on the talkpage. 4494:

blocked socks edited the same articles. And you need comparison diffs for every suspected puppet. Saying "and the list goes on" won't work. Also, a "vague" suspicion about a user (Shaded0) is not a reasonable basis for accusing that person of socking. Finally, two users - Keroscene777 and Shaded0 - are older than the master.--

2465: 4429:, and eventually I believe Philippines Maharadya Lawana might be recognized as a version of Ramayana if provided with sufficient credible references. However, I think it is necessary to sufficiently address the sockpuppet suspicion which involved you. And here you are again, keep sliding fast forward to 19 December 2017 4264:(the latest JournalmanManila sockpuppets) being banned in 28 August 2017. And s/he seems to pick the baton where JournalmanManila and his many sockpuppets left, to continue the flame I think which is suspiciously another sockpuppets of JournalmanManila. Soon we involved in edit disagreement, and he almost breaking 734:

how irrelevant it might be. So I fixed and cleaned up the article. Then again Cleaner880 come to rescue and retrieved Jasper0070's , and again . The similar image push also appeared in Thai wikipedia and this , the pattern is same, Jasper0070 image push is defended and retrieved by Cleaner880. Also appeared in

4409:

i am not out of the topic , i encountered your friend N0n3up because he reverting a sourced sections, which is the reason why i am here. wheather you like it or not that was part of it . Since its your complain right? Now, why do you insist that i am doing something you accuse ? At that time

4307:

At the first place i never did those disruptive editing what so ever , and i have a "suspicion" because, "why you three are so eagerly insisting of Those things which i never did ?" and poke me up on spi. Note: those things where the start of this matter, and i can't even find a lead aside from

4225:

and his sockpuppets which known for his/her insistence on creating a false historic narration of "strong Indic/Dharmic/Hind-Buddhist civilization in the Philippines," which kind of false and misleading due to lack of evidences and sources. Jasper0070, one of JournalmanManila's puppet, add Philippines

1429:

biting new comer and accuse me with the thing I never been encounter are not good if there was a problem you can revert it and tell what mistake was (and as I apologized ) but why you need to bring me up here and charge me of heavy accusations ? Its clear that you want my reputation in short this is

1409:

motive of gunkarta because hes the only one to first gave me a bite motive , as i said aside to that mistakes i do not have done wrong / or abused my account as a firstimer , i must learn which is valid sources i ain't ignorant of policies here as i read the guidelines. So its up to admins to decide,

742:

image pushing defended and retrieved by 112.198.242.130 In my talkpage 112.198.242.130, 112.198.246.17, 112.198.242.124, and Cleaner880 left messages protesting my edits and even accusing that there is a soo called "Indonesian hostilities against Philippines" . All of this peculiar actions has made

733:

by this edit and made a multiple image format . I deemed the addition as out of place; among photographs of real crowns, there appear an unknown low quality painting of a Philippines women wearing a crown that seems to be nothing but a peacockery; to add anything Philippines in some articles despite

4196:

By the way ,Why are you alternativity and N0n3up are insisting of something i never did before in the first place? That thing supposed to be a content dispute i can't find a lead for why i poked up here aside from i reverted no3ups removal of sourced statements you said i must address it to

2598:

edit and describes as if there was a glorious, strong, rich, and sophisticated Dharmic culture existed in the Philippines, just based on the discovery of a few artifact and scarce historical sources. To date, there is no Hindu-Buddhist temples ever discovered in the Philippines, which doubt the said

1393:

and chopsticks , i just found it up on a site (which i do not remembered because im so busy in real life) But according to wikipedia, Sources must be valid and in academic standards, (as blog sites are NOT allowed in wikipedia as a references) so i must wrong in choosing a site with wrong sources "I

4066:

or even of the evidence you say is presented in the sources themselves. Further, you have repeatedly misrepresented the content of sources by asserting (here and on the Ramayana template) that the Darangen and Biag ni Lam-Ang are "versions" of the Ramayana. Most damningly, you consistently demean

1388:

Honestly, do not understand why i have been called out here for SPI as i had been accused of a sock of these various accounts? Hey , let me tell you this is my only account and i do not know who are these users, and i do not have even an idea what they done here in short i just new comers but they

