Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Xashaiar/Archive

Report date April 22 2010, 10:45 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:84.23.140.26 ܥܝܪܐܩ (talk) 10:45, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Evidence submitted by ܥܝܪܐܩ (talk)

Copied from above talk page:

After performing two reverts on Iran–Iraq War, User:84.23.140.26 arrived at my talk page - "Hi. I am against edit wars. But, I am also against people who don't respect the Wikipedia rules. Let me make it perfectly clear for you. First of all, you deliberately removed United States from the list, even though the source clearly states "direct military involvement". Secondly, removing sourced materials without discussion in the Talk page is a violation of Wikipedia rules. Thirdly, this issue has already been discussed between other parties - Uirauna and Xashaiar - and an agreement has been reached. So, what you are doing is unacceptable. You are not allowed to remove sourced materials without consensus, fair and simple. Should I contact an admin?"

After my reply, off User:84.23.140.26 went to User:Xashaiar's talk page - "Hi. I saw your edit in the Iran-Iraq War revision history . So, I decided to let you know that [] is continuously removing the United States and other parties from the "Belligerents" list. I told him that his behavior is unacceptable because he is removing sourced material without discussing the matter. Also told him that the issue has already been discussed between other parties and a consensus has been reached. I have reverted him twice, and I cannot revert him again due to the three-revert rule. Since, you seem knowledgeable, I thought you may be helpful to deal with him. Or, should I contact an admin to put an end to his disruptive edits? Thanks."

After cautioning 84.23.140.26 about WP:FORUMSHOPPING, I then checked User:Xashaiar's contributions. The first thing I notice are edit summaries commonly prefixed with "rv -"


 * "rv - and what is the relevance of that translitration when the city is ancient Iranian?"
 * "rv - no cons exists on this. Zoroaster goes long back"
 * "rv - per wp:nor"
 * "rv - please stop these edits"
 * "rv - ip. irrelevant"
 * "rv - to last good version."
 * "rv - wrong info"
 * "rv - please stop these edits"
 * "rv - use talk page, your edit has multiple issues not only Zoroasetrian."
 * "re - NOR"

(Not just "rv" which is fairly common, but "rv -" which is more peculiar.)

Then I look at 84.23.140.26's contributions and notice these -
 * "rv - You are removing sourced entries from the "belligerents" list. You're not allowed to do that!"
 * "rv - don't remove sourced materials!"
 * "rv-"

In User:Xashaiar's contributions I notice an edit similar to the one User:84.23.140.26 made on Iran–Iraq War - reinserting the United States back into the list of belligerents -
 * Xashaiar
 * 84.23.140.26

Then I compare both of their statements regarding these edits -
 * "source clearly states "direct military involvement"" - 84.23.140.26
 * "source states "direct military involvement"" - Xashaiar

I now notice User:Xashaiar has performed the same revert - on the back of 84.23.140.26's "message" -
 * "rv - direct military action makes US being listed just as much as kurds are in Iranian list."

Revision history of Iran–Iraq War. ܥܝܪܐܩ (talk) 11:00, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

User:84.23.140.26's response to this report was to further canvass on the pretence that this is harrassment. ܥܝܪܐܩ (talk) 11:13, 22 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.
 * That is false accusation. I will wait for the result by checkuser. I would like to mention 3 points. 1. Please see the history page that shows I have been involved and used the same edit summaries and edits long before the accusing user take this as evidence. See also the Iran-Iraq talk page (especially this. The users who do not engage in talk page and revert (maybe correct) materials that have been there (long enough) but do not take it to talk page, seem to violate what wikipedia considers unjustified]. 2. This edit is unacceptable. It is kind of labelling others of something that is not proved. 3. If I am not mistaken, the reasons (based on several reverts I have done on several different pages) given by the user above appears (to me) to have the purpose of adversely affecting (me as the) targeted person. Xashaiar (talk) 12:02, 22 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I find it quite offending that User:ܥܝܪܐܩ has chosen to accuse me of being a sockpuppet, even though I have never had a Wikipedia account. Since, I have not broken any rules, I would appreciate if he stopped harassing me. I have no connection to User:Xashaiar or any other registered users. In my opinion, this silly accusation only shows User:ܥܝܪܐܩ's hatred towards me, simply because I decided to revert his unfounded edits in the Iran-Iraq War article. I am 100% sure that this "investigation" will lead nowhere. Why do I think this "investigation" is a waste of time? Here are three reasons: First, I have never registered here on Wikipedia. Secondly, I have no intention to register here on Wikipedia. Third, just because I respect fair and constructive editors who engage in discussions (User:Xashaiar, for example) and have a dialog with them, it doesn't mean I am them. You can read all my logs all you want. Now, where can I report harassment? I would like to file a report on User:ܥܝܪܐܩ for harassing me. 84.23.140.26 (talk) 13:39, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Requested by ܥܝܪܐܩ (talk) 10:45, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
 * CheckUser requests

You edit warred, and more than one person disagreed with you. That does not make them socks of each other. ~ Amory ( u •  t  •  c ) 14:57, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments