Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tradeze1/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

All three have edited Detained in Dubai and Radha Stirling (CatJon1 Tradeze1 212.63.119.106), with both CatJon1 and 212.63.119.106 not following WP:AGF or WP:NPA (CatJon1:, , , ) (212.63.119.106: , , ). I included Tradeze1 because Tradeze1 is making disruptive edits similar to CatJon1, and of course their names are similar. They are violating WP:LOUTSOCK. Sungodtemple a tcg fan!|!!1!1|11!|!! (talk) 12:17, 28 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Another comment: CatJon1 has made this edit, which looks like an attempt to obtain 'consensus' by socking. Sungodtemple a tcg fan!|!!1!1|11!|!! (talk) 13:43, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

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

Checkuser requested --Firestar464 (talk) 04:18, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I would also like to mention that checkusers cannot link accounts to IPs. Sungodtemple a tcg fan!|!!1!1|11!|!! (talk) 11:44, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I am editing Radha stirling and detained in dubai. I have not made "disruptive edits" and I have not looked at catjon1 edits except I noticed the reverts. I do not have a similar name?! I saw the page needed updating and I see there is hardly any data up there, so I added more. You didn't like too much detail in the cases sections, so I removed that, but added shorter, cited content. The "cited content" or "added..." is something that just comes up automatically as a choice, as I start typing what I've added. What else do you want me to say? I am trying to present pages as factually accurate as possible, while fitting into the wikipedia rules. A lot of my work is being undone for no apparent reason. For example, some editors are reverting to the original version, rather than simply accepting my edits on a case by case basis. This doesn't help grow the pages. It feels like this page is being disrupted and its growth stunted. Happy to have my IP investigated, provide ID etc. I'm not a sockpuppet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tradeze1 (talk • contribs) 08:43, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Many of your edits were overall unconstructive. For example this diff has you add 'Due Process International' to the article. You say 'it describes itself as', which means you are reiterating what the website says about a itself. This was taken as an advert. Please take this moment to educate yourself on the Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Sungodtemple a tcg fan!|!!1!1|11!|!! (talk) 12:00, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * The proper way to request checkuser at SPI is by changing the text  to  . You should also provide a brief explanation of why you are requesting checkuser (many cases can be decided on behavior only). Mz7 (talk) 04:45, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * While others are investigating the issue of socking, I've semiprotected two pages as an interim step: Radha Stirling and Detained in Dubai. The article on David Haigh is already semied by another admin. It also looks to me that a block of for edit warring may be justified. EdJohnston (talk) 16:49, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
 * ❌ as far as checkuser evidence goes. .  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   02:14, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
 * IP is stale & edit warring is beyond the scope of SPI - ping . Cabayi (talk) 13:09, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
 * User:CatJon1 has been given a 3RR notice and warned not to edit logged out. Since they have not continued to edit since 28 April, this report can be closed. EdJohnston (talk) 14:39, 7 May 2021 (UTC)