Cannabis Ruderalis

thcscience_admin


Kaz

Kaz (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
06 October 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Kaz was involved in a dispute over the name and contents of the article on the Crimean Karaites. (Kaz preferred two other words for them "Karaims" and "Karaylar".) He was indefinitely blocked for disruptive editing on 2 October 2012, and his appeal was declined on 3 October 2012.

The Polkanov4 account was created on 5 October 2012, and immediately recreated something similar to Kaz's last version[1] of the Crimean Karaites article as Karaylar.[2] He has done more edits to it since. In addition he has changed various redirects so that instead of leading to Crimean Karaites, they lead to Karaylar.[3][4][5] This is similar behaviour to Kaz.

The Polkanov4 account has also edited articles in the same area of interest such as Qaraei,[6] Khalyzians,[7] and Khalyzians.[8] The article histories show that Kaz also edited these articles.

Muthmar has made three edits. He posted a comment in support of Kaz in Talk:Crimean Karaites#Proposed renaming of article,[9], he joined Wikipedia:WikiProject Karaimism/Members[10] the day after it was created by Kaz. He contributed to a discussion that Kaz had initiated on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard,[11] which was astonishing - how does an editor on only his third edit even know about Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard? He was not notified of the discussion. If he had been a genuine user, he would not have claimed "i did edit the page to correct the typos"; he had not done this. I believe that his puppet master got confused about who had done what. (In the various discussions on ANI, Kaz sometimes got confused about which user had done what.)

Danage posted a message of support of Kaz in Talk:Crimean Karaites#Proposed renaming of article,[12] and joined Kaz's Wikipedia:WikiProject Karaimism/Members.[13] His only activity since was to update his user page on 5 October (the same day as the Polkanov4 account was created).[14]

Note that Kaz, Muthmar and Danage are the only members of WikiProject Karaimism. Toddy1 (talk) 13:31, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  •  Clerk endorsed - Knowing Kaz, there is no doubt that some socking is going on here, and each account here has varying degrees of behavior consistent with being a sock of someone. Would request a check for sleepers as well, considering the totality of circumstances and likelihood that multiple already exist here. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 14:52, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Polkanov4 (talk · contribs) is a  Confirmed match to Kaz. The other two are technically Red X Unrelated. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:34, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Polkanov4 indef blocked. Kaz reblocked as indef for puppetmaster. Closing. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 15:37, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes i did edit some typos, making some misspelling corrections. and how come you could say that Kaz and I are the same person? I am new to this but if you can check my IP address and my location, they are OBVIOUSLY different than Kaz's Muthmar (talk) 10:04, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would have made contributions, but I can assure you that I am not the same user as Kaz. The Karaims are a very close community, but not in regards to location (I live in one part of the UK, he lives quite far away from me). I have been in contact with Kaz for several years, and he asked my opinion on the debate on the talkpage. I took the stance that I should support his comment. As I hadn't used my account for years before, Kaz advised me on how to support or oppose discussions on the talkpage; likewise, he advised me on what to change on my talkpage, as it was a bit out of date. My IP address and location are completely distinct from Kaz's. Danage (talk) 23:00, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

10 October 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Kaz was blocked on 2 October 2012 for disruption, and on 6 October 2012 for sock-puppetry.

He has now started using his 62.255.75.224 IP address to make edits on 8 October,[15][16] and 10 October to promote his POV.[17][18][19]

This IP address is Kaz.[20][21]

86.26.236.107. When asked if the edits by 86.26.236.107 were by him, Kaz answered evasively, saying that it was not his IP address and that the IP address was a dynamic IP address that protected users privacy, by ensuring that their IP was not published for all the world to see.[22][23] All but two of the edits by this IP address were to related articles of interest to Kaz Crimean Karaites,[24] Abraham Firkovich[25] and Talk:Abraham Firkovich[26][27][28][29] between 24 and 26 August 2012, showing similar editing patterns to Kaz and the same POV on Crimean Karaite-related subjects. As Kaz, he also made many edits to Abraham Firkovich promoting the same POV, for example.[30] Toddy1 (talk) 07:19, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. This can be closed. IP blocked for 3 months. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 09:00, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
15 November 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Kaz is an editor who was blocked for disruptive edits concerning Crimean Karaites. He was also blocked for operating both a second user name and an IP as socks editing on Crimean Karaites and related articles. The similarities between Kaz and Budo have led me to believe that they are the same person. Though Budo was not using the same IP as Kaz at the time of Kaz's sock-pupetting block. I believe that the Budo ID edits from a webcafe or or free wireless internet.

WordsWorth did 3 edits on 13 November.

  • [31] was to the Crimean Karaites article suggesting it be merged into Kaz/Budo's POV fork Karaite Folk.
  • Another created User:Неполканов and outed him. The wording of this was remarkably similar to that used in User:Budo. Admin Beeblebrox deleted this edit by the Wordsworth ID, and blocked the latter for harassing another user.

The following lists similarities between Budo and Kaz.

Both Budo and Kaz created POV forks of the Crimean Karaites article, and created networks of redirects to them.

  • [User:Budo]] 7 November 2012 created this POV fork.[32] This is similsr to one of Kaz's versions of the Crimean Karaites article.[33] Special:Contributions/Budo shows that he created redirects. (most of these are new, so I cannot do diffs).
    • [34]
    • 14:13, 9 November 2012 (diff | hist) . . (+25)‎ . . N Soviet Karaites ‎ (←Redirected page to Karaite Folk) (top)
    • 14:12, 9 November 2012 (diff | hist) . . (+25)‎ . . N Soviet Karaite ‎ (←Redirected page to Karaite Folk) (top)
    • 14:11, 9 November 2012 (diff | hist) . . (+25)‎ . . N Russian Karaite ‎ (←Redirected page to Karaite Folk) (top)
    • 14:09, 9 November 2012 (diff | hist) . . (+25)‎ . . N Russian Karaites ‎ (←Redirected page to Karaite Folk) (top)
    • 14:07, 9 November 2012 (diff | hist) . . (+25)‎ . . N Ukrainian Karaite ‎ (←Redirected page to Karaite Folk) (top)
    • 14:06, 9 November 2012 (diff | hist) . . (+25)‎ . . N Ukrainian Karaites ‎ (←Redirected page to Karaite Folk) (top)
    • 14:05, 9 November 2012 (diff | hist) . . (+25)‎ . . N Lithuanian Karaites ‎ (←Redirected page to Karaite Folk)
    • 14:04, 9 November 2012 (diff | hist) . . (+25)‎ . . N Lithuanian Karaite ‎ (←Redirected page to Karaite Folk) (top)
    • 13:58, 9 November 2012 (diff | hist) . . (+25)‎ . . N Polish Karaite ‎ (←Redirected page to Karaite Folk) (top)
    • 13:51, 9 November 2012 (diff | hist) . . (+25)‎ . . N Polish Karaites ‎ (←Redirected page to Karaite Folk) (top)
  • User:Polkanov4 (sock of Kaz) on 5 October 2012 created this POV fork.[35], which is again similar. he also created a web of redirects to the POV fork article. (There ere originally more redirects, but some were deleted in the clean up afterwards.)
    • 07:57, 5 October 2012 (diff | hist) . . (-8)‎ . . Karaimlar ‎ (←Redirected page to Karaylar)
    • 07:56, 5 October 2012 (diff | hist) . . (+21)‎ . . N Karaylar and Karaims ‎ (←Redirected page to Karaylar)
    • 07:36, 5 October 2012 (diff | hist) . . (-8)‎ . . Karaite Karaism ‎ (←Redirected page to Karaylar#Religion)
    • 07:24, 5 October 2012 (diff | hist) . . (-8)‎ . . Crimean Karaims ‎ (←Redirected page to Karaylar)
    • 07:23, 5 October 2012 (diff | hist) . . (-8)‎ . . Lithuanian Karaims ‎ (←Redirected page to Karaylar)
    • 07:23, 5 October 2012 (diff | hist) . . (-8)‎ . . Polish Karaims ‎ (←Redirected page to Karaylar)
    • 07:05, 5 October 2012 (diff | hist) . . (-18)‎ . . Karaimism ‎ (←Redirected page to Karaylar)
  • User:Kaz created his first POV fork of the Crimean Karaites article on 29-30 August 2012.[36] He did not do a web of redirects to this one, but he did propose that the Crimean Karaites article be merged to it (just as has happened with Budo's Karaite Folk POV fork article.