1263:

seems to the continuation of what JournalmanManila's will do to the article. JournalmanManila shows no respect to copyrights (that is why he was blocked in the first place). He also often add false refs, the references that after careful examination, contains nothing to supports his claims/edits. I

4192:

well i know my self that i never did a type of undue nvov here and even pushing a "pseudo history " or what so ever which is a fairy tale like it can be Prove , even you turn it upside down, i never did that disruptive editing or vandalism. okay i have a grammar issue sometimes, but it was

4013:

for what reason i will put a statements without a valid references? this is an encyclopedia , the dispute over Ramayana are the reason i know for poking my name up here as N0n3uP tries to remove Philippine sections many times but i keep reverting on what he did, and when i ask them for what valid

4493:

In the beginning of your presentation, you have the right idea, including diffs of a suspected puppet and a comparison diff of the master or a sock. However, you need to elaborate on why the pairs of diffs are similar. It's not obvious, and, otherwise, all you have is that the suspected socks and

4217:

First of all, let me remind us that this is about sockpuppet investigation, not about edit dispute on valid references of Ramayana (in this case I have to agree that Maharadya Lawana was influenced or highly localized version of Ramayana). Let me provides this case with chronological background.

3747:

is actually the typical behavior of JournalmanManila. I would like to emphasize that this is recurrent problems, and shares N0n3up's frustration that this user:JournalmanManila has made problematic edits, disrupted wikipedia articles multiple times, and has done some unredeemable transgression by

2561:

Yes this is easy to deny by them , but if you critically think of it based on their activity patterns and movement i suspected that this IP's are link on their behaviors and interests , This is my defense here this is all about "Removing of a Legally Sourced materials based on their Conflict of

3974:. So far s/he has demonstrated good manners in nondisruptive arguments, has good grammar, respects the wikipedia consensus process, and doesn't overstate/draw undue conclusions from what's written in sources. These to me seem to be the main hallmarks of JournalManManila's profile. I don't know 2532:

Further more , as i observed this series of IP's are i suspected those are related to Gunkarta and N0n3tup , because when this anonymous user remove a series of sections about philippines, and a user revert it they will remove again because of their reason "Irrelevant" despite of stated sources:

4377:, and actually I agreed on including Maharadya Lawana as one of Ramayana rendering, although highly localized and possibly rendered from another derivative Muslim Malay/Indonesian version. The problem and suspicion was started when an anonymous IP 122.54.197.173 retrieve JournalmanManila's edit 2589:

in this case is actually came from those sockpuppets; JournalmanManila/Theseeker2016/Jasper0070/Cleaner880/Parashurama007/Xcalliber and possibly also include Searcher0 and Hunter05. Probably motivated by undue nationalistic agenda, or a wish to rewrite his country's history gloriously. Those

1251:

that after careful examination has mention nothing about kinnara. This false ref was probably an effort to try to trick other editors into carelessly overlooked doubtful edits, by seemingly provides valid references. Therefore I put the citation need tags that later Parashurama007 removed

2788:

I've indeffed Searcher and Hunter, and blocked xxx.242. xxx.100 is already blocked. Those are all JournalmanManila. I'm not seeing the case for Darwgon0801 clearly and will leave the opportunity for more evidence to be presented before proceeding with the checkuser request. Why is

2666:, most of his edits was just tidying edits made by editors there including those added by JournalmanManila's sockpuppets. I think they have established friendship, especially with Theseeker2016, as shown in this edit they seems to be involved in edit dispute with Stricnina 2641:, I already had blocked the two accounts a few minutes before you posted the above and will likely endorse the checkuser request to confirm and find other accounts but what you should focus on now is providing evidence concerning Darwgon0801 and why you think he is a sock. 3920:

turned to become irrelevant or worst the branding of Vandalism? (if so, how these people wasting their time and effort just to create "fables" or a "fairytale" to lure people? ) but they can't even answer my question they are just silent and no reply on the talk page

2584:

For a "new user", Searcher0 seems to be (suspiciously) well-versed and familiar to those sets of WP rules, as if he has done his homework. Are you sure you are a new user? And those IPs you mentioned was involved with previous sockpuppets edits. The possible

747:

and status, I learned that Jasper0070 was being blocked because of being the sockpuppet of JournalmanManila . I think 112.198.242.130, 112.198.246.17, 112.198.242.124, and Cleaner880 are block-evasion accounts of Jasper0070 and ultimately JournalmanManila.

