Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/WatanWatan2020/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets
This new IP appeared shortly after WatanWatan2020 was indeffed (30 May 2022). Their behaviour/arguments seem pretty identical;

Both strongly oppose the term 'Turko-Persian' in Seljuk related articles, completely disregarding the sourced information that supports it, instead preferring their own POV. Both also makes random comparisons to the culture of Iran, which they regarded as largely being Arab. They both consider the term 'Turko-Persian' as some sort of nationalistic/pan-Iranian conspiracy. I have bolded the more relevant bits of these comments, since they are quite long.


 * WatanWatan2020's comments:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Seljuk_Empire&diff=1089849381&oldid=1087270563 Why is the Seljuk Empire called a Turko-Persian Empire? It has no basis in any aspect due to the fact that the Seljuks were not Persians. They were Turkic people. I have seen the previous discussion in which it seems pan-Iranians are trying to find a viable reason for why this is the case, although it cannot be. It is understood that Seljuks integrated Persian culture into their empire to a good degree. Although, still, this does not justify the label “Turko-Persian”. Because it indicates that they were ethnically Persian people. That is innacurate. By the same token, Many of the Persian dynasties should be considered Perso-Arab dynasties due to the fact that the Persians widely adopted Arab culture, but also religion, the Arabic script, Took on Arab style spellings and forms to their names, recieved loan words from Arabic that could be found in practically every other Persian word. So, if those Persian dynasties are not considered Perso-Arab, then why isnt Seljuks held to the same fairness? Again, Persians adopted more Arab culture than the Seljuks adopted Persian culture, and mind as well that the Persian they adopted, was an extension of Arab culture as well.''' I propose to remove the Turko-Persian label and do the Seljuks its due earnings by identifying them as who they really, and only are, Turkic.]

[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Seljuk_Empire&diff=1089891255&oldid=1089860578 Therefore, I again propose that the Seljuks be presented of their accurate origins. They were not Persians. And I am sure that Turkic origin people have listed their complaints against this, as in the prior discussion. Although, it seems the Pan Iranians may have control over this and do not want to budge on the matter. In regards to the Arabization of Iranians and Iran, It is well known that many things Persian have been Arabized. Again, from the loan words, to the writing script, to the religion, to the names of Persian individuals. The only thing that seems that may have survived, most prominently, would be the Persian language. Although, this Persian language is also Arabized to a great extent as well.]


 * IPs comments:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:2A02:A458:447B:1:3D6D:40A8:755F:9E4C&diff=prev&oldid=1091637052 Calling the Sultanate 'Turko-Persian is like calling the Iranians Persian-Arabs. It makes no sense. Some use of the Persian language in the Sultanate doesn't make them 'Turko-Persian' anymore than the use of Arabic in Iran makes Iranians Persian-Arab. The Sultanate was Turkic, and understood by anyone as such.]

[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sultanate_of_Rum&diff=prev&oldid=1091627944 These terms, like 'Turko-Persian', are scholarly terms that make sense only in specific contexts. Please don't use it here. The use of Persian language, among other languages, in the courts doesn't make them 'Turko-Persian'. By that logic, every Iranian political polity since the 7th century is Turko-Arab, considering the major role Arabic has had in Iran..]

[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sultanate_of_Rum&diff=prev&oldid=1091643411 Defining them as 'Turko-Persian' is entirely inappropriate in this context. The term/concept is used by some modern historians only in certain contexts. It's ahistorical to define them like that in the first sentence. Elsewhere we can write about the status of the Persian language, as a language of administration for example, and other influences from Iran's cultures.]

Stop inserting that Iranian nationalist content

[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:2A02:A458:447B:1:3D6D:40A8:755F:9E4C&diff=1091645274&oldid=1091644143 Stop inserting this Iranian nationalist stuff. The Seljuks were not Persian in any sense, similar to how Iranians are not 'Persian-Arabs', even though your culture is deeply influenced by the Arabs (more deeply so than the Seljuks were influenced by the Persian tradition).]

[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sultanate_of_Rum&diff=1091648951&oldid=1090826968 ...Overly enthusiastic Iranian nationalist contributors.... ....Iranian nationalist Wikipedia contributors would never allow for something like the Samanids or Khwarezmians to be called 'Persio-Arab' or 'Turko-Arab', even though their cultures were deeply affected by Arabic culture (more so than the Sultanate was affected by Iran's cultures), yet they are the first to insert a Persian claim right in the first sentence.]

EDIT: Looks like he is editing through another IP now. This seems to be the full-range of his IP

--HistoryofIran (talk) 14:29, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Both User:WatanWatan2020 and the IP Special:Contributions/2A02:A458:447B:1::/64 have engaged in anti-Iranian POV-pushing. However, running a check did not produce any illumination. I'm going ahead with a 3-month block of the IP's /64 range for nationalistic disruption. My investigation did not find any evidence of sockpuppetry. I'm marking this SPI for close. EdJohnston (talk) 02:03, 26 June 2022 (UTC)