Revision as of 14:42, 5 April 2018 editJuicy Oranges (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers867 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:58, 5 April 2018 edit undoBbb23 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators271,595 edits →Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments: ping VanjaNext edit → | ||
Line 83: | Line 83: | ||
====<big>Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments</big>==== | ====<big>Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments</big>==== | ||
Anastan and Axiomus are technically {{likely}}, but they are using a very common user agent. Axiomus and {{checkuser|Musaeum}} are {{tallyho}}, but Musaeum has made very few edits and only one of substance. Behaviorally, the only similarity between Axiomus and Musaeum are their userpages (lovely images). The behavioral evidence connecting Anastan and Axiomus is much stronger, including the other projects both users/accounts edit and their Keep !votes at ] – the Delete !votes overwhelmed the Keeps. I'd like to hear from others before deciding the disposition of this report.--] (]) 14:15, 21 March 2018 (UTC) | Anastan and Axiomus are technically {{likely}}, but they are using a very common user agent. Axiomus and {{checkuser|Musaeum}} are {{tallyho}}, but Musaeum has made very few edits and only one of substance. Behaviorally, the only similarity between Axiomus and Musaeum are their userpages (lovely images). The behavioral evidence connecting Anastan and Axiomus is much stronger, including the other projects both users/accounts edit and their Keep !votes at ] – the Delete !votes overwhelmed the Keeps. I'd like to hear from others before deciding the disposition of this report.--] (]) 14:15, 21 March 2018 (UTC) | ||
*{{ping|Vanjagenije}} Other than the factual admissions, I don't feel much more illuminated than on March 21 when I said I wanted to hear from others. As a native Serbian speaker, do you have a recommendation as to what should be done with this report? Thanks.--] (]) 14:57, 5 April 2018 (UTC) | |||
----<!--- All comments go ABOVE this line, please. --> | ----<!--- All comments go ABOVE this line, please. --> |
Revision as of 14:58, 5 April 2018
Anastan
Anastan (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
For archived investigations, see Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Anastan/Archive.
21 March 2018
– A checkuser has completed a check on relevant users in this case, and it is now awaiting administration and close.
Suspected sockpuppets
- Axiomus (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
- Editor interaction utility
Axiomus stays inactive for considerable periods of time just to appear again to back Anastan on his fights. The latest case was yesterday. Anastan started a war , and Axiomus returned after a month of sleep to continue it . Both accounts have showed a large interest in Belgrade, indicating that both edit from the same area.
- They have a strong interest in List of twin towns and sister cities in Serbia. Examples: Anastan , , , and Axiomus , , , .
- They have an interest in List of Nobel laureates by country, sth untypical of Serbian editors. They are concentrated on the nationality of Ivo Andrić. Examples: Anastan , , and Axiomus , .
- Another shared interest of them that is untypical of Serbian editors is editing articles of national libraries of countries. Examples: Anastan , , , , , , and Axiomus , , , , . Axiomus adds "Start date and age" and after a part is removed, Anastan readds it .
- Another shared interest that is untypical of Serbian editors is Brutalist architecture. There they move and replace pics in a frivolous way: Examples: Anastan , , , and Axiomus , , .
- Both accounts heavily edit articles of Serbian heritage in Kosovo, with a particular focus on the destructed one. Examples: , , , , , , and Axiomus , , , , .
Since I and other editors have expressed worries about Anastan's combination with other accounts during his fights, a CU could confirm these two accounts with each other and look for other possible socks. Ktrimi991 (talk) 12:53, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
Comments by other users
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
@Bbb23: Thanks for CU, nice findings. I started to suspect that Axiomus is a sock after I noticed that he started to use Twinkle and make redirects in his first few days, unusual of newbies. Ktrimi991 (talk) 14:24, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
- Some other similarities between Anastan and Axiomus:
- Both accounts heavily edit templates of Kosovo, with a particular persistence in keeping "Kosovo_stub.svg" rather than symbols of Kosovo, making same edits. Examples: Anastan , , , , , , , , , , , , and Axiomus , , , , , , , , , , , .