4061:

Ordinarily, I make it a policy to give people the benefit of the doubt. But you have consistently disrespected wikipedia's consensus process by attacking the opposed editors on personal grounds, rather than discussing the merits of the source based on

1294:

and being removed since the addition is not quite relevant and its link to Filipino styized title of nobility is obscure, since it was simply means "general" in sanskrit. After JournalmanManila being blocked, Parashurama007 retrieved his previous edit

2367:

Concur with N0n3up's suggestion. I strongly suspect Searcher0 and Hunter05 are block-evading accounts and sockpuppets of JournalmanManila/Theseeker2016/Jasper0070/Cleaner880/Parashurama007/Xcalliber. Based on his/her behavioral pattern and edits in

2751:, to set the record straight, I did not put your name in the suspected list in the first place. My prime suspects here are Searcher0 and Hunter05. I just examine the possibility after your name turn up here. Sorry for the inconvenience. — 4246:. By this time JournalmanManila and some of his sockpuppet has been banned, so he seems to went to guerrila warfare using unregistered user IP address editing. And again being removed due to its questionable relations with Ramayana 4058:. If indeed you are a sockpuppet , then you are supposed to be penalized for the behaviours of those accounts, and you are using this account to avoid the penalty. Knowledge (XXG) policy says that means you should be blocked. 4441:

when you took the baton left by JournalmanManila sockpuppets, and salvaged his/her works. Which is a typical give-away trait of sockpuppets, that usually return back to the crime scene to retrieve and protect the works of past

728:

Jasper0070 add by put this painting which was uploaded by Theseeker2016. The image I think is irrelevant to the article. Then Cleaner880 defend and retrieve the Jasper0070 . Jasper0070 also pushed the very same image in

3899:

Check users / Admins can verify if these following sources written by Juan R. Francisco was a type of "Pseudo-History" or if this sources where really an undue POV pushing . it was the same references that i give to

3667:

and the list goes on. Also the fact that these sockpuppets always tend to be arbitrary regarding their edits, always reverting more than they should, and in the archives of past SPI's, there is a pattern. The same for

2603:

or just put there in order to discourage other editors to dip in and examine the bulk of false ref. The sockpuppets urge to include Philippines in many articles, despite how irrelevant it may be, is also considered as

1394:

learend my mistake" . and I had been apologized to that user and aknowledge my wrong but instead he give me a rude repply that " don't trick us to your modus operandi and one of the socks" and "he keeps watching me"

4275:

The stalemate or status quo condition on Ramayana at that time is that, I had improve the refs and we keep the Philippines subsection that has clear reference linked to Ramayana, which was only the Maharadia Lawana

1410:

and i hope there's a second chance to a new comers here , what i done is due to my first time editor but i learned my mistake by prejudging me easily as a sock is not correct either , its clear this is against

4067:

the people who don't share your interpretation of facts as either stupid, crazy, or conniving, and you seem to believe that your "truth" is the only truth, with other people's interpretations being invalid.

3789:

I'd request to get my name off the list. I poked my head in quick with AWB flagging the article when it was in rather poor shape then dug a bit out of interest. Any help from me you need let me know though.

4230:

to include much irrelevant additions, that most was not related to Ramayana in an attempt to paint "strong Indic culture in Philippines". Parashurama, another JournalmanManila's sock puppet help out too

2917:

as part of the clerk training process. Please allow them to process the entire case without interference, and pose any questions or concerns either on their Talk page or on this page if more appropriate.