Both Budo and Kaz make similar ad hominem attacks on other editors, for example:

  • Budo, 9 October 2012,[37][38]
  • 62.255.75.224 (Kaz's IP), 8 October 2012,[39]

Both Budo and Kaz make untruthful citations to sources:

--Toddy1 (talk) 23:25, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Copied from Dennis Brown's talk page
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Kaz was blocked at 6 October 2012 due to for disruptive editing of his POV on page Crimean Karaites Please compare Kaz's last versions with posted by Budo Karaite Folk page commented by him as""Independently corroborated brief summary of information from the 6 volume Karaite Folk Encyclopedia". Obviously the versions are almost identical.

In Talk:Karaite Folk page he claims that does not accept Kaz's blocking ,motivating it as personal issues between Kaz and other editors.

Please refer to Budo's editions list showing that at last to weeks all his efforts are to change links to original Crimean Karaites page by links to his Kaz's POV Karaite Folk page.

In his editing Crimean Karaites original and accepted page he tries to reduce significance of this page by some ridiculous changes like claiming that there only Crimean Karaites 80 in the world.

After that he use this change to claim that "the Crimean Karaites article, may indeed need deletion for notability reasons (there are only 80 Crimean Karaites in the world)"

Probably Budo misunderstands the meaning of Crimean Karaites (Karaim) term (ethnic group having origin from Crimea but leaving all over the word). The issue is explained on Crimean Karaite page, but all efforts to explain him were useless.He continues repetitive removing links to RS regarding Crimean Karaite population outside the Crimea. Please learn the issue and prevent this unacceptable behavior. Неполканов (talk) 21:23, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My belief is that Budo and Kaz are the same person. At the time the IP check was done during the Kaz sock puppet investigation, they were not using the same IP. The Budo ID probably edits from an internet cafe or free wireless internet area.
Note also User talk:WordsWorth who was blocked for harassing Неполканов, who I believe is another Kaz sock.--Toddy1 (talk) 21:35, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  •  Clerk endorsed I've added and endorsed a checkuser request, and added a discussion from my talk page. I was reviewing rather skeptically, but the more I looked, the more possible this looked. The links are in the hatted portion, but the timing and choices of article topics, combined with behavior on the article talk page [43] that looks forced from someone that claims that English is their native tongue, leads to believe that the likelihood of a match is very, very high. Because the account is old, from 2003, but seldom used, I feel CU is the proper way to insure these do indeed link up. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 23:54, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Clerk note: Note that Polkanov4 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki), a confirmed match (via DoRD, in archive) is currently asking for a review at the same time. Outside of a template, informal. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 21:12, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Polkanov4, Kaz, and WordsWorth are all  Confirmed to be each other (and given the abusive nature of "Polkanov4" I will decline the request with prejudice).
  • Budo exclusively uses an anonymizing proxy, so the link with the previous three is technically  Inconclusive; I did block the proxy because it has been abused, however. For the user, go on behaviour. — Coren (talk) 00:16, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Indeffing on behavioral similarities and tagging socks. Closing.
     — Berean Hunter (talk) 03:16, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
19 April 2015[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


User Kaz had a thing about the Crimean Karaites. He used various accounts deceptively to promote his ideas about them. I believe that IP editor 79.109.203.252 is Kaz.

Kaz often attacked other users, and the IP started his very first edit with an attack on another user.

  • 18:04, 17 April 2015. "No offense but how the hell has this "Nepolkanov" been allowed to make up all this ultra right-wing crap?"
  • 14:50, 19 April 2015 "Undid revision 656961482 by Toddy1 (talk) disruptive edits by insane user Toddy1 probably a sockpuppet of Nepolkanov"

Kaz and the IP make similar distinctive claims:

  • 19:15, 2 September 2012 Kaz claimed that the Crimean Karaites' religion involved "belief in Christ and Muhammad"
  • 18:04, 17 April 2015 The IP claims that there are Crimean Karaites who "are basically just Muslims who call themselves Qaraims" and "Krymkaraylar of Polkanov and Ormeli´s group. Their culture descends from a Christian branch of the Crimean Tatars called Karaits" "They believe that Jesus was Christ but NOT Moshia´(Saviour God the Father), they begin and end EVERY prayer service with Atamyz (Our Father). They venerate the Old Testament Lectionary above all other scriptures as sacred, but they also read virtually anything including Talmud, the Gospels, and the Quran being basically "Chrislamic""

There is no point in doing a check-user. User:Kaz edited from Cardiff in Wales; the IP is from Majorca (he is probably on holiday there). Toddy1 (talk) 17:23, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The IP editor has compiled an interesting list of enemies, which includes the admins who blocked Kaz and his sockpuppets. If the IP editor really were a new editor, he/she would have no reason to bear a grudge against them. I regard this as more evidence that the IP is Kaz.-- Toddy1 (talk) 19:17, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The IP editor cites and promotes amateur site managed by Hadji Kazimir that actually is Kazimir Hubert von Stauder from Cardiff After my citing of this page yersteday Kazimir;s place of residence at his personal page was changed from Cardiff to Palestine to hide the evidences -Неполканов (talk) 21:49, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Comments by other users[edit]

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

I really think that if you are going to talk about my IP address here there and everywhere toddy! you should be notifying me so that I am aware of your scheming plans. You seem to have learned the ropes here at wikipedia very well. I am certain that there are probably rules about keeping accused parties informed?

I have also invited User:Kaz to join this discussion as you probably should have. However a google search for this man´s name in Cardiff which you and Nepolkanov have provided against the wiki rules shows that he is probably too busy with an election campaign there right now. 79.109.203.252 (talk) 09:37, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]


I am happy to provide an ID card via email to any genuine admin known personally to Jimbo Wales as well as a proof of address. As long as I have a guarauntee that my personal details will only be handled in absolute confidence. I am concerned about the obsessive behaviour of this user Toddy1 and his/her obsession with war and military topics. 79.109.203.252 (talk) 09:37, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Having read through the accusation against me, I would like to point out that there are numerous publications and articles which talk about the Caraims/караимы (караи) beliefs in Christ and Muhammad some of which I have posted on the Crimean Karaites Talk Page (e.g. 1, 1, 3) which Toddy1 and his team keep deleting. Furthermore Ormeli and Polkanov are well known leaders of the Krymkaraylar whose website (http://karai.crimea.ua/) also mentions belief in Christ and Muhammad. Seraya Shapshal and Ilya Kazas are famous for mentioning these facts too, as well as Johann_Reinhold_Forster and Douglas Morton Dunlop.

Basically it is common knowledge! Just pick up any modern Lithuanian Karaim or Crimean Karaim Prayer service book and you will see!

Somehow though a tiny team of religious fanatics have managed to hijack the English wikipedia to completely censor out all this and the accurate cultural information about the extremely endangered Caraimean minority in a form or Orientalism to project their own fantasies about what and who Caraims are by portraying them as some sort of Jewish minority, which they most certainly are not. Some were allowed into Israel under the law of return as Subbotniki until 2003 along with many Russians, but they are not eligible for Aliyah. The erroneous information defended by Toddy1 and his team on wikipedia is misleading and is certainly tied to money making schemes whereby scammers (e.g. Karaite Jewish University) advertise to people who are interested in making Aliyah to Israel that they can easily convert (for a fee) to become Crimean Karaites and move to Israel. Utter Nonsense. 79.109.203.252 (talk) 09:58, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Also I think my angry comments to Toddy1 were justified considering what he/she and his/her sockpuppet/meatpuppet did to my comments on the Crimean Karaites Talk Page http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Crimean_Karaites&diff=656961403&oldid=656930381. When they appologise for attacking me I will revoke my angry comments. 79.109.203.252 (talk) 10:03, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]


This user (79.109.203.252) is definitely Kazimir Hubert ( User:Kaz) Please check below fully referenced explanation:

Compare the following ridiculous unproved claims( I never published images that are at the site below):

with

This site was established by real Crimean Karaite V. Kefeli but later vandalized in Kaz's style by non karaite German count's son Kazimir Hubert, claiming that he is Hadzhi,Chan and Gibbor(hero in Hebrew). Probably he bought the domain. E.g he changed the original site page about M. Sarach ,referenced by me in Russian Wikipedia replacing "Together with the majority of other French Karaites-emigrants converted to christianity to "he defended the Christian nature of the Karaite Church of Anan from the influence of Qumisi's Karaite Jews converted to Christianity" in Kaz's style . At the beginning he had at this site a page about himself (the Crimean Karaite Institute director 'Kazimir Hubert) claiming there also that he has some grade of autism , exactly like User:Kaz. This in addition the fact that his his name is similar to User:Kaz. After Kazimir's charge by Cardiff court he removed his page from the institute but wrote that "At July 2014 The Founders of the International Institute of Crimean Karaites appointed a new Chief Executive Joseph" . Joseph is the name that Kazimir calls himself (link from Moscow Crimeam Karaites site guestbook). May be the British court decision is the reason that currently Kazimir's IP is not British. --Неполканов (talk) 21:29, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your attempt to include me in your WP:OUTING of User:Kaz by identifying me with that person is ridiculous as he is currently involved in a political campaign as any google search on his name reveals (even produces one wikipedia result!). I on the other hand do not even reside in the UK! I don´t think any Politician would want would be to be involved with any kind of controversy during a campaign.

You and your cronies simply don´t like anyone presenting the facts about the Crimean Karaites. That is why you gang up on them and block them ban them and accuse them all of being sockpuppets of User:Kaz whenever someone points out the truth of the matter. You are very sad little people who have mastered the policies of wikipedia in order to build up your own little POV fortress. But your time will come to an end.

My suggestion is to ENGAGE in DIALOGUE rather than try to silence those whose comments you do not like.

You and your cronies have a current beligerent method which will cause anyone who does not feel passionately about this the truth to give up. History will judge you unfavorably for that.

79.109.203.252 (talk) 18:41, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]


25 April 2015[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


The following is an extract from Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive882#Users Toddy1 and Nepolkanov (Неполканов).

"...I am also very concerned that a fourth revert has been made using an alternate IP address which appears to be a dynamic proxy IP address which has been unused (for Wikipedia purposes) since 2013. Since the revert is the only edit that this IP address has made in over two years, it smells very strongly of WP:SOCKPUPPETRY. If this is a sock and  Looks like a duck to me, then this puts the reverts at 4RR, though not within 24 hours but that is evidence of edit warring... DieSwartzPunkt (talk) 15:32, 21 April 2015 (UTC) "[reply]
"However, it is also clear from that talk page that 79.109... is indulging in abuse of those that oppose him. I also find 79.109...'s use of a sockpuppet IP address to continue his edit war at Crimean Karaites convincing enough (how many times have we seen similar one off edits following 3RR?). A clear WP:DUCK test winner. These actions alone warrant a block of 79.109.203.252. The socking alone warrants an indefinite block (the IP address appears static). I B Wright (talk) 07:46, 22 April 2015 (UTC)"[reply]

-- Toddy1 (talk) 08:37, 25 April 2015 (UTC) Toddy1 (talk) 08:37, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

NOTE I have just been made aware that this SPI case exists in parallel with a case that I raised 3 days earlier on 2 IP addresses that are socks of each other. One of the IP addresses is listed here. The case can be found at [[44]]. DieSwartzPunkt (talk) 12:38, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
29 April 2015[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


This is a Welsh IP address. Clearly he has returned from his trip to Majorca.

  • 01:15, 29 April 2015 In the edit summary he has the statement "Reading through talk page and its archives shows there is clearly a massive dispute over this article. -Kazimir Hubert Independent Candidate for Cardiff Central 2015". This is an admission of his identity. He also restores the synthesis tag that he placed using the IP he was using in Majorca.
  • 01:21, 29 April 2015 The edit summary states: "removing images owned by IICK and Caraimica.org, you may only insert them with a credit to us". This is another admission of his identity.

Toddy1 (talk) 06:58, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  • Since the article is already semi-protected there isn't anything left to do here. The IPs are dynamic. Closing.
     — Berean Hunter (talk) 13:49, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
22 April 2015[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

79.109.203.252 has resorted to making controversial changes to the article Crimean Karaites following what can only be described as a rant on the talk page [[45]].

79.109.203.252 had already made three reverts to the article within 24 hours ([46]; [47] & [48].

Having a need to make a fourth revert ([49]) and not wanting to fall foul of the three reverts rule, 79.109.203.252 adopts the classical approach of using a different IP address, 149.254.235.196, to make the fourth revert.

  1. The revert is reverting exactly the same material from the article.
  2. The revert is the only edit that 149.254.235.196 has made to wikipedia in over two years.
  3. 149.254.235.196 has made no edit since the one above.
  4. The IP address, 149.254.235.196, appears to be a proxy as it does not resolve to a specific geographical location, but only a country.

This is clear case meeting the WP:DUCK test. DieSwartzPunkt (talk) 15:41, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This ANI case (WP:ANI#Users Toddy1 and Nepolkanov (Неполканов)) also contains an allegation that this IP is the same user as a blocked user User:Kaz for pushing the same viewpoint. While I haven't checked back far enough, the clerk may wish to do a check.

2.101.113.202 (talk · contribs · count · logs · page moves · block log) has been added to the sockpuppet list as that IP has started exactly the same edit war that the other two IP's were taking part in [here].

Comments by other users[edit]

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

In my defense, I do not know who the IP Editor for IP 149.254.235.196 is. I was grateful for the support, but nevertheless politely asked the IP editor to keep out of this dispute as anyone can see on the IP´s talk page[50]. Using an IP locator identifies the IP address as being based in London, while my IP has already been identified by Toddy1 as being based in Majorca.

Rant not related to SPI case.

I dispute the validity of the content of the Crimean Karaites article as it stood on the 17th of April this year and so I posted the Original Research Synthesis tag at the top of the page[51]. I do not believe that my strong objection to the content can be called a rant as I produced evidence to illustrate the problems, quoting the Crimean Karaite prayer books, the Crimean Karaites own websites, Seraya Shapshal, Ilya Kazas, and initially three articles in Russian. I also posted a notice on the No Original Research Notice Board about Nepolkanov´s use of Wikipedia´s Crimean Karaites article as a platform for publishing his Synthesis of various ideas. My comments on the talk page were immediately deleted by User:Toddy1 who for no apparent reason immediately accused me of being a sock puppet of User:Kaz [52] and he also removed my comment on the No original Research Noticeboard [53] making the same allegation against me for no apparent reason.