- Brutalist architecture is part of a wider interest in architecture and monuments that both editors share. Examples: Anastan , , , , , , , , , , , , and Axiomus , , , , , , , , , . Axiomus gave bad news and Anastan updated readers with good ones . Ktrimi991 (talk) 18:54, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
omg... Ok, first of all, i know who user Axiomus is. We were both on the same wiki workshop here in our country where we learn to edit, and we were beside that on the same academy. We do talk and comment together off wiki, and as you see, sometimes when i mess up something he come by to fix it and vice versa, but that doesn't looked like to me that our collaboration is questionable, as he is very rarely online, as you may see... Now i look, he had less then 40 edits in the entire last year... Now i feel sorry that this is opened, as i unfortunately only see a revenge from an editor who was blocked several times for its nationalistic disruptive edits after my reports, Ktrimi991. If admins finds acquaintanceship between me and Axiomus troublesome, i would gladly agree on any proposition you may have. I dont want to create a problem for any other editors. I will tell Axiomus to write down comment also. we are living in the same city and have the same provider (as 90% of the city, at the end...) As you already see, i am ordinary editor who follows guidelines, and i do not need sockpuppets for those minor pointless subjects i edit. Again, i am really open for any advice you have on this, as this report by Ktrimi is unfortunately founded on dishonest foundations. --Ąnαșταη (ταlκ) 22:16, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
- Two friends can back each other only in current fightings. Anastan and Axiomus accounts make exactly the same edits not only hours, days or weeks after each other in a clear attempt to force their POV over other editors, but also make exactly the same edits even months or years after each other. One can not protect an edit that his friend made years ago. Some examples: Anastan and Axiomus ; Axiomus and Anastan ; Axiomus and Anastan . Axiomus edited about the destruction of the monument and almost two years later Anastan updated the article with the restoration of the monument . The cases belong to articles that are not among the most preferred for Serbian editors; the articles of the National Library of Australia and the monument in Syria must not have been edited by Serbian accounts other than Anastan and Axiomus since their creation. How can two people syncronize their work so perfectly? How can two people have the same style of editing? How can two people have exactly the same interests? How can two people be so dedicated to placing the note on the status of Kosovo everywhere it is mentioned? How can two people insist in the same way in the Serbian names of settlements and other geographic features in Kosovo? Ktrimi991 (talk) 23:47, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
- Nothing less expected from a problematic editor as Ktrimi but to present all of those things so wrongly. We finished architecture!! Its obvious that we edit article about monuments, library buildings and architectural styles that we love!! We talked about that article, and how images were completely wrong to represent style. And yes, we edit the same subjects from time to time, and yes, we have the same wiki preferences. Same as our instructor showed us during course. Same as rest of the group. :) If editing same subjects is forbidden, we will obey the administrators instructions. But we didnt find that problematic. Nevertheless, your editing style Ktrimi is still very problematic, and your constant removal of sources and references, every single one reverted as vandalism by many editors (1, 2, 3, 4...) will still get you in problem, no matter who is looking on those articles. But, unlike you, i dont want to make problems for Anastan, as our main goal is to create encyclopedia, and to expand nice subjects, and not to use[REDACTED] for political struggle of your people. Its not ok to remove everything you dont like to see about your nation. You are only trying to discredit editors with whom you are having problems.
- At the end, I am very rarely on Misplaced Pages, as a semi retired editor, so whatever admins propose, i will follow. If they dont want us on the same subjects, i agree. Really, all of this is not that much important for me, as i am very busy in real life, so, this editing is just a bypass station for me anyway. I am from Beograđanka building, and that may explain other accounts, as everyone are on the same network here. if administrator need any document or anything else to prove my identity, i will gladly send that to someone who needs to see it. --Axiomus (talk) 15:06, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
- @Bbb23:, Ktrimi's report and additional findings are compelling. Anastan already has admitted to knowing Axiomus and that they have edited from the same place, the wiki academy in Serbia. It can also be a defence to try and blur the lines that they are in fact one and the same person. The editing style and interests of both editors bare this out strongly in their behavior that Axiomus is the sock account of Anastan.Resnjari (talk) 23:49, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
- Both accounts share an interest in Kosovo conflict, in particular the violent events of 2004. The aim is to show crimes committed by Albanians, and description of them with same and similar terms and ways to show them and their actions as "extremism", "terrorism" and "Kristallnacht". Examples: Anastan , , , , , , , , , , and Axiomus , , , , , , , .
- Both accounts add the Kosovo status note everywhere they can. Examples: Anastan , , , , , , , and Axiomus , , , , .
- Both add Serbian names of settlements in Kosovo, move it before Albanian one and whenever possibility exists remove Albanian ones. Examples: Anastan , , , , , , , , , , and Axiomus , , , , , , , .
