Xtremedood

Xtremedood (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log· investigate · cuwiki)
18 May 2015
Suspected sockpuppets


Both are doing the same edits and editing behaviour (blanking any mention of forced conversion especially in Islam in India articles, giving the same "reasons", both have the same userpage, both are new users, both are editing the same articles and same topic.

Blanking of forced conversion by Xtremedood :

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]

and there are many more such examples in his edit history.
Blanking of forced conversion by Calm321

[7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13]

Calm321 either has no edit summary or says "Did not see source" [14], "no reference", "i see no ref"
Xtremedood either has no edit summary or says "did not see reference, Did not see source [15], No references.

Xtremedood has also been reported to ANI and AE several times for disruptive editing and has been blocked for edit warring. @Gorgevito: @Kansas Bear: @FreeatlastChitchat: @Ghatus: @Delibzr:

Calypsomusic (talk) 11:56, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

17 December 2015

Suspected sockpuppets


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

"he source provided by Capitals00 and other Indians are from Hindustan news and other Indian mouth piece" is nowhere close to being a racial issue. Don't cloud the waters with obviously bad accusations. Nyttend (talk) 15:00, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]


22 December 2015

Suspected sockpuppets


2 IPs from Canada, the same country where Xtremedood's admitted IP address[16] comes from. These IPs came from nowhere, and started to save an article created by Xtremedood from AFD(Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Praise and veneration of Muhammad),[17][18] their fanboy commentaries read like they are real authors of this article.

They have particular habit of making little edits[19] without marking them as minor edits, like Xtremedood too.[20][21][22]

142.109.127.36 shares same location as 96.51.75.106 (self admitted IP of Xtremedood)

"on negative perspectives of Muhammad" - 69.165.152.170[23]
"matter of negative perspectives as" - 142.109.127.36[24]
"a negative perspective on Islam" - Xtremedood [25]

Just like Xtremedood fails to type out whole thing at once, and requires many many edits to make his paragraph, this IP address has done exactly same thing. Just compare:-

Xtremedood's making of a comment[26][27][28][29][30][31]
142.109.127.36's making of a comment[32][33][34][35][36][37]

Capitals00 (talk) 16:23, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting Vanjagenije to review this, because there is an on-going AFD, master is temporarily blocked and these comments on AFD are capable of influencing the outcome of AFD. Capitals00 (talk) 03:51, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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


26 December 2015

Suspected sockpuppets


From first comment on this on-going AFD concerning an article created by Xtremedood, this IP[38] is acting like he knows wikipedia well, while continuously using AFD for WP:FORUM. He knows the redirect called "WP:IDONTLIKEIT"[39] thus he is not new to wikipedia at all.

Apart from that, IP went to bludgeon whole AFD,[40][41][42][43][44] just like previous IP sock of Xtremedood.[45]

Same style of writing:-

86.96.60.18: "The topic of the article is very encyclopedic"[46]
142.109.127.36: "The article is of encyclopedic value"[47]
86.96.60.18: The topic "Praise and veneration of Muhammad"[48], "The topic of the article is"[49]
69.165.152.170:"the topic of praise and veneration of Muhammad"[50]
142.109.127.36: "of the topic it makes sense as", "Western scholarship on the topic"[51]

Very soon, IP went to restore the result data of a totally unrelated article, First Anglo-Afghan War,[52] which was originally written by Xtremedood.[53]

This is clear block evasion and WP:DUCK.