Subsequently a troop of Meat Puppets jumped out of no-where defending Toddy1 and Nepolkanov. Toddy1 went uncharacteristicly quiet judging from his edit history [54] under that username, leading me to suspect that one of these Meatpuppets is in fact a sockpuppet of Toddy1 which he inadvertently edited a response under and in order to keep up the pretense has decided to continue editing under that name, perhaps SamuelDay1 or DieSwartzPunkt whose sole contributions since the 19th of April have been in a campaign against me and apparently nothing else [55]. When I have a better idea I will request a sock-puppet/meat-puppet investigation be opened. If it is not against wikipedia policy I would like to propose watching these users very closely in future. I welcome advice on how to proceed.

Nepolkanov meanwhile (whose only conversation seems to be when Toddy1 makes an allegation that someone is Use:Kaz [56] generally a quiet editor [57] though that in itself is no cause for concern) has been busy providing all the personal details of User:Kaz [58] [59] and most recently User:Neria [60]. Evidence which DieSwartzPunkt now wants swiftly deleted [61] falsely alleging that my open question constituted an "enemy list" as he puts it. Suffice to say all this evidence has been screenshot saved and fully documented by me and other witnesses in the meantime.

79.109.203.252 (talk) 20:25, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]


The sock IP address has apparently already been identified as a proxy. It geolocates to a country but not a specific location. If you zoom in far enough it geolocates to the geographical centre of the country's capital (a church hall opposite the Palace of Westminster) a sure sign of a proxy. That means that its geographical location provides no evidence as to the origin of the edits made through it. The fact that the edit followed a 3RR (avoiding a 4RR) and is the only edit made in over two years, is a classic case of using a sock to avoid a 3RR violation. The rest of your rant does not address this case. Posting a note on the sock's talk page is not such a clever touch, as everone has seen that one before. I B Wright (talk) 08:03, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE I have just been made aware that there is a parallel SPI case against the same IP address but addressing the relation to Kaz highlighted above. It can be found at [[62]] DieSwartzPunkt (talk) 17:33, 30 April 2015 (UTC) Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

26 January 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets


The Marcuslevine account appears to have made no edits on any Wikimedia project[63]. Yet Kaz knew of the existence of the account, and used his sock Budo to write to the talk page[64] and to the user page[65]

Marcuslevine is therefore a sleeper account, and should be blocked. Toddy1 (talk) 08:11, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

  • @Toddy1: I'm closing this with no action. Why do we care what happened in November 2005? Marcuslevine made two deleted edits at that time, and Budo, at roughly the same time, updated Marcuslevine's user pages (as you stated). Marcuslevine hasn't edited since, so why are you even bringing this up? If they edit at some point in the future, which seems highly unlikely, we can deal with it then.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:53, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

07 February 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

YuHuw claims to be a new editor. It is odd that he uses terms like "refactor",[66][67] even though he claims not to have seen the policy.[68]; this is not an everyday word outside the Wikipedia community. Though it was a word Kaz was familiar with.[69][70]

The YuHuw account was created on 8 January 2016.[71] By 11 January 2016, he was asking " May I also ask if anyone here recognizes this IP address? 202.9.41.173 It looks like a WP:DUCK from User:Ancientsteppe." [72] This does not sound like a new editor.

Kaz and YuHuw made the same error of thinking that Неполканов means anti-Polkanov:

Kaz and YuHuw talk in a similar way:

  • Kaz in edit summary "Due to prejudiced harassment"[73]
  • YuHuw "So I am asking you and your Tag-team to re-consider the group tactics you are currently employing (harassment and bullying)"[74]

Both Kaz and YuHuw put their heading above another user's comment on a talk page, even though the other user objected.

Kaz and YuHuw have the distinctive habit of creating large numbers of redirects in a short period of time:


Kaz and YuHuw share a common interest in the Crimean Karaites, and in an unrelated Mogolian group called the Keraites. Kaz's sock Budo talked about his interest in the Keraits and then said: "Naturally I became very interested in… Crimean Karaites". He said that the Crimean Karaites "really do believe that their religion is a from the Kereits being a form of Torah observance which includes belief in Jesus Christ and in Mahomed." (Kereit is a redirect to Qarai Turks.)

Crimean Karaites Talk:Crimean_Karaites Karaim_language Talk:Karaim language Qarai Turks Talk:Qarai Turks Keraites Talk:Keraites
Kaz 239 186 9 5 10 1 1 1
Budo (sock of Kaz) 13 26 4
Polkanov4 (sock of Kaz) 2 2 3
YuHuw 12 29 11 7 41 9 65 46

Toddy1 (talk) 01:05, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kaz and YuHuw use the same word: Караимствующие: This word is used in English only on Kazimir Hubert's Crimean Karaiite Institute site 16:15, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Hubert Kazimir, the self-nominated "high priest" of a tiny Russo-Muslim religiou sect, a.k.a Kaz or Budo on WP, now in his new sockpuppet disguise YuHuw, is still running here, due to the fact that the issue is a quite arcane one, within the particular Russian religious sectarian arena. But he surely cannot hide any more, can he? warshy (¥¥) 18:35, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please compare this with this and this it looks like both disruptive editors like to use the same expression "please be patient with me" . Неполканов (talk) 21:54, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]


IP editors

YuHuw complained below under "Accusation 1 New User" that I had omitted his earlier edits as IP editor. So I have added the two he used on holiday in Israel. He has admitted that 94.159.177.65 was him.

The following demonstrates that 31.154.167.98 was also him. 31.154.167.98 made eight edits to Karait. He turned a redirect into a content fork of Keraites.[142]. After Неполканов reverted this back to a redirect, 94.159.177.65, reverted back to the content fork.[143] Both these IPs were Orange Israel IPs. They were the same person.

YuHuw continued the development of the content fork.[144],[145],[146],[147]. Naturally this involved mixing the Crimean Karaites (Karaim) up in this.[148]

Readers of the archive will be familiar with Kaz sockpuppets turning redirects into content fork articles about the Crimean Karaites. This one was slightly different in that it was about a Mongol tribe, but naturally (being Kaz) this involved mixing the Crimean Karaites (Karaim) up in this.[149] -- Toddy1 (talk) 18:35, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please consider also
It looks like the same editor from the different IPs. Неполканов (talk) 14:04, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
See also this
Addional use of new based in Britain IP Неполканов (talk) 20:51, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
And the next one sockpupettry is obvious,when 3RR warned by admin,disruptive edit warrior continues his EW by anonymous IP and after that exposes his sockpuppetry, explaining it by unbelievable technical reasons.Неполканов (talk) 21:31, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

I finally managed to grab a few minutes to start this, but it turns out to be too much for one night. therefore I have skipped over some things I thought were too obsessive and irrelevant to countering the behavior issue I am accused of, but please don't judge me on the absence of extra diffs if they are required please just ask for them.

In response to my repeated requests (most recently here) for him to engage in discussions to establish a consensus on sources which his team like to remove from certain articles, my accuser has instead "attacked" me here by opening a very bad faith sock-puppet investigation instead (having taken a break from his usual editing interests [150] to work practically full time on me) trying to build a fake case to prevent his own editing from being examined. Which I intent to keep a very close eye on from now on if I am allowed to do so.

Team-Toddy1's motive for this attack (to prevent his own Team's editing from being examined) is very clear.