2488:

And They remove the Philippine section despite of its academic source!and i restore it that's how the conflict got started . what an irony Yes! they remove it just because they like to say its either

2562:

Interest and sent editor to SPI as their Tool". now im not afraid of how you decide here but i hope admins become "Fair and Just" to this issue what i presented and why i have been called up in here .(

3727:. While user:Pricedelink and user:Keroscene777 are possibly also another sockpuppets, although I'm not quite sure. His/her insistence on Philippines inclusion on Hindu-Buddhist articles such as 4153:

Compare with rejection by user Mimihitam of similar (although weirder) POV-pushing by confirmed JournalManManila sockpuppet Jasper0070 equating Bohol with the legendary land of Suvarnabhumi (

1256:. Parashurama007 modus operandi, and weird attachments to pre-Hispanic Philippines articles kind of suspiciously similar to JournalmanManila and his previous sock puppets, like his edits in 3949:. JournalmanManila and his/her sockpuppets have been evading manl blocks and have abused of multiple accounts and to be honest, this is going too far and needs a permanent solution IMHO. ( 2599:

high influence of Dharmic civilization in the Philippines thesis as promoted by those socks. Although a few of his sources/references are adequate, many of them are false ref which is not

2594:

or making up history, due to lack of study and valid sources in this field. Yes, there is a few artifact linked to Hindu-Buddhist culture discovered in the Philippines. But this editor

1264:

think Parashurama007 is a block-evasion accounts of Cleaner880, Jasper0070 and ultimately JournalmanManila. He is a persistent sock puppet that keep coming back and shows no remorse. —

4070:

All of these are behaviours that I have come to associate with JournalManManila, so I'm convinced you're him. Let me cite specific instances that convince me, for admin's reference:

2885: 21: 4373:

Here we go again with your routine of back and forth with your misleading argument on the validiy of quoted references etc. I suggest we left that Ramayana editing disputes back in

4235:, of course after examination, all that bunch of supposedly references mention nothing about Ramayana, and being removed. Ref falsifying was the hallmark of JournalmanManila edits. 2590:

sockpuppets has special interest of Pre-Hispanic history of the Philippines, also Hindu-Buddhist civilization in India and Southeast Asia. However, most often involved in inventing

3994:

need to find out is whether Skyrim09 (and Reign05) are actually just JournalManManila/Jasper007 avoiding his block. Me, in these two cases I'm convinced by the similarities. -

2222:

since it matches that of JournalmanManila and his/her sockpuppets. Not to mention that he/she uses either none or bunk cites as his/her edits, and his/her troublesome edits as

5840: 5098: 3715: 2713:, I didn't establish friendship to them. I don't talk to them anymore. It may seem like that but I can assure to everyone, I'm not his puppet. I just now polish edits (like 2328: 2254: 1335: 1303:. All those Parasurama007 edits seems has a suspicious pattern and motifs, helping, supporting and retrieving JournalmanManila's and his socks such as Cleaner880's edits. — 780: 4331:

These complainants already cleaned up the statements and also they do an additions of terms until N0n30p remove it and went up to the series of reverts that lead up here.

2722: 4178:

There are other points, and further examples of the same points, but these are just the ones I have time to provide evidence for at the moment. Perhaps others can add? -

2408:

I believe the the whole reason for i had been here is just because of; it all started when i revert User:N0n3tup's edit's after he removed the Philippine section on

2662:, I am not sure about Darwgon0801 as sockpuppet of JournalmanManila/Theseeker2016/Jasper0070/Cleaner880/Parashurama007/Xcalliber/Searcher0/Hunter05. In the article 2416:, they excluded Philippines and i revert that because it contains academic works and based on scholarly books. so i find that it's a right thing to revert it . 65: 3739:

is kind of reminiscence of what JournalmaManila would do. Plus his/her rambling back and forth also SHOUTING during discussing edit disputes in the talkpage

3978:, but s/he doesn't seem to fit. Skyrim09's shout-filled, POV-pushing rants on this page alone, on the other hand, sound a whole lot like JournalManManila. 4173:

https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Knowledge (XXG):Sockpuppet_investigations/JournalmanManila&curid=54773593&diff=816452724&oldid=816449290

4130:

https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Knowledge (XXG):Sockpuppet_investigations/JournalmanManila&curid=54773593&diff=816452724&oldid=816449290