Requesting Vanjagenije to review this, as AFD is still on going. Capitals00 (talk) 13:19, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Seeings this edit on closed AFD, it tells that this abusive IP,94.58.157.181 claims to be the owner of 69.165.152.170, which was from Canada. It is Xtremedood. Since Xtremedood is eager to establish that 69.165.152.170 wasn't him,[54] even though it is not going to help his case or it matters, he is now evading block with this IP (94.58.157.181) to push it further. We can see there was no influx of IP addresses on this AFD, for its last 3 days,[55] only those IPs have commented who had same behavior as Xtremedood. Capitals00 (talk) 15:22, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Just because I have the habit of defending others against false accusations launched by established liars like you doesn't mean that I claim to be the owner of theirs IPs or accounts. I edit by an iPhone using the Internet service of Etisalat (Emirates Telecomunication Corporation) which is, as can be seen here, the 17th largest mobile network operator in the world. It is not a proxy server.--94.58.143.194 (talk) 06:21, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Can you link some diffs where we can find your "habit of defending others against false accusations", or this is the first or last time that you needed this "habit"? If there is no evidence of your habit, then as usual, WP:DUCK. Capitals00 (talk) 07:37, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Now that this IP has failed to prove if they edited wikipedia ever before this scene, I am sure that this IP was Xtremedood and even meatpuppeting is violation of socking. Ping Ponyo again as he is active now. Capitals00 (talk) 06:14, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just read edit history of First Anglo-Afghan War, it looks like this IP continued reverting[56][57][58][59][60][61] to preferred version of Xtremedood[62][63] for last few days, IP also made false accusations of vandalism[64][65] similar to Xtremedood.[66][67][68]
This IP mentions "LuzLuz31"[69]? Xtremedood also mentioned LuzLuz31,[70] for justifying his edits. Capitals00 (talk) 17:33, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
94.58.148.217 is now trying to bludgeon the DRV at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2016 January 1, just like Xtremedood's sock 142.109.127.36 was bludgeoning the AFD. Capitals00 (talk) 15:43, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Comments by other users

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

I was the guy using that ip: 86.96.60.18 from United Arab Emirates and I am not the same guy using the account of Xtremedood. I came accidently accross the article "Praise and veneration of Muhammad" and saw a big notice at the top saying that it is going to get deleted, so I followed the link and voted to keep it, then I noticed the name of user:Xtremedood and went to check his talkpage and contributions. I saw that he is being trolled by certain anti-Islam/Muslim admins and editors whom I am familiar with because I have been watching this silly social network for a long time and know these admins and editors trolling Muslims editors here.
By the way, user:Capitals00 is an obvious liar. The sourced content that I restored on first Anglo Afghan war and got deleted repeatedly by British meatpuppets were not originally written by user:Xtremedood but by user:LuzLuz31 as shown here.--94.58.157.181 (talk) 13:48, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Also, these ips are from United Arab Emirates and not proxies.
And also, just because multiple persons are telling this jackass that "an encyclopedic article" is "encyclopedic" doesn't mean they are sockpuppets. Perhaps he and those who voted with "delete" are sockpuppets of each other..--94.58.157.181 (talk) 13:48, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments


31 January 2016

Suspected sockpuppets


For months, several users (DeCausa, Jobas and myself) have been repeatedly harassed [71], [72] by IPs mainly from the UAE. Thanks to Diannna identifying the link between the harassment of DeCausa and myself and the harassment of Jobas, it seems obvious that the sock master behind it all is Xtremedood. The only connection between DeCausa, Jobas and myself is that we have at some point locked horns with Xtremedood.

Jeppiz (talk) 13:02, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • One final piece of evidence that emerged after I filed the report. Bbb23 blocked Xtremedood for one week for filing a "baseless report at SPI" [93], and when the latest IP incarnation turns up here, it pings Bbb23 and refers to a one week block and ''baseless SPI reports" [94]. So not only do the troll IPs edit the same articles (Mia Khalifa, Punjab-related and religion-related) as Xtremedood, sometime they head straight to ongoing investigations to support Xtremedood [95], [96] or, as here, launch into tirades directly tied to cases related to Xtremedood [97]. Jeppiz (talk) 15:55, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Furthermore, the fact that the sock master has really lost it after being linked with Xtremedood is also a bit indicative. [98], [99], [100], [101], [102], [103], [104], [105], [106]. There'd be no reason for this strong reaction if it would be a mistake. That in itself is of course only indicative, the previously presented evidence of the clear pattern in editing certain areas and the IPs going after those who disagreed with Xtremedod already in summer 2015 and ever since is much more conclusive. Jeppiz (talk) 17:38, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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


27 May 2017

Suspected sockpuppets


Account created on 26 May 2017 just for edit warring and disrupting one article Nathu La and Cho La incidents. Same thing was done by Xtremedood before, who created an account(Greentea555) just to carry out disruption and edit warring on this article.