- Some examples of similarities in page protection requests: Axiomus for Voisava , two weaks later Anastan for the same article . Later, Anastan for Voisava again , Axiomus for the same article four days later . Anastan asks for Telephone numbers in Kosovo , asks again two days later , and Axiomus for the same article two weeks later . Anastan again ten days later . Ktrimi991 (talk) 23:27, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
- Both accounts continuously tell other editors "Go to talk". Examples: Anastan , , , , , , and Axiomus , , . Both extensively use Twinkle to make blind reverts and often request page protections. Ktrimi991 (talk) 23:27, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
- You presented most of the things falsely, and digged years behind. God help you if someone diggs your edit history. Anyway, all of those things are the way we are thought. Its stupid to compare the way they showed us, as that is the way they told us to always do. They thought us to always ask editors to go to talk page no matter what if we have dispute, and to add Kosovo note as neutral info for dispute near the word Kosovo in all articles, to add article name first in line as the article title is, and to ask for protection if article is abused by revert warriors, such as you. And you actually presented this falsely, as you usually do. they told us that in infobox name should be only article name, and next below, official name should be with both languages, first again the article name. So that was standardisation with the rest of articles already in line. So Albanian name should not be first if article is not at all named like that! Thats obvious. And in links you falsely presented as similarities can see that Axiomus actually didn't do it like it should in all edits. He left both names in first name section. (diff, diff) If you push Albanian name instead of common English name in all articles, than that is not removal of Albanian, but restoring original article name. Beside the dispute about content, all of those things mentioned are the proper way to edit Misplaced Pages. I have already told you that two of us talked about articles here, and again, everything we did was in line with guidelines. I can list other editors who were with us on the same academy, and you will see the same editing pattern with them, and i guess the same address. But they are almost not active, and you are not in conflict with them, so they are not here. They do not stop your agenda. And again unlike you, we add sources about true sourced Kosovo history, instead of remove them as you do, and other editors you invite off wiki. And you know that we saw your agenda here, and that's why you are trying as hard as you can to discredit us, inviting other editors that support your POV even here in this request. You have 0 other edits during this so you can give your full attention. We would not need to ask for protection of articles you mentioned that Hakuli, you and other editors dont push their pov and remove sources, and present Kosovo political questions as your only way of editing. They have also thought us one more thing. That editors who edit only one subject, only political subjects and only one political view such as you do actually do more harm then good to wikipedia. Administrators should know that you would now post forever comment after comment, repeating the same arguments over and over. This discussion would never end, but you dont have anything to revert now, so its different. I have already said, and i would said again. If this was the same account, then i must say that would be the dumbest possible person alive, editing the same articles, same subjects in similar way and not expecting to get seen. Dont you think it would be obviously different if the same person have two accounts? Also, if you haven't notice, our usernames are also similar. Yes? That's not because we are the same person. Its because we are friends in real life, we talk and consult each other about this, share watchlist, and we edit wiki together as one smaller part of our friendship. Obviously that is forbidden in your strict world of using[REDACTED] as political agenda. I would now expect some more pro-kosovo editors just to randomly reappear here to give comment how you are completely right. At the end, i already talked too much. You didnt mentioned we have also edited Vojinović Tower together. You wouldn't know that was one of our thesis we worked together during studies, and planed to work here also, and to expand article together. I will not share here nothing personal anymore. Already talked way too much, and I do not have to justify myself anymore to the person who has evil intentions, not to expand encyclopedia, but to use it for its own selfish political goals. --Ąnαșταη (ταlκ) 00:37, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
- Comment - As soon as i saw this discussion I was ready to !vote for indef ban of Anastan and to congratulate editor who reported her here. Then, I went to sr.wiki to check their contributions and saw that they indeed edit architecture related topic independent from each other. (link to contributions of Anastan at sr.wiki) and link to contributions of Axiomus. Apparently, they indeed edit architecture related topic and in several occasions when there was some editing dispute between them and other editors they did not collaborate. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:10, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
- Comment. I've read this page word for word to this stage. You cannot begin to list the number of fallacies committed in what is clearly an attempt to "kill two birds with one stone". The similarities at best affirm the consequent rather than provide a sound argument as to how one individual can be abusively operating two accounts. Anastan had already provided an explanation as to how and why technical data matches even before CU information came through (i.e. the two persons are acquainted), therefore the rejection of this premise is more argument from incredulity than a satisfactory testimony that one person is using two accounts. As my languages are Ukrainian and Russian (asides English), I confess my knowledge of Serbian and South Slavic is rudimentary but I note the sr:Wiki citations from Antidiskriminator which clearly show that the two editors have been on opposing sides of an editing dispute. Although any CU ruling is appeal to probability anyhow, I'd say that Antidiskriminator's findings profoundly shatter that probability. The selected "timings" argument is mere Post hoc ergo propter hoc and not an explanation as to how it is impossible for two persons to frequently edit the same time. I am also very suspicious that all of the editors to push in favour of the banning of the two accounts are unequivocally partizan on Kosovo-related matters and this would explain to me as a complete outsider why none is prepared to accept that Anastan and Axiomus may be genuine and playing fair. Apart from that, the rest of the similarities are wholly generic and are practised by multiple editors. For such inductive reasoning, I wouldn't waste my time with this accusation. --Coldtrack (talk) 20:53, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