3656: 2261:

after being turned down. At this point, I believe that JournalmanManila and his/her sockpuppets are going to be persistent until they get what they want. (

856: 2674:

Theseeker2016 tried to recruit Darwgon0801 into his "camp" in this dispute on Kingdom of Tondo article. Maybe Darwgon0801 was just a compatriot, a fellow

3982:

On a last note: I'm on record saying that the Philippines section in Ramayana should be put back, on the basis of reliable scholarly sources. But that's

1147: 368: 4099:

b. Pattern of edits seems to indicate a thematic continuation from the edits of Parashurama007, a checkuser-confirmed sockpuppet of JournalManManila

2741:, whom you stated is also a sock). But I think its only mislabeled as "kingdom" since it is ruled by Rajahs so I think Rajahnate is right. Thanks. - 5800: 5192: 4964: 4644: 3073: 1871: 5580: 5483: 4741: 1050: 953: 271: 174: 1677: 58: 17: 5386: 5289: 4034:

You know what? Sometimes I agree with you. Sometimes you say things that I think are correct. And in this case, I respectfully disagree with

3163: 1961: 1774: 636: 458: 128: 4161:(Sorry if this one is complicated: should I look for simpler examples? This was just the first that I found out of many that I know exist.) 4547: 3632: 3519: 3430: 3341: 2976: 2050: 1538: 1469: 919: 849: 547: 2535:

This following Ip's are removing the Philippine subsections despite its relevant academic references, i think they have more IP that used.

1210: 431: 5706: 5255: 5027: 4838: 4707: 3136: 1934: 1580: 1140: 361: 5643: 5546: 4804: 2884:, though I will note they didn't turn up in either of the JournalmanManila ranges I checked. Also, this was a 2 for 1 deal as there is 1113: 1016: 334: 237: 3252: 1740: 5449: 5352: 1837: 5185: 4957: 4637: 4610: 4076:

a. Focus on articles connecting Philippine history with India or China (not evidence per se but establishing a pattern of behavior)

3066: 3039: 2474: 1864: 5769: 4901: 2586: 2514: 104: 5573: 5476: 4734: 1566: 1552: 1043: 946: 264: 167: 4111:

https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Special:Contributions/Parashurama007&offset=20170821182438&target=Parashurama007

4105:

https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Special:Contributions/Parashurama007&offset=20170821182438&target=Parashurama007

4094:

https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Special:Contributions/Parashurama007&offset=20170821182438&target=Parashurama007

2847: 1670: 1603: 5904: 5883: 5824: 5662: 5140: 5083: 4920: 4503: 4459: 4419: 4402: 4359: 4317: 4297: 4206: 4023: 4003: 3958: 3932: 3799: 3783: 3765: 3748:

always comming back as sockpuppets in numerous instance. S/he is a persistent sockpuppet that keep coming back without regret.

3700: 2932: 2905: 2832: 2806: 2768: 2699: 2654: 2633: 2577: 2397: 2309: 2270: 2243: 1633: 1615: 1522: 1477: 1451: 1423: 1376: 1320: 1281: 895: 812: 765: 5379: 5282: 3620: 2861: 1767: 1461:

THIS IS A KANGAROO COURT ! IVE DONE WORKING BASED ON ACADEMIC SOURCES BUT THIS IS WHAT I GET? BLOCKING BY UNJUST ACCUSATIONS!

85: 3867: 2497:. but i think it was irrelevant reasoning to exclude philippine sub-sections on the list because it was sourced . As i read 1186: 407: 4197:

the articles talkpage but as i said i recieve no reply from you all. Then i got my reply was in here something's fishy.(

4169:

https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk%3AGunkarta&type=revision&diff=793187599&oldid=793085121%7Cthis

4124:

https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk%3AGunkarta&type=revision&diff=793187599&oldid=793085121%7Cthis

4540: 3913: 3909: 3194: 2969: 1992: 667: 489: 2300:. But I still don't know whether to say if Darwgon0801 is actually related to JournalmanManila, I'll let others decide. ( 5787: 5699: 5231: 5003: 4831: 4683: 3550: 3461: 3372: 3112: 2081: 1910: 876: 578: 2498: 5619: 5522: 4780: 2896:

I saw your email and have added a subpage to the CU wiki. Thank you for that and all that you do to help out at SPI.--

1167: 1089: 992: 388: 310: 213: 1716: 3283: 2729:

before, I regret that. They could've suspected me in that time. But you were right about the compatriot statement.

