Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jaredscribe

Jaredscribe

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

For archived investigations, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jaredscribe/Archive.

03 July 2025

– A user has requested CheckUser. An SPI clerk will shortly look at the case and endorse or decline the request.

Suspected sockpuppets

Housemousemarie (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 · SPI Tools

Displays the same concern for the Greek-Roman imperial colonisation of Judaism (meaning the religion itself, not the Ancient Jews from the Holy Land). Also, divagations about epistemology/ontology(=metaphysics)/dogmatism. More precisely, mainstream scholarly epistemology under Greek-Roman or antisemitic influence, Greek-Roman ontology, modern mainstream scholarly dogmatism, equating minority opinion with truth that should rendered in the voice of Wikipedia.

They display the same discontent with mainstream academic WP:RS (of the WP:CHOPSY sort). Or with the mainstream academic view.

They both display errors of capitalization.

Edits by HMM

the belief in a singular messiah crystallized to the public largely due to roman imperial occupation and syncretic ontological warfare present within the community [1]

reflecting historical and textual fluidity prior to the crystallization of a singular redeemer figure under Roman imperial influence. [2]

an attested scholarly perspective that predates and critiques the later crystallization of messianic singularism—especially under the pressures of Greco-Roman ontological frameworks. [...] Let’s aim not for dogmatic consensus, but for epistemic range. [3]

While the archetypal framing may not be preponderant in modern lay discourse, it reflects deeply Jewish interpretive traditions and precedes Roman imperial singularism. [4]

it's essential not to conflate prevailing modern perceptions with the consensus of voices within the tradition itself. [5] [hint: why is this relevant? see emic and etic; further, it ignores that the word "archetype" is modern idiom]

[6] [hint: suggests they are acquainted with user talk page policy; Wikipedias in other languages do not always endorse deleting stuff from one's own user talk page]

[7] [hint: it's their third day at Wikimedia servers, and a lot of arcane userboxes suddenly pop up at their user page]

[8] [hint: slick wikilinks for an editor with just three days tenure]

if we're continuing to enforce a non-jewish lens onto the article about the *jewish* interpretation [9] [hint: emic and etic, again]

Edits by JS

Nirenberg holds that anti-jewish theologies of supersession were translated into the discourse of "Critical reason" in the enlightenment [10] [hint: this is about epistemology]

This article shows that the priorities and judgements of mainstream "scientism," in addition to creating systemic bias against women, against traditional religion, and against cultures outside the Graeco-Roman white supremacist world of solarian imperialism [11]

defined by a normative mainstream Academic bias toward scientism, graeco-roman supremacy, <strikethrough>solarian religions</strikethrough>, christianity and post-christian rationalism. [12]

defined by a normative mainstream Academic bias toward scientism, graeco-roman supremacy, solarian religions, enforced by WP:CHOPSY. [13]

and thence the nominalist—realist controversy, which plagues academics on and off wikipedia to this day, in which both parties were and are ignorant of the correct understanding of ontology [14]

is based on a metaphysical assumption: that there are no specific essences, no knowledge of metaphysics, and no final causes, purposes, or teleology in nature, against all common sense and evidence. Mechanistic philosophy as a replacement for dogmatic church metaphysics. [15]

as if he speaks for us all, that "wikipedia takes an emic and not an etic view." [16] [hint: I didn't say that, I said its opposite, see [17] for my edit summary]

about the epistemic foundations of scholarly opinion [...] Likewise where powerful incumbents who define "mainstream opinion" are demonstrably in the wrong, [...] I won't abdicate that merely because the truth happens in some matters to be an unpopular minority opinion. [18]

We hold that it is a culture bound condition known to the greeks as hubris, and that hubris is systemic within the upper classes of hellenic and derivative graeco-roman and phil-hellenic cultures such as Freud's Vienna, being an aspect of the (mis)education and religious systems. It remains so today in the Anglosphere [19]

User:Jaredscribe [20] [hint: publicly discloses his own website, which states he is a PsychoAnalyst; "archetype" most usually belongs to C.G. Jung's psychoanalysis]

Other stuff

See WP:ANI#Housemousemarie. See especially [21]. So: I don't know if they are the same person, but they do have the same POV, which produces the same WP:CIR issues. tgeorgescu (talk) 05:49, 7 July 2025 (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

tgeorgescu, this would be a lot easier to action if you labelled which of these were from which account and included some 90% fewer words. Please see WP:GOODSPI. -- asilvering (talk) 05:22, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]