Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kaiser von Europa/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Kaiser von Europa

Kaiser von Europa (talk  · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
04 January 2015
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


There's also a whole bunch of other related IP addresses floating around. These are all User:Kaiser von Europa, who has been indef banned for disruptive editing [1]. This user has extensive history of sock puppeting on German wikipedia (where they're also indeffed), discussed in this old AN/I thread: [2]. See also [3] [4]. Checkuser is actually not necessary as this is pretty obviously them. First, there just aren't that many people out there in the world who are obsessed with documenting the "native German" history of a couple of Polish villages (the "county" that these span, Gmina Szczytno, has a population of about 10k people. The individual villages this user is concerned with have as few as less than 100 inhabitants.) This clearly indicates that this is Kaiser. Second, part of the reason for Kaiser's indef bans (both on German wiki and here, although grossly insulting personal attacks also played a role) was use of outdated and unreliable sources, often ones with Nazi connections. This is the case with these IPs as well, where the source being used is also of this dubious nature, as documented here and here. Again, there just aren't that many people out there in the world who are even familiar with this source, much less wish to use it obsessively on Wikipedia. It's him.

Hence, this SPI is mostly a formality to document the fact that Kaiser is sockpuppeting (again).

Now, there is the issue of User:Vrinan who has stated that they're also User:71.169.181.208 [5]. I reverted this user here and noted some very problematic comments made by the user (examples: [6] [7] [8] and [9]) which appear to be Holocaust denial. In response, as some kind of revenge, User:Vrinan began following my edits and in particular, undoing my reverts of Kaiser's edits.

I have a strong suspicion that User:Vrinan is also not a new account (perhaps sockpuppet of User:Smith2006, who was indef topic-banned from Eastern European articles in January 2013 [10] and who shares with Vrinan an interest in non-mainstream fringe quasi-Catholic groups [11]) but that would probably require a different SPI, and Smith2006 account is stale by now. For now, I'd merely appreciate it if Vrinan refrained from meat-puppeting for indef banned users and quit following my edits (might also cut it out with the Holocaust denial comments). Volunteer Marek (talk) 23:26, 4 January 2015 (UTC) Volunteer Marek (talk) 23:26, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbbb23 - it's a little hard to focus just on diffs because the edits are specific to a (small) geographic area, rather than necessarily the same articles. Kaiser knows that I have a lot of articles they previously edited on my watchlist, so this time he's moved on to smaller, more obscure places, basically trying to edit "under the radar". Here are Kaiser's edits on Szczytno, for example [12] (note the use of an old source from 1905). ALL of 62.155.216.16's edits are about villages in Szczytno county: [13]. It looks like they're working off of this template [14]. Same is true for the other IP accounts. Like I said, this is a small geographic area and it's extremely doubtful that two different users would have the same specific interest in that same area.Volunteer Marek (talk) 02:47, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23: Yes, the material is mostly disruptive. The stuff about the East Prussian plebiscite is clearly WP:UNDUE and it's a form of POV pushing and irredentist territory marking. The stuff about the expulsions - it depends. None of it's sourced and seeing as how this was an ethnically mixed area there is no guarantee that in some specific, particular village (of a hundred people or so), people were expelled. He's working under the assumption that if it was part of Germany, then it must've been Germans that lived there, hence, they got expelled after WW2. But, again, that wasn't necessarily the case for every single village that's he's spamming that text into. For some yes, for others no, that's why it should be sourced. There were Poles, Lithuanians, Masurians etc living in those parts too. And then you have the additions of the Nazi names - again, territory marking - to the first sentence. Which is plainly offensive.Volunteer Marek (talk) 18:08, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

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

I find user:Volunteer_Marek's accusations highly insulting. The suggestion that I am a Holocaust denier is hardly appreciated, and not at all supported by any statements of mine in the past, unless one is willing to take a very liberal interpretation of the phrase, "Holocaust denial" (e.g. question of contentious evidence becomes "denial"). It appears to me that Volunteer Marek tends to derail discussions by making insinuations about other editors and attacking their character. Instead of genuinely addressing the concerns of editors with whom he is in conflict, he seeks to discredit them and effectively nullify their point of view. I find this argumentation tactic is not conducive to a proper atmosphere in the encyclopedia; as another editor has said, it "raises the temperature" and polarizes the debate. We should be working for compromise, not complete domination.