2284:

and the listed IP's are without a doubt definitely related to JournalmanManila, yet I'm not sure what to say about

809: 46: 5425: 5328: 2600: 2482: 2142:

was blocked twice after two subsequent sockpuppet investigations were made including his/her subsequent accounts (

1813: 5212: 4984: 4664: 3151: 3093: 1891: 624: 446: 4586: 3015: 2511:

the source must be come from a Academic and scholar works like textbooks and and publications with free copyrght

2427: 5600: 5503: 4761: 3507: 3418: 3329: 2678:

just like JournalmanManila that shares similar views regarding Philippines history. Thank you for your efforts

2038: 1949: 1532: 1473: 1447: 1419: 1070: 973: 837: 291: 194: 5745: 4877: 535: 5781: 4350:. So the issue was only started when i revert Sourced PH sections in which n0n3up always trying to remove ( 4183: 3999: 3779: 2827: 2801: 2649: 1697: 1628: 1574: 1517: 1128: 743:

me think that all these users might be the same person using different IPs and usernames. Then I looked for

349: 4041: 4040:

But that isn't the issue here. The issue is whether you are actually the same user that went by the names

2573: 1465: 5812: 5808: 5561: 5406: 5309: 3607:

Users Skyrim9, Pricedelink and Keroscene777 all editing Philippines-related articles constantly evade. In

3240: 2206:, not to mention that the article was edited by the same editors including his/her other sockpuppets like 1794: 1597: 5879: 5270: 5173: 5124: 5071:

had been blocked. I haven't looked into whether the restored claim even has merit because it looks like

4945: 4625: 4567: 3878: 3054: 2996: 2513:, and these sources are fit to all mentioned on WP:Source, and as i observed they have the obviously 2337: 2156:. Considering both are recently made accounts, first one made 1 days ago and second one 3 day ago. User 2139: 1852: 1352: 4485:. Therefore, the only thing I can do is compare the listed named suspected puppets against each other. 2613: 3175: 1973: 1509:- to confirm socking and check for other accounts as the archive shows that he will likely have them. 648: 470: 5726: 5464: 4858: 4722: 3531: 3442: 3353: 2555: 2550: 2545: 2540: 2062: 1560: 1546: 1031: 934: 744: 559: 252: 155: 3980:

Perhaps we should put the similarities in table format so that we can see the evidence more clearly?

3723:

I strongly suspect that user:Skyrim9 and user:Reign05 are the block-evasion accounts/sockpuppets of

2609: 4045: 3967:

I have had long arguments with JournalManManila's many many sockpuppets, and I have to concur that

3264: 2841: 2738: 2734: 2567: 2354: 1658: 1528: 1443: 1415: 1344: 2506: 5898: 5820: 5367: 4454: 4397: 4342: 4292: 4179: 3995: 3946: 3827: 3775: 3760: 2891: 2855: 2822: 2796: 2763: 2726: 2714: 2694: 2679: 2659: 2644: 2628: 2392: 1755: 1623: 1570: 1512: 1315: 1276: 760: 4081: 3841:

These what they called “Disruptive editing” was actually supported by an Academic references :

2605: 2595: 2523:

the misused SPI as their tool for blocking the editors who opposed to their conflict of interest

2503:

there are no mentioned that the works of a blocked editor despite of reliability must be remove!