Using the same isolated source("https://books.google.com.au/books?id=02Hjr6RUckwC&pg=PA197&lpg=PA197")[107] as Xtremedood did.[108]("on page 197")

Prefers putting a dot in the end of the edit summary:

Capitals00 (talk) 10:46, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Since CU is stale, I am adding more behavioral similarities.

"an another perspective", "with Indian perspective", "different perspectives"[120]
"however his perspective, the Ottoman Caliph's perspectives, the leaders of the 200+ Million Barelvi Movement of Sunnis perspectives should not be silenced"[121]


Ping @Vanjagenije and Ponyo: who blocked him or his socks before.[141][142] Capitals00 (talk) 16:16, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

After seeing that he has resumed his disruptive edit warring, after 1 month of break, I am finding more similarities of these accounts:

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

 Stale. CU declined.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:07, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]


05 November 2017

Suspected sockpuppets


Same propensity to add flags in various battles, particularly the File:Alam of the Mughal Empire.svg. cf. [151] or the entire set of contributions [152] regentspark (comment) 20:44, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Sir Sputnik:. The consensus is that File:Alam of the Mughal Empire.svg and various other mughal related flags are fictional. Xtreemedood (and their sock User:Alexis_Ivanov are known to add this flag to articles that are related (or peripherally related) to the Mughal Empire. Looking at Nuclear Elevator's contibutions (hover over the diffs at [153]) shows little interest in anything other than the addition of the Alam and other fictional flags to various articles. My guess is that this needs to be evaluated behaviorally so @SpacemanSpiff and Fowler&fowler: for additional input. --regentspark (comment) 14:17, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Sir Sputnik: The User:Alexis_Ivanov sock of Xtreemedood has added these flags in the past. For example, [154], [155]--regentspark (comment) 21:30, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Xtremedood is currently topic banned by Wikipedia community at ANI

Which doesn't allow him to edit many articles with a different account, so SirSputnic should be made to know the background, or he will make wrong assumption. --Marvellous Spider-Man 04:36, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Sir Sputnik: Xtremedood was topic banned from whole India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh. NuclearElevator should not be making any edits on the articles of those countries but he has. NuclearElevator has also edited Third Battle of Panipat[156] like Xtremedood.[157] Capitals00 (talk) 08:04, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have tried to gather some evidence while keeping in mind that there is very low amount of activity from new account.
Changing/removing images on India-Pakistan articles,[158][159] like NuclearElevator.[160][161]
Fails to sign the comment.[162][163]
Prefers putting a dot in the end of the edit summary:[164][165][166][167]
"should not be used",[168] "shouldn't be used"[169] Capitals00 (talk) 18:24, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

This case is being reviewed by Sir Sputnik as part of the clerk training process. Please allow them to process the entire case without interference, and pose any questions or concerns either on their Talk page or on this page if more appropriate.


23 July 2020

Suspected sockpuppets


Registered only for restoring non-notable articles created by Xtremedood.[170][171][172]

Ping Ponyo who might have the logs.

His recent edit[173] that "In return, Tipu would get all the places that they had captured in the war, including Gajendragarh and Dharwar", is same as what Xtremedood added here.  Looks like a duck to me. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 05:57, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Callanecc: Xtremedood is under an indefinite community topic ban from anything related to religion, India and Pakistan.[174] His last edit show he tried to appeal the topic ban to Arbcom and it failed.[175] This is how he has every reason to be behind this sock account. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 14:51, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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


04 August 2020

Suspected sockpuppets


All these very new accounts restoring edits of this sockmaster.

 Looks like a duck to me. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 02:49, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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