Just as I am no "Holocaust denier", I am no sock-puppet. I know that any investigation into the matter would conclude favorably to me, but unfortunately, the mere accusation of being something bad often does damage enough. Joseph McCarthy taught is that much. Volunteer Marek may disguise his accusations as tentative hypotheses or mere speculation, but they are still accusations, and they still spoil any chance of debate or compromise. Vrinan (talk) 00:16, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

 Clerk note: @Volunteer Marek: Please compare diffs of the IPs with diffs of the master. The history is fascinating, but I don't really want to look at ANI discussions. Also, focus on the two IPs (of the four listed) who've edited the most recently. Finally, the allegations against User:Vrinan should not be discussed in this case. If you want to raise them, please do it somewhere else. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:59, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Volunteer Marek: Let me make sure I have the analysis straight. The master edited in the area of Szczytno county. The IPs are editing only articles of places that are part of that county. Looking at the revision histories of some of those articles, they have almost no activity by other users since their creation 8 years ago. Therefore, the IPs must be the master because of their interest in something so obscure. Two more things. First, it's clear to me that all four IPs are the same person, whether they are the master or not. Second, in glancing at a few edits, they are adding identical information about East Prussia to all of the articles. Is that material disruptive?--Bbb23 (talk) 06:12, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've blocked the three IPs that have edited in January for three months. If there is continuing disruption by the other IPs on the list or new IPs, please reopen the SPI with a new case. We may need to consider range blocks. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:38, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

25 July 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Both edited 30 the same low traffic articles about Polish towns: [15]


Both use word “Polish Propaganda” or “Polish POV” in the edit summaries or comments:

  • Kaiser von Europa

[16]

  • Tino Cannst

[17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22]


Both add German names to Polish towns:

  • Kaiser von Europa

[23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28]

  • Tino Cannst

[29] [30] [31] [32] [33]


Both use the term “Ethnic Cleansing” or “Expulsion of Germans” after the war:

  • Kaiser von Europa

[34] [35] [36] [37]

  • Tino Cannst

[38] [39] [40] [41] [42] [43] [44] [45] [46]


Both use terms "before 1945 the area was German" or "was German-speaking" while referring to the Polish territories:

  • Kaiser von Europa

[47] [48]

  • Tino Cannst

[49]


Both make reference to the Holy Roman Empire of German lands:

  • Kaiser von Europa

[50]

  • Tino Cannst

[51] [52] [53] [54]


Both use term "annexed by Poland" while referring to former German lands:

  • Kaiser von Europa

[55]

  • Tino Cannst

[56] [57] [58]


Prior sock puppet of Kaiser von Europa (talk  · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) include blocked Renekm (talk  · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki).

All correlate closely with both Kaiser von Europa and Tino Cannst. Also, Stan Tincon is an anagram of Tino Cannst. GizzyCatBella🍁 03:20, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

  • The evidence on the Kaiser link is weak, nothing beyond a joint German nationality. The Tino Cannst / Stan Tincon accounts are not a violation. Stan made his last edit on 13 August 2019. Tino made his first edit on 6 September 2019. This is just a permenant account switch, maybe a forgotten password, and no attempt to deceive given the obvious user names.--82.208.137.178 (talk) 07:21, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
When you have anon accounts show up to defend the subject you know something sketchy is going on. Volunteer Marek 16:51, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This IP looks like User:VikingDrummer/User:Icewhiz who got recently banned for socking and who recently barnstar’d Tino account [59] Volunteer Marek 16:55, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is very obviously Kaiser, I don’t think he’s even making an effort to hide it. The above articles are super obscure and have like literally 4 or 5 non-bot, non IP accounts editing them since like 2007 when they were created. Two or three of these accounts is usually Kaiser/Tino/Stan (obvious anagram of Tino) and the other one is me reverting Kaiser’s socks.