4528: 4415: 4355: 4313: 4202: 4019: 3928: 3917: 3808:

I clearing my self on this, they have gone too far, The root of the problem was started when

3795: 3674: 2957: 2471: 5072: 2436: 1406: 1402: 5875: 5687: 5136: 4819: 4345:

he which actually added extra sentences on what originally short revision did by Gunkarta

3954: 3856: 3830:

he which actually added extra sentences on what originally short revision did by Gunkarta

3696: 3688: 3669: 2775: 2748: 2742: 2718: 2663: 2377: 2341: 2340:'s? But I can assure you that I'm not him/her. I'm not a sock puppet of JournalmanManila. - 2305: 2285: 2266: 2239: 2215: 2199: 1372: 1257: 730: 5040: 4265: 3987: 3732: 3591: 2122: 1411: 1223: 708: 5658: 5128: 4916: 4499: 4155:

https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Suvarnabhumi&diff=797653346&oldid=792860923

4049: 3891: 2928: 2453: 2448:

Laszlo Legeza, "Tantric Elements in Pre-Hispanic Gold Art," Arts of Asia, 1988, 4:129-133.

2219: 1556: 1542: 1348: 801: 4425:

In Ramayana case, I stepped back and keep my silence to let wikipedia consensus works in

4063: 4252:

Then user Skyrim9 retrieved much of previous edits done by JournalmanManila sockpuppets

5858: 5116: 5077: 4257: 2837: 2563: 2350: 2277: 2250: 2231: 2160:

keeps editing and retrieving edits made by JournalmanManila or his/her sockpuppets. In

2157: 2149: 1593: 739: 4381:

and then you came along to retrieve again much of JournalmanManila's sockpuppet edits

5816: 5807:

of Luzon mercenaries being involved in the conflict, which had been previously added

4446: 4437:, while the actual question/problem started in 29 October 2017 with your involvement 4426: 4389: 4374: 4334: 4284: 4261: 4238:

49.149.97.134, an anonymous IP address retrieve again much of JournalmanManila edits

3942: 3819: 3771: 3752: 2851: 2755: 2710: 2686: 2638: 2620: 2591: 2384: 2281: 2191: 2153: 1307: 1268: 752: 735: 4087: 2812: 4411: 4351: 4309: 4198: 4015: 3975: 3969: 3924: 3791: 3678: 3181: 1979: 654: 476: 5793: 4146:(After checking by multiple editors, community consensus is that these sources do 3537: 3448: 3359: 2068: 565: 4221:

First, in past year (August 2016) until past months (August 2017) we encountered

4144:

https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Ramayana&diff=prev&oldid=807668018

5132: 4488: 4035: 3950: 3901: 3809: 3692: 3684: 3270: 2737:? I'm not sure if it is actually mislabeled as "Rajahnate" (based on an edit by 2301: 2262: 2235: 1368: 3213: 2011: 686: 508: 5890: 5654: 4912: 4495: 4385:. Which led us to suspect that you are another sockpuppet of JournalmanManila. 4171:

Compare with: existing arguments on this page as per the date of this edit. (

4137:

3. Misrepresents (or jumps to conclusions/creates synthesis based on) sources:

4128:

Compare with: existing arguments on this page as per the date of this edit. (

3912:

which N0n3up branded as “Vandalism”, how come that a books written from the

3569: 3480: 3391: 3187: 2924: 2914: 2897: 2519:

removing a legit sourced materials are a clear violation of wikipedia policies

2100: 1985: 1607: 1356: 660: 597: 482: 3543: 3454: 3365: 2074: 571: 4117:

2.Resorts to personal attacks instead of explaining the merits of the source

3302: 2675: 2288:. Although he/she did make edits on the same articles as the sockpuppets in 3276: 1606:). There are some busy ranges at play, so sleepers aren't always obvious.-- 3986:

the issue here; we can resolve this on the relevant talk page, or via the

2874: 41: 3818:] which is already revised by the members , even that complainant named 3813: 3728: 3644: 3608: 2440: 1287: 3146: 1944: 619: 441: 5060: 3844: 3502: 3413: 3324: 2409: 2373: 2176: 2033: 1430:

a misunderstanding between an accused newcomer and rude old users here

1390: 1240: 832: 530: 4142:

See assertion that Biag ni Lam Ang is a version of the Ramayana here:

1123: 344: 4109:

Also compare with recent JournalmanManila sockpuppet Parashurama007:

4092:

Also compare with recent JournalmanManila sockpuppet Parashurama007:

3860: 2413: 2369: 2161: 1355:. As evident by Parashurama007 and Cleaner880's edits in the article 5839: