Draft talk:Raavan (2022 film)

This draft was nominated for deletion on November 22, 2021. The result of the discussion was delete.

This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Film This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm India This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia Bengal (defunct) This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Bengal, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.BengalWikipedia:WikiProject BengalTemplate:WikiProject BengalBengal

Several IPs, all starting with 2409:4060, are suspected to be edits by a blocked editor. As such, even if the content is true, blocked editors are prohibited from editing articles. David notMD (talk) 10:21, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@David notMD Yeah, like Special:Contributions/2409:4060:2E1C:B29C:0:0:5888:9509, Special:Contributions/2409:4060:E82:3A2C:0:0:32CA:D907 and Special:Contributions/2409:4060:E82:3A2C:0:0:32CA:D907. They also removed your comments as well, so it can be well understood who this IP actually is. No new IP, without knowing the previous stories, would suddenly come and remove comments like that. That LTA is the only one who uses this 2409:4060 range. So, I think this whole of 2409:4060 range should be blocked. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 10:50, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What do you say? Itcouldbepossible^Talk 10:50, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you are willing, I think the right place is Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AnonymousIndiaz/Archive. Less energy perhaps just to watch the draft to make sure the Comments are not removed again. What's sad is that this is probably a valid draft (of a movie premiering 29 April), but tainted by the behavior of the editors attempting to create it (Fruit of the poisonous tree). David notMD (talk) 11:58, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@David notMD Yes, I perfectly know that, anyway, it is a bengali film, and our roads are now spewed with the film poster. So it is really 'valid' draft. But due to so much sockpuppetry, it has quite lost its value, and you know what, I can create it freshly, but I am not doing it, because first of all, it will soon be the target of socks as a revenge, and moreover, I don't want to get into any kind of trouble for creating an article, that has for so long been created by sockpuppets. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 14:30, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also pinging Girth Summit to look at these IP groups and determine if the whole range can be blocked considering the fact that most of the IPs in the range are used by an LTA, and few good faith edits have been made from it. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 14:31, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note - @Ohnoitsjamie:@Itcouldbepossible: @David notMD: In the cast hoax actor Ayan or Ayan Nayak both are same person and he is don't even in the movie, adding his name again and again, for more information see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AnonymousIndiaz/Archive. that's more suspicious and ridiculous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4060:2e18:c208::58c8:5009 (talk) 13:07, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ohnoitsjamie, Itcouldbepossible, David notMD, and Girth Summit: The IP 2490:4060:2..... is/are very clever as they create confusion by countering their own acts when caught red handed. Actually, they are here for paid works by creating hoaxes to gain edit counts and edit in behalf of promotion agencies and do not follow Wikipedia norms.42.107.132.108 (talk) 15:38, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I know that very well. All the counter edits made from the range are also made by the same person to avoid suspicion. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 15:44, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

These edits do indeed look a lot like the proposed sockpuppeteer, I believe this is block evasion. It's a pretty wide range though - an IPv6 /32 range would cover a lot of people - I will partially block them from this draft and its talk page however. Girth Summit _(blether) 15:50, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Girth SummitThanks a lot for this wise decision! It would be enough to stop this confusion from going any further. But, as I have observed from a long period of time, that range is solely used by AnonymousIndiaz and his sockpuppets. Very few other people edit from that range. From the contribs we understand that most IPs of that range share the same interests as the sock. But still, as an experienced checkuser, you don't want to block the range, then you are good to do it. How much do I understand? Maybe, this will stop some collateral damage from taking place. Thanks for this allover decision. Regards, Itcouldbepossible^Talk 15:53, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, that block is an ordinary admin block, I'm not acting as a CU here (again, policy would prohibit me from connecting an IP with a named account based on CU evidence). I took a brief look at the recent contribs from that IP range, and from a quick glance I thought it looked to me like multiple users. If you are convinced it's all the same person, SPI is the place to expand on that fully, and we can take a closer look. Best Girth Summit _(blether) 15:56, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Got it, thanks. I knew about that policy. I have seen Spicy say that on many SPI case pages. I have going to wait for a while, then no one is stopping me from going to SPI. I was harassed on meta wiki from this range, though it could be some one else as well. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 16:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]