- Comment: Editors that suggested a ban are going on the evidence provided and its detailed. If editing Kosovo related articles is considered "partizan", then editors who edit Slavic and Serbian related articles calling for no sanctions can equally be considered partizan. Antidiskriminator has presented edits where there was dispute between the two accounts. If indeed these are two separate editors, Anastan and Aximious have admitted that with they know each other personally and that they have edited from literally the same place, and the evidence above confirms they have helped each other on articles, in some cases during disputes. This goes against Misplaced Pages policy and is also considered sock puppetry (see: WP:MEAT).Resnjari (talk) 02:35, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
- Editors should know that this is not a voting process, and not a forum. Personal attacks on me do show the real intentions of those who make them. Anyway, Coldtrack needs to present diffs for their claim. As far as I can see, both accounts have never been part of any content dispute on srwiki. Ktrimi991 (talk) 07:41, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
- If you dont understand language, of course you wouldn't see it. We had several discussions on sr wiki, and we had somewhat different attitudes about several things, but mostly content and technical disputes. Also, i must state that we didnt edited "from the same place" as falsely represented above, just from the same town where we live, and we didnt "helped each other", we just edited subjects we were both interested in. You are trying to represent our relationship as wrong hidden intention again, but i will repeat, you are all making this far more important and planned then it actually was. We didn't have any intentions with editing wikipedia, we are just friends edited subjects we wanted, Axiomus rarely, and that's it. I was not aware of some of the guidelines i know now, but anyway, that is the way to become a proper wiki editor. Again, despite massive false representation and discrediting, we didn't "planned editing", and as far as i remember, we didn't ever edited from the same place. Why would we do that? Editing Misplaced Pages should be a pleasure and learning, not a struggle, political battle, history falsification, planing and lies. Unfortunately, only that was a problem here. Its not problem that we edited our minor non-important person, architecture and history articles, but that we edited Kosovo related articles, and accidental stepped into someone's systematic political agenda, so we must be removed quickly, before some other point of view is reveled. Well, congratulations. I am certain that i will not edit those dirty political rags again, and Axiomus can speak for himself, if he even care at all anymore to reply. So, whatever is a administrators decision, you have fulfilled your plan. That you really care at all about wikipedia, you would stop User:Hakuli blatant misrepresentation of sources, edit wars and other things on Kumanovo Agreement, and talk to him, but no. You support his POV and without editing the article you are hunting down editors who oppose him and report them to administrators, because they are in the way also. Are you talking off wiki? The same reason you reported us here? That much about your intentions and your editing style. You should read one great guideline i was thought on wiki academy. Its called "Clearly not being here to build an encyclopedia". --Ąnαșταη (ταlκ) 10:55, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
- Editors should know that this is not a voting process, and not a forum. Personal attacks on me do show the real intentions of those who make them. Anyway, Coldtrack needs to present diffs for their claim. As far as I can see, both accounts have never been part of any content dispute on srwiki. Ktrimi991 (talk) 07:41, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
Pointless debate + repeating the same arguments over and over. Vanjagenije (talk) 19:53, 2 April 2018 (UTC) |
---|
|
- Comment: Looking at the examples provided and the counter response, I am unsatisfied that sockpuppetry or meatpuppetry have been substantiated. I am able to see from Serbian Misplaced Pages (I am a speaker of Serbo-Croatian) that the editors have appeared on opposing benches of disputes, whilst their editing style in Serbian (as a first language) immensely differs. As nobody there has implied that there exists a suspicious association between the accounts, and whilst nobody anywhere in this project page can adumbrate how and why it is impossible for two individuals to have fallen victim of circumstance (in collapsed section), all I am seeing is a campaign of obvious bamboozling. --Juicy Oranges (talk) 14:42, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Anastan and Axiomus are technically Likely, but they are using a very common user agent. Axiomus and Musaeum (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) are Technically indistinguishable, but Musaeum has made very few edits and only one of substance. Behaviorally, the only similarity between Axiomus and Musaeum are their userpages (lovely images). The behavioral evidence connecting Anastan and Axiomus is much stronger, including the other projects both users/accounts edit and their Keep !votes at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Dimitrios Baltzis – the Delete !votes overwhelmed the Keeps. I'd like to hear from others before deciding the disposition of this report.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:15, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
- @Vanjagenije: Other than the factual admissions, I don't feel much more illuminated than on March 21 when I said I wanted to hear from others. As a native Serbian speaker, do you have a recommendation as to what should be done with this report? Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:57, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
Categories: