Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Edward321/Archive

27 April 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

Since the time I started to contribute to Mahdi page, Edward321 and DeCausa kept deleting and reverting my positive contributions. My contributions and edits used an authentic source, an academic textbook on the subject, but since DeCausa and apparently Edward321 believe that Mahdi is a myth, as DeCausa clearly stated it in the Talk page [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mahdi&diff=651945073&oldid=651936586], they reverted everything that disagreed with their personal believes [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mahdi&diff=651629649&oldid=651628781] [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mahdi&diff=649529667&oldid=649520314] [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mahdi&diff=648334101&oldid=648287516]. I proved this fact with great details in the Talk page, under Amir Arjomad POV, that the part of text they revert back to it is not reliable or authentic.[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mahdi&diff=651633567&oldid=641276517] They didn't come up with any reason to support their belief,  but never gave up on reverting my edits and other good contributions to the page [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mahdi&diff=657287823&oldid=657269542]. In fact, the sole action of these two accounts, which are strongly correlated and probably used by the same user, is to revert the work of others when it doesn't line up with their believes. I don't recall they have added a single word to the page.

DeCausa almost always reverted my amendments in a few minutes or hours after they took place [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mahdi&diff=649529667&oldid=649520314], [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mahdi&diff=651629649&oldid=651628781] [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mahdi&diff=657287938&oldid=657270218]. Recently he reverted my fix to the page for no good reason while there wasn't any consensus [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mahdi&diff=654882893&oldid=654875084] [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mahdi&diff=657269542&oldid=654882893] on his opinion [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mahdi&diff=657287938&oldid=657270218]. I edited and amended the page for the last time and warned him that he is engaging himself in an edit war [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mahdi&diff=659396465&oldid=659396265] [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mahdi&diff=659397785&oldid=658773104]. Being afraid of being caught in an edit war or otherwise the account DeCausa took no action but immediately the friend-account of DeCausa, Edward321, reverted the edit [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mahdi&diff=659400994&oldid=659397785], ignoring all the reasoning brought up in the talk page. I neutralized their attack and Edward321 again undid the fix [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mahdi&diff=659410274&oldid=659405533].

These two accounts have been always working in parallel and backing each other in the Mahdi page which make everyone suspicious about whether they are handled by the same person. A part from their collaboration on reverting my edits shown above, here I show their collaboration to revert someone else edit from last year. You see the pattern more clearly in this example. It's a suppression on Illuminator123: First Edward321 reverts all the work of Illuminator123 [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mahdi&diff=624899536&oldid=624872314], then Illuminator123 defends his right and DeCausa does exactly the same thing that Edward321 did [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mahdi&diff=624924955&oldid=624924582], Illuminator123 defends and it's Edward321 turn to attack [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mahdi&diff=624945423&oldid=624932464], Illuminator123 resists and they switch it to DeCausa to revert his work [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mahdi&diff=624978438&oldid=624965860], Illuminator123 defends his writing for the last time and Edward321 wipes his text out [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mahdi&diff=625245473&oldid=625219078] and DeCausa threatens Illuminator123 with edit warring [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Illuminator123&oldid=624979593] and persumably Edward321/DeCausa filed a case to block Illuminator321. This is exactly what Edward321/DeCausa did to me last year when I was an amateur. They switch frequently between two users Edward321 and DeCausa to circumvent violation of three-revert rule and then file a case to block and suppress other users. This immediate switching between Edward321 and DeCausa and doing similar actions makes it hard to believe that they aren't connected in any way. Smhhalataei (talk) 23:08, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

This appears to be retaliatory for my filing of Sockpuppet investigations/Smhhalataei. There I informed both Smhhalataei and Peacemaker 11, a courtesy that has not been returned by Smhhalataei. Smhhalataei has been previously blocked for sockpuppetry and almost all of their edit history has been an attempt to remove views they disagree with from the Mahdi article. Edward321 (talk) 23:44, 27 April 2015 (UTC)


 * "These two accounts have been always working in parallel and backing each other in the Mahdi page which make everyone suspicious about whether they are handled by the same person." ("Everyone"??) Well, there's two explanations to this: either we're socks or we have the same reaction to Smhhalataei's edits because we are following the same policies such as WP:RS, WP:NPOV, WP:V, (policies which Smhhalataei shows no interest in following). DeCausa (talk) 05:51, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * This report has no basis. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:01, 28 April 2015 (UTC)