Chariotrider555 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

24 May 2021

Suspected sockpuppets

• White Horserider (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
• White Horserider has Almost identical userpage to user:Chariotrider555 the name is also similar Chariot rider and horse rider.
• The interests are almost same aswell  refer to the user interaction report  
• edits by Chariotrider on Lalotra page edits by White horse rider on same
• white horse rider restoring same content which was restored by Chariotrider aswell(2) .
• The Horse rider account was created on 17 may , isn't it suprising that Chariotrider has been editing in less frequency from 17th may? ( refer to CR555's contributions)
• edit by White horse on Hada Chauhan, Edit by Chariotrider on Hada Chauhan
• edit by Chariot on Bihari rajput similar edit by WHR on same

Ratnahastin (talk) 09:22, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

• Comment White horserider edits when Chariotrider555 sleeps. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 15:50, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, I originally thought that this was a metaphor for me being away from editing, but as is shown I have a different editing time range than this suspected sock. Chariotrider555 (talk) 23:42, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment White Horserider was renamed from Athiesm-The Best Way Forward after a username block. They don't look like a new editor, and their antagonistic style on their talk page[1] feels familiar. Image warring on Kangana Ranaut here is similar to a different sock. Their editing on wrestling articles [2], [3] which includes image changes, is something you would also see from socks from the other account. None of this is something I've see from Chariotrider555. The behavior doesn't match up. Ravensfire (talk) 17:19, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I've been away from Wikipedia for a while because my life has gotten busier in the last few weeks (and will continue to be busy for a while). While this suspected sock does have some similar interests to me, they also diverge in different ways and have completely different demeanors. I don't edit in film or sports articles. This sock also has not edited any Hinduism-related articles, which I have an interest in, and in fact has gone out of her way to establish that she is an atheist. This kind of antagonistic behavior from the suspected sock is clearly not something I have had in the past, as I have witnessed many editors engage in similar uncivil behavior and gotten themselves banned User:OnlyTruthShallPrevail, User:Weeabo-kun2198, User:Rtr315, etc). I have also been involved helping catch several sockpuppets before Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Showbiz826/Archive, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lazy-restless/Archive, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ravi mavi/Archive, and I am clearly aware of the consequences of sockpuppetry. The suspected sock also fails to leave edit summaries like I always do on non-talk articles. Also all of the edits by the suspected sock are mobile edits, which I only rarely do because I find editing to be extremely hard on a mobile device. Chariotrider555 (talk) 22:11, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This sock also has not edited any Hinduism-related articles

Thats a lie, The sock has edited Yudhisthir and Pandava both are hindu mythological characters. page the Yudhisthir was edited by you too. (refer to the user interaction report.)Ratnahastin (talk) 08:39, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Lie" is a big word. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 18:45, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My bad, I didn't see that the suspected sock had edited Pandavas and Yudhishthira. Regardless, such sloppy editing and antagonistic behavior is not a trait I possess, as one can see from my edits. I request a that a Checkuser speedily confirm my nonassociation with this account, so that I can get back to my short Wikibreak. Chariotrider555 (talk) 23:42, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Retaliatory SPI against established editors: I don't know what's happening with us.Since the last one year, me and few other editors like LukeEmily and Chariotrider555 along with some other editors were editing in caste and society related topics in India. A new user who had filed this sockpuppet investigation is following our edits and is getting eager to made us blocked anyhow, given the editing dispute and the content dispute he has with us. Many a times grounds are just annoying. I don't think the account has any connection with Chariotrider555 as when he filed investigation against me he had knowledge of my location and it seemed that he had done a lot of work on my edits on all wikiprojects. Take a look at this, where he wanted to block LukeEmily the username policy and argued with 331dot. [Please note: In the meanwhile, LukeEmily was talking with them on Maratha (caste) page.] I would like to bring Blablubbs here to make the person filing this report aware that Wikipedia is not a battlefield. Heba Aisha (talk) 01:53, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All this started with me and see when we were discussing on Maratha caste page and I mentioned LukeEmily, the username violation report was filed by Ratnahastin. I many a time engage in talk with Chariotrider555 and from here, the Chariotrider555 comes into picture. Ratnahastin has been warned earlier too by Bishonen for filing frivolous reports for retaliation when he find themselves losing in content dispute cases. Heba Aisha (talk) 02:05, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Heba Aisha So many strawman arguments,Cherry picking,Red herrings,&Poisoning the well fallacies in a few paragraphs.And i report violations of policies when i see one, and this is not a retaliatory report in anyway i'm not engaged in a content dispute with him so your entire arguments here is irrelevant red herrings, i saw white horse ride editing Lalotra page and i got suspicious so filed one report to be safe. And I've reported many people not only LukeEmily for username violations and others. [4] ,[5]. and it seems you've got the WP:BATTLEGROUND wrong give its proper read. Ratnahastin (talk) 04:20, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is no doubt, most of the contribution of the complainer are just non important contributions on different article while the main aim remains making established caste editors blocked. I can see the WP:POV edits on Rajput caste related articles. Since, we have made that and they donot have complementary sources to revert our edits, such cheap tricks are at play. Chariotrider555 has no reason to use a sockpuppet. Heba Aisha (talk) 01:52, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you Heba Aisha. For someone like Chariotrider555 who uses academic and scholarly sources sockpuppets are of no benefit at all as there would be no need to use two or more accounts simultaneously. Thanks Heba. I was not aware of the "username violation" investigation against me.LukeEmily (talk) 22:35, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

•  Check declined by a checkuser. The evidence presented is not compelling. Behaviorally, these look like different users who happen to share some of the same interests. Closing without action. Mz7 (talk) 06:40, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]