Concerning Toddy1's so-called "behavioral evidence", there are good reasons -which must be pointed out- for what has been presented by my accuser above.

Accusation 1 New Editor

Toddy1 is pretending I am a new editor rather than a new User. I have long been a keen wiki reader making anonymous minor contributions to articles (e.g. [151]) relating to Judaism as I wrote when I introduced myself here in my first Talk page post under my User account name [152]. I was drawn into the Karait discussion because I had spotted that many articles were suffering not having been cleaned up since blocking some sock-puppets of User:Ancientsteppe. Until then, I was more focused on minor edits than making much use of the wikipolicies I had digested, mainly because I find some of them difficult to get my head around as they require me to re-learn the basic meanings of a word (e.g. "re-factoring" one of the more difficult to understand policies). YuHuw (talk) 19:13, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Today Toddy1 added the IP which I mentioned I used when I signed up. But he tries to present it in a suspicious underhanded way. This is all bad faith again. There is nothing unusual about this, I am sure all Users on Wikipedia were IP addresses once upon a time.

This is all just part of his belligerent style to attack editors who challenge the content he wants to monopolize.YuHuw (talk) 05:26, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Toddy1 also tries in his new IP Editors section to make it look like I added comment about Crimean Karaites (Karaims) to the Karaites article of my own volition, while in fact again closer examination exposes it was later in the day in response to user Nepolkanov who brought them into the discussion here [153] and I simply put them in as a gesture of good will to the editor. Every reference concerning them which Nepolkanov brought up Dbachmann and I included into the section which Dbachmann suggested is where such info should go. It seems now our good will was un-be-known to us all playing to part of the manipulation game Toddy1's team/community of friends/colleagues have been playing from the start.

Everything Toddy1 and his friend presents here is nothing but mis-direction and deceitful playing about with with the diffs. There is no chronological order of events in their context. They deliberately try to obscure the context and confuse the order. YuHuw (talk) 05:40, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Accusation 2 Refactoring

Toddy1 says I use an alleged unusual Wiki word "refactoring" just like Kaz but look here [154] 3,750,000 hits without any reference to wiki. This article [155] is about 12 years old and it already shows how the word back then was becoming secularized "is often used when it's not appropriate". Anyone with a computing background should know this is not an uncommon word outside wiki. Moreover and more importantly, the links Toddy1 provided here [156] and here [157] show that the way User:Kaz uses the word is completely different from the way I use the word. The meaning Kaz presents is Edit/re-arrange/restructure while my use is very literal (change the base factor) [158]. So Toddy1's "evidence" actually supports my innocence! Completely different uses of a word.

Accusation 3 Polkanov

He had been trying to guess what my Username meant so I assumed his user name might be N.E. Polkanov and wanted to find out if he was a famous author or something because he presents himself as an expert on Karaites. Anti-Polkanov is the number 1 hit on Google when I google his user-name [159].

Accusation 4 Harassment

I have already submitted two requests for mediation to ANI here [160] and [161] concerning his aggressive harassment (there is no more appropriate word for it) which this accusation here is nothing but the next level.

Again Toddy1 shows how different Kaz uses his language from mine. He says "prejudiced", I say "bullying". So again his "evidence" actually supports my innocence! Very different meanings.

Accusation 5 Headings

Me deleting bad spelling from my Talk page and then trying top find a common factor between me and Неполканов is in no way comparable to the insertion of Biased POV headings by Kaz on Discussion pages. It must be pointed out though that Toddy1's behavior in this regard [162] is comparable to that of User:Kaz.

There is nothing unique about this.

I realize now though that Team-Toddy1 decided Nepolkanov should put bad spelling on my page in order to coax me into changing that painful heading.

Accusation 6 Redirects

Again closer scrutiny reveals a significant difference in behavior. I clearly state what I am doing on the Talk page here [163] I want to encourage discussion and I have been listening to advice on how to generate discussion.

The links Toddy1 provided for Kaz and Budo on the other hand do not even have any discernible pattern besides copying each other. I did not even know such redirects existed! Some of them do not even make sense. But all of them are clearly trying to mix religious community with secular community which is exactly what Nepolkanov tries to do, but diametrically opposed to what I am concerned with -namely why try to obfuscate Christians with Jews? The term Karaim clearly refers to a type of Jew not Christian -although Nepolkanov disagrees and claims [164] they not only accept Jesus and Muhammad but even Buddha (?!?) so maybe he is a better candidate for being a Kaz & Budo sock.

Accusation 7 Common Interest

The table shows that the main interest of Kaz has been Crimean Karaites, while my most main interest has been the Keraites article which are totally different groups but I can also explain in detail how and why I got hooked on that article and why I have touched a very small selection of articles which User Kaz also touched. By analagy, there is no 19 miracle in the Quran, but if you are selective on what you look for you can make it appear so. Toddy1 has re-created a 19 miracle. It is an old magician's trick.

From the outset, the accuser has been discussing with his community team-mates/friends[165] (e.g. here [166], [167], [168], [169], [170], [171], [172]) on how to set me up from almost a month ago practically as soon as I created my user-name here. It is clearly stupid to think that these public discussions are the only ones which have been taking place between them.

Toddy has a keen interest in Military strategy and has clearly used his advanced knowledge in that area to bait me and ensnare me in a trap which I walked right into without realizing.

They have baited traps for people to investigate those pages he listed my work on by bringing references to them up in unrelated discussions (e.g. User:Неполканов's unsigned comments here [httpshttps://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AKarait&type=revision&diff=698741065&oldid=698739460]).

The truth is that I, having collaborated with User:Dbachmann on the Keraites article against suspected puppets of User:Ancientsteppe [173], have been drawn to the pages (which Toddy1 listed) while I was supporting User:Dbachmann's efforts [174], [175] who is an absolute delight to work with but by Toddy1's logic is another Kaz puppet! Of course the reason Team-Taddy1 does not run with such insanely ridiculous accusation is because Dbachmann is an admin. He is, however, not the only Admin that Team-Toddy1 has accused of being a sockpuppet (see for example here [176]. Because I defended that user editor here [177] (That is the anon IP assigned to me before I signed up my new account) I was then tagged as the next sock by Team-Toddy!

The other of the pages listed by my accuser I am sure I first touched by cleaning up the redirects to Keraites [178] after Dbachmann moved and renamed the Keraites page [179] to undo the work of User:Ancientsteppe [180].

I believe the only reason my activity on those pages is extended is because Team-Toddy1 try to create controversy on those pages (requiring more diligent activity) only while no one has on any of the other pages I have touched, hence no-need to dwell on them. If you turn away and give up trying to fix the substantial errors, then fine, but if you hang around and try to get them to engage in discussion on what is wrong then it seems you will end up here.

Anyway, as a result of these baseless accusations I have always volunteered to officially identify myself to an official of Wikimedia foundation and show I am not the user (who was entirely unknown to me prior to being brought to my attention). I even contacted a checkuser to discus about this option [181]. Once identified, it will be obvious (if not from my behavior anyway) that I have no connections to the user they accuse me of being.

Naturally though, having been accused of being a puppet of this user and having seen this sockpuppet's investigation page talked about frequently by Team Toddy1, common curiosity forced me to read through the history to try and find out what it is exactly I have been accused of. At the same time I thought Toddy1's Team (see below) might be User:Ancientsteppe puppets of some kind so I started a little background research of my own hoping to make a name for myself (perhaps exactly what Toddy1 is trying to do).

The great thing about wikipedia of course is that ANYONE can familiarize themselves with the activities of ANY user through the history pages and edit histories IF we have nothing better to do (which is something Toddy1 and I seem to have in common at least for the time being -how sad we are -time to get a life I think lol). While I have not been as obsessive as Toddy1, I have not been lazy either in doing my background research. Finding "Toddy1" on User Warshy's talk page has made it particularly easy to catch up with his team's hounding strategy as the reason why he does all this is explained on User:Warshy's wall. There we not only learn about his opinion that admins are clueless [182], but that the outcome to these sock-puppet investigations are not important to him because he has his own reasons and agenda [183]. The point as he explains is to tag editors that he does not like obviously thereby associating them with this user here which I have learned is punishment enough in its own right.

As you probably noticed from the above evidence already, the accuser has a long history of working with a very specific team (puppets of User:Ancientsteppe, puppets of User:I_B_Wright, Warshy, and especially Nepolkanov the only putting in appearances when Toddy needs him. Other random IPs [184] and sleepy users e.g. Vadcat also appear from time to time. It can be seen that they work together to set up anyone as being puppets of this user if anyone touches certain monopolized articles (as can be seen from the edit history and which Toddy1 selected from my extensive edit history). Credit where credit is due, long ago, it seems Team-Toddy1 might have been correct in identifying possible puppet accounts, but other times (the majority of times) their suspicions have been rejected by the admins. Someone might as well accuse Team-Toddy as being a sock puppets for all they know of each other and even are able to randomly answer questions for each other.

Of course Toddy1 knows all this very well.

I thought making a user account would be a fun way to engage with intelligent people on topics of common interest having seen some of the camaraderie which emerged from discussions and realized I would never get to enjoy that same level as I can not afford to purchase my own static assigned IP address from my ISP. Any check-user can verify that the IPs I use, they are always the one(s) assigned to me by my ISP which is a major ISP company in my country. Since creating my account there are only very few occasions when I have edited Wikipedia without being signed in due to cookie clean ups on my computer.

I would like User:Bbb23 to know that since first being accused I have been asking for a Checkuser to allow me to vindicate myself. No relationship between Kaz and me is possible.

I really have nothing to hide from Admin who have won the trust of the wiki community. But I am concerned about people who "don't know you from Adam" suddenly deciding to equate you with an alleged pedophile -a seriously dangerous thing to say about anyone. That really causes one to be intensely critical of the accuser's motivations.

YuHuw (talk) 19:13, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Who is the alleged pedophile you are referring to, and where was that alleged? Wbm1058 (talk) 15:08, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Really,how YuHuw knows details from the internet page removed before his appearence on Wikipedia?!. The similiar familiarity is seen also here. Amazing ability for newcomer to dig in WP archives.
It is also amazing that with starting of this disscussion with this "Israeli" user ,user Kaz changed his page out of WP(the sentence "I have Israeli citizence that does not undermine my loyalty to Britain." was changed to "I don't have citizen rights in Israel and that does not undermine my loyalty to Britain. the sentence without any sence(So why you intend Israel at all?). Hurry to see this page because all Kaz's pages that intended in WP were very fast changed/removed.
But of course the main argument is the unique Kaz's style massive edits that they are not only massive and repetative but argumented on RS that obviously claim the opposite or not related things.
The best example is 4 times removal of concensus map
1)
2)
3)
4)
explaining that this map usage on other langugaes WP pages is mistaken because these pages (Kheraid) actually are ;mistaken translatioh of this English page' (while actuallty these pages are written in different manner with RS at their languages. He also refers to Dunlop that does not intend this map at all.The same thing can be said almost of every one of his edit.For example here his edits fully distort original source(later he "recognizes" his mistake by reverts the concensus version refering problematic source in spite of getting from me explanationby his request why this source is really problematic and outdate).Instead of looking for consensus considering other opinions ,he blames the other editors in conspiracy against him.
Of course his claims above that his main interest is Kerates is misleading: His interest is not Keraites but Karaites.His changes(see map changes above) are directed to cliam that the Karaites is the correct names for Kheraid. So he removed the map about Kheraides and added faked RS argumented page regarding connection between Kheraid and Crimean Karaites, It is the main purposeof his edits in similiar to Kaz. It is possible to see that most of his edits are in talks related to Crimean Karaites theme. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Неполканов (talk • contribs) 20:29, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Summary
YuHuw is Kaz because:
  • Edits thematics is the same
  • Unique distriputive, ignoring concensus, RS forgery style is the same.
  • Kaz changes his pages out of WP by content related to this discussion,in similiar manner as during his previous clones,
  • Suspicious familiarity with claims and arguments that were archived during several previous Kaz's activities.
Неполканов (talk) 19:51, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Updates regarding extenal Kaz's pages: page that I referenced here was changed during this disscusion again from Palestine to P and after that to unexisting state Polce. Неполканов (talk) 20:06, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Response to Неполканов's claims
  1. There is no evidence of "thematics is the same" in fact all the alleged "evidence" provided when scrutinized reveals significant differences in style, POV, method and very specific differences in use of language as illustrated above. The illusion vanishes as soon as we do not take for granted the deceptive words of these accusers, but instead wet check (even though it is tedious and time consuming) into the TRUE contexts of what they are talking about.
  2. Douglas Morton Dunlop is not a forgery he is a very well known English language RS
  3. Makes no sense to me at all. I have no idea what he is talking about. If someone can help translate please do.
  4. Any sane person accused of being someone else will want to read through the investigations and history on that user and the users who are accusing him especially as this incessant accusation has been used against me every time I asked for discussion. It is tedious a bit boring but not difficult at all to find past information on wikipedia. Most of what is needed is in the history of this very page.

It is extremely clear from Nepolkanov's waffling that the only think he cares about is restoring the work (and very specific wording) of User:Ancientsteppe's sockpuppets which User:Dbachmann -and I in his footsteps- have been working hard to remove, although the task is far from complete.YuHuw (talk) 22:11, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Douglas Morton Dunlop is not a forgery he is a very well known English language RS is a typical claim of this unique style. This old RS is really not forgery.But reference to it while removing the Kheraid's map is a forgery. Because Dunlop speaks nothing against the map you have removed 4 times trying to claim that Karaite is the only and dominant name for Kheraid that you rejected because you have found such faimily name at Google, It is clear accoreding your other edits that your purpose to connect it with Kaz's style to favorite Kaz's Karaims.So the tematic is the same Qaraism,,Karaim Language ,Crimean Karaites, Isaak of Lutsk ,Simha Isaac Lutsk. Keraites are only small part of your edits. When you deny it you again recall me the Russian idiom that you failed to translate correct with Google translate like many other Russian RS. "The hat burns on thief's head" Неполканов (talk) 23:05, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The map you are trying to restore is one of many on wikipedia which have yet to be removed all created by the same absent editor who used the very precise wording and ideas introduced by User:Ancientsteppe's sock-puppets and no one else -it is therefore untrustworthy. Discussion is what will lead to a new consensus on that, not false allegations trying to get rid of your critics. YuHuw (talk) 05:44, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
And why do you keep calling me a thief over and again here?

[185] [186] [187] [188]

Do you and your friends own some sort of business [189] [190] which is being damaged by the truth? YuHuw (talk) 06:04, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I never called your a thief. The sentence bolded above is Shiboleth -it is idiom unsderstendable to every Hebrew speaker:[על ראש של גנב בוער הקובע ]. It intends to lier's behaviour that extradies him. While you did not understand it it is clear evidence taht you are not Hebrew speaker and not Israeli in contardiction to your claims.
So there is enough evidents for permanent suspected users disinformation:
  • He hides his interests claiming that Crimean Karaites are not his main interest(see above Accusation 7) , while history of his edits shows opposite
  • He is not Hebrew Speaker while he claims, that he is Israeli explaing the use Israeli IP.
So I join the reques for his CheckUser. It looks me justified and essential. Неполканов (talk) 19:47, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
YuHuw - since you clearly do not understand Hebrew - read this link, which explains the idiom.-- Toddy1 (talk) 20:12, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Response to Wbm1058's request

User:Wbm1058 I discovered that reference in this [191] version of the current page here where you can also see that the same accusers were supporting sockpuppets of User:I B Wright in doing roughly the same thing to other people that they are doing here in support of User:Ancientsteppe's work.

That page is interesting also because you see they point out quite significantly different point of view of user:Kaz from my own although Неполканов has shown here that he support those points of view.

Whoever User:Kaz really was, a whole group of sockpuppet supporters have been using that account to silence anyone who has come along questioning their edits.

I feel uncomfortable with quoting directly what Неполканов alleged about (at least one of) the alleged identities of the person(s) behind User:Kaz, in case of legal backlash against me. But you can see the pedophilic reference very clearly just before the blue text in this edit [192]. Interesting to see there that Неполканов is making a claim that evidence has magically vanished from the internet. In other words, the only person who has seen the alleged "evidence" is the (can I say over the top?) Неполканов.

Anyway the intended insult against you is very clear whenever one of these users calls you a puppet of "Kaz". This is all just smoke and mirrors to divert attention away from critically analyzing the editing activities of this particular team of accusers. YuHuw (talk) 22:11, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Daily Mail website said that the German count's son was innocent. He subsequently stood as a candidate in his home town in the 2015 British General Election. He is one of a number of notable people in Britain who have been falsely accused.-- Toddy1 (talk) 23:38, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ah so finally after weeks of me asking you to stop [193] equating me with someone you alleged to be a pedophile, and not once trying to reassure me, suddenly when an admin is watching you try to reassure me? Where is the article you mention? I am sure I will be forgiven at this point for not wanting to trust you on your word alone. YuHuw (talk) 05:37, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Having googled the election you mention, I now notice that the allegation by Nepolkanov makes in the diff above (again here [194]) is towards the end of the election campaign you mention, so your claims are increasingly unbelievable. YuHuw (talk) 06:09, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The accusations are increasingly cryptic, anachronistic, contradictory and eccentric. I await admin comment. YuHuw (talk) 12:22, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I see that this earlier incident discussion is now archived: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive913 § Same thing resumes as soon as last incident is archived.
As this is a "sockpuppet investigations" page, the scope of this is not about evaluating editor behavior per se, but I suppose only to investigate and determine whether behavior is so much like that of another user to circumstantially conclude, beyond reasonable doubt that you are the same person as another editor. Doesn't strike me as an easy task.
Have you been able to identify yourself to the Wikimedia Foundation? Though, I suppose that, even if you have identified yourself, if we don't know for sure who Kaz is, then it will still be difficult to say whether or not you are Kaz. Was Kaz ever conclusively identified? – Wbm1058 (talk) 18:13, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No, I have not had any reply to any of those requests yet Wbm1058, but good point, I don't know and I hadn't thought about that :( I assumed yes because Nepolkanov and Toddy1 continually identify Kaz as that politician, but now I really can't tell if that is a fact or just yet more eccentric hot air as I see above Nepolkanov at least seems to have also been suggesting possibly (at least) two people as Kaz. How many confirmed puppets of Kaz are there and how were they identified?
Concerning my behavior I think it has not been bad has it? I have only lost patience on very few occasions and always explained my actions in talk pages and sought amicable resolutions and discussion to understand if there are any points which other editors are trying to make. Both my requests on ANI (before these accusers went way over the top with this eccentric page of slander) were to seek advice on how to reassure these users. I still seek admin advice on how to do that and I am holding myself back from further edits as a sign of my sincere good faith until this investigation is concluded.
As for the reasonable doubt you mention, even the accusations presented above are out of context, anachronistic and contradictory -Kaz is Israeli / not Israeli, pedophile / not pedophile, etc.. Meanwhile the accusers can not even agree with the statistics they presented which show most of my edits were on Keraites following User:Dbachmann after I signed up! So sic ipsa loquitur as is said. It is extremely obvious that these accusers just don't like the new kid on the block (me) exploring "their turf" (Karaims), so they are waving about the only weapon they have (clearly) had experience using. It does hurt the heart. Whatever the Admin decision is though, I do hope someone will be scrutinizing the edits of my accusers from now on considering the users they have been exposed as supporting in the history of this issue. YuHuw (talk) 21:46, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
YuHuw, I'm calling your attention to a discussion on a third-party site: What Wikipedia defines as sock puppets. I can't dispute their assessment of sockpuppet investigations, particularly those that rely entirely on "behaviour investigations", though I have not studied any such investigations in detail, so I don't know. Wikipedia has a shortage of administrators in many areas, and I wouldn't be surprised if there were a shortage of administrators willing to thoroughly and fairly investigate cases such as this one. You don't strike me as lily-white here, and I don't know whether it can be determined specifically and without reasonable doubt which prior editors are the same person as you, but you seem to have familiarity with Wikipedia indicating some prior experience here beyond what I think you've let on. You might want to try calling attention to your case over at that other site, and see if anyone there is interested in giving their assessment. Or just have faith that this will close with no action taken on the specific charge of sockpuppeting, go back to focusing on issues regarding article content, as I suggested to you earlier, and take care not to do anything more that could get you sanctioned for other behavioural issues. Specifically, read or reread WP:Refactoring, and understand and abide by it. Wbm1058 (talk) 14:45, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the comment Wbm1058. I need to keep it in mind again and again for anyone who might read that the context presented by Toddy1's team is deceptive first and foremost because even from my first substantial edit as a registered user here [195] I have never presented myself as a new editor, I only stopped being anonymous recently by setting up my User account. Not "lily-white" as you put it but obviously because I was still green enough to walk right into the trap set for me.
Moreover, I think most normal people if accused repeatedly of being a puppet of someone else will eventually want to find out as much as they can about the puppet cases of that person (all of the necessary info is in the history of this page here which Toddy1's team openly identified again and again no doubt to ensure I took the bait).
I have nothing to hide from normal non-obsessive editors who have never harassed me. I hope the personal attacks and harassment will stop from those who have shown they do not fit into that category. If it will help allay any doubts about me I still don't object to my IPs being checked by any check-user if User:Bbb23 can do that I welcome it.
As for WP:Refactoring I will do my best to understand it "the wiki way" and abide by it. I would like to ask, have I ever broken that rule so far? Many thanks. YuHuw (talk) 17:59, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • They're obviously the same character, as demonstrated by the similarities in response to both their SPI cases: walls of text, regular bolding of phrases and sentences, and a somewhat over-formal, stylistic, use of language which suggests a high level of taught-proficiency rather than nativeness. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.68.139.189 (talk) 10:27, 22 February 2016‎ (UTC)[reply]

Or maybe [196] is just another puppet of [197] let's look at their contributions [198] and [199]. Yep, pretty clear who that is if we use his own criteria. YuHuw (talk) 05:33, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Way to defend yourself in your own SPI to make personal attacks of socks etc (around dynamic IPs, ffs!). Same as on your last investigation. That lack of good faith did not help you; I imagine you will encounter a not dissimilar conclusion now. Good luck! 79.68.139.189 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:47, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Bad faith? Look whose talking [200]! OK how about this, you say I am Kaz and you say Kaz is that British politician and yet you say above using your anon IP that I am not a native English speaker. So all I see are yet more wild and contradictory accusations. Just be honest and say it was far from "love at first sight" for when you saw me and you want me off Wikipedia for no reason other than that. lol Anyway, Wikipedia is big enough for all of us to get along as long as your team of very close friends (if that is what you are since despite talking to each other, you habitually finish each others sentences and answer for each other questions posed to each of you) drop your interest in WP:HOUNDING me. Peace. YuHuw (talk) 16:37, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can I just point out that every accuser on this page (in fact every member of team Toddy1) has taken a break from usually prolific Wikipedia activity for the last two days [201], [202], [203], [204]. Not such an surprising coincidence when you think about it. Yet I am the one accused of puppetry by someone with a lot of first-hand experience in sock-puppet investigations. :/ YuHuw (talk) 18:31, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh and now of course we see in they come back together from vacation on the 11th too [205], [206]. No surprises there. YuHuw (talk) 12:05, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]


User:Bbb23 Concerning the recent posts bu Team Toddy1 here [207] The word Караимствующие appears in several reference works I cited on the Qaraimits page. The google result they produced even shows the word is used in several resources too, so I really don't know what the problem is. All I see is an attempt to identify me with yet another private person who they are making claims about being a "high-priest" or owning a website. But I see no evidence to back up their claims. At least the last Hubert they mentioned was a public figure. Who is this new one? Is his name Kazimir Hubert or Hubert Kazimir? Is he a Russian Muslim? A website owner? Is he a Politician? [208] Is he a German count? How do we know? Do we even have a right to know? Was User:Kaz ever positively identified? Is any such speculation about who User:Kaz is/was or who I might be in real life relevant? I myself have asked for a clear and precice definition of what exactly it is that I am suppose to be saying which is the same as what User:Kaz said and asked for precise diffs to show what the similarities are [209] so I can understand what the problem is but my requests have been ignored[210].It is clear this whole accusation and the very existence of this page is nothing but a way for Trolls to Harrass and mock me by saying I am "Kaz" and changing what that means whenever they like depending upon what they think will annoy me most. The best way to deal with trolls is WP:DENY. YuHuw (talk) 22:02, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mentioned by Yhuw Qaraimit page last edits are the best example of his disruptive edits when arguments of other editors are totally ignored. The text that YuHuw reverted twise (one time with his Israeli IP to prevent the bot warning, erroneously claims that the Qaraimits are Molokans that came from Lithuania to Russia. I explained him that he misunderstands any source he cited, I approved it by additional RS. But like in all cases before with him or his predessor my arguments were ignored. My edits were reverted without ny meaningfull explanation.Also you can see from Google search that English sources does not mention this word exept the Crimean Institute. Also please pay attention again on multiplied new IP reverts to return the disruptive content of the suspected editor. Disruptive edits are continuing every day. It is opinion of at least 4 editors. Please stop it. I think that CU reject revision is essential c (talk) 22:51, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

3 questions from your last post Неполканов. 1) So you finally accept that I am an Israeli and not based in the UK? Or do you still think I fly around the world just to annoy you by editing wikipedia? 2) Although I got the word Караимствующие from Russian sources (it is a Russian word not an English word can't you tell?) and although I can not access the Institute's pages (and thank you for bringing up that English language source) please could you clarify why is the English source no good? 3) Please list your 4 editors and explain diffs what has your inability to understand the sources got to do with your allegation? YuHuw (talk) 05:38, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you are "israeli" my grandmother had balls too. You are most probably paying some dubious internet service provider to help you disguise your tracks and to be able to make this ridiculous claim that you are "israeli." As for you claiming to be a "priest" of this Russo-Muslim small sect, anybody can look at the exchange we had back in 2011 or 2012, under your first disguise as Kaz. Toddy1 has shown recently that you cannot speak or understand Hebrew, as I had already argued back in 2011 or 2012. Now, who in the world would continue trying for 6 or 7 years, under all disguises and rues possible to come back here and continue arguing this same ridiculous line that Eastern European Karaites did not have a Karaite/Jewish religion at all (but where Muslims to begin with) back in the 17th and 18th centuries? warshy (¥¥) 16:19, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Some diffs to back up anything you say might help at least to understand what on earth you are talking about. Honestly if it were not so insulting it would be utterly hilarious to me. On your Wikipedia profile page you claim to be Yuval Warshai, if you are telling the truth about that then judging from your results on google you certainly at least have an idea how to abuse multiple IP accounts around the world -judging from the company you work for. But that makes you a singular expert in such matters. User:Bbb23 your input would be appreciated. YuHuw (talk) 16:45, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Answers to YuHuw 1) You are not Israeli because you have not basic skills of Hebrew speaker as was shown above.You are disinformating us.You have multiply IP's as claimed above 2) The only English source using this word belongs to your predecessor  :Kaz.On all the Web there is no English source using this word. 3) According the history of this page the editors suspecting you sockpupetry are :
Неполканов (talk) 18:51, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My Hebrew skills are one of your business, and you have not proven anything, and even if my Hebrew skills were deplorable it would still prove nothing, millions of Israelis have relatively poor Hebrew. The only IPs I have ever used are Israeli as can no doubt be seen by the admins. You try to pretend I used English sources but the word is Russian from Russian sources which User:Dbachmann taught me I should use google translate to understand. You in order to help justify your claim you and your meat-puppet have just deleted from the article which bothers you here. YuHuw (talk) 20:52, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

  • I've declined the CU request. The puppets in the archives are  Stale.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:32, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Toddy1: This case has seen no activity in about 10 days. At some point, I may close it as apparently no one wants to take any action. Early in the case, you stated: "So I have added the two he used on holiday in Israel." In rather blatant canvassing on your Talk page you stated much more recently on March 5 that Kaz " lives in Cardiff in Wales, and is a British citizen." ([211]) I'm curious. Typically, holiday is not a long time. Otherwise, it's either permanent or possibly a second home. How long do you think Kaz's holiday in Israel lasted?--Bbb23 (talk) 14:56, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I would imagine that the holiday started shortly before 31st December 2015 and ended 2 weeks later (i.e. some time after 8th January 2016). I did not originally mention the IP addresses in the SPI report. I only added them because he complained on 19:14, 7 February 2016 saying that he had "long been a keen wiki reader making anonymous minor contributions to articles", giving the example of an edit he had made on 7 January 2016. The reason I asked for a check user when I made the SPI report was that I believed that it would either show that by late January/early February he was either using anonymising proxies (as with his Budo account) or that his edits were from a Welsh IP (as with his Kaz account).
The reason for the post on my talk page on 5th March, was that an Enfield/London-based IP editor 79.68.139.189 asked me how the SPI investigation was going.[212] The advice that I gave might be summed up as Wikipedia like heaven helps those who help themselves, so if he/she wants something done about Kaz's edits, he/she needs to do something himself. IP editor contributed to this page on 22 24 and 26 February 2016 -- Toddy1 (talk) 15:47, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Is there nothing I can do about this Bbb23? In fact I am sure Toddy1 does not believe I am really Kaz and is only calling me Kaz everywhere (e.g. in his canvassing and again here just above) as a form of Harassment. Every shred of so-called "evidence" he/his friends have presented is contradictory and apparently he does this to everyone who gets close to discovering (as has just dawned upon me) that Russian Karaites are well documented as a group which derived from Russian Christians. Ironically I would not have discovered this without his group posting things pretending I was Kaz which I began to investigate. YuHuw (talk) 05:06, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've investigated YuHuw's edits myself and find no compelling evidence he is Kaz. They have similar interests, but behavioral similarities are limited. I will not go fully into the evidence I dug up, but I do not believe they are the same person. Someguy1221 (talk) 04:04, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Kaz/Archive

Leave a Reply