I noted that Tino is Kaiser way back but it was just easier to undo their POV edits rather than going to the trouble of filling an SPI but I did ask them twice if they were Kaiser [60] [61] and they didn’t deny it, just removed the question [62]. It’s obviously him. Volunteer Marek 17:05, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Look at the articles that Tino and Kaiser both edited [63]:

  1. Barwice [64]/[65] - there's a total of about 50 edits to that article. More than half of that is bots. Another third is minor clean up with automated tools by wiki gnomes. The only substantial edits to that article are Tino, Kaiser, another Kaiser sock [66] and one other account reverting the said sock. This is an article about a super small Polish town noone's ever heard of (sorry Barwicans)
  2. Wierzbięcin, Pomeranian Voivodeship [67]/[68]. This is an article about a village of ... 86 people. Eighty six. No one's ever heard of it. The only non-bot edits are Kaiser, Tino and a Kaiser sock [69], and me. Did I mention this is about a village of 86 people?
  3. Same thing on Tymień, West Pomeranian Voivodeship. Here we have an article on a village with a whopping 950 people. Again only accounts are Kaiser, Tino, Kaiser sock [70] and one other editors.
  4. Czaplinek again, another obscure Polish small town no one’s ever heard of. Again, very few non bot edits in article history - just Tino, Tino’s anagram Stan [71], Kaiser and a couple (literally two) editors undoing Kaiser socks.

Etc. etc. etc. I could keep going because there's dozens of examples like this. And then even more for the Stan Tincon account where the link to Kaiser edits is even stonger [72]. Like dozens of articles on small villages edited ONLY by Kaiser, Tino/Stan and maybe one other editor.

Like, there's no freakin' way this is anyone but him. Volunteer Marek 17:54, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

this looks like another sock account (same pattern, few edits, shows up to support Tino) that just reactivated itself. Since this one and Tino are not stale a CU could be of use here (obviously Kaiser account is stale). Volunteer Marek 18:01, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's obvious Stan Tincon and anagram Tino Cannst are the same. Regarding "stale", well Stan and Kaiser are of course stale, and most of what we have here will need behavioral analysis (by themselves they are not in violation of anything but the connection to banned Kaiser is much more problematic). Also, as VM pointed above, HQGG isn't stale (ping User:Sir Sputnik re this new tidbit, not sure if you saw it? Wouldn't CU on TC and HQGG make sense?). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:12, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
  •  Clerk declined - This is case is  Stale. Sir Sputnik (talk) 15:41, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • With another account added, the reason for the decline doesn't apply any more. Sir Sputnik (talk) 02:32, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • HQGG is Red X Unrelated and Stan Tincon is  Stale. Tino Cannst is  Possible based only on log data, but I'm not seeing enough to block behaviorally. ST47 (talk) 21:17, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Good catch on Stan Tincon being an anagram of Tino Cannst! I think it's exceedingly likely that they're the same person, but there's no temporal overlap between the two, so we can't call it socking. As for whether they're also the same person as KvE and/or Renekm, it's possible. Stan Tincon was created just 3 days after Renekm was blocked; so that's a bit of a red flag, but we're digging back 4 years for that, which feels like Javert territory. I'm going to close this. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:59, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

07 August 2023

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

This may better fit under Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Kaiser_von_Europa/Archive#25_July_2021 Kaiser von Europa since Renekm was blocked as a likely sock of Kaiser - feel free to move it there.

Let's start with obvious: this is clearly not a new user. Within minutes of creating the account was using templates that a brand new user would be unlikely to know about [73]. Soon they began the practice of mass-adding German names to obscure Czech and Polish villages [74], which was the characteristic of Kaiser and his socks, including Renekm. Between June 21 and August 2, Crainsaw made around 2000 of these sorts of edits possibly using some kind of automation, in a way very similar to Renekm. The overlap between the obscure villages edited by Renekm and Crainsaw is quite significant: [75]. For many of these Renekm and Crainsaw were pretty much the only non-bot editors of the articles.

Another indication that Crainsaw is not a new user is their invocation of the old, old "Gdansk vote" in one of their edit summaries [76] [77] and adding it to articles [78]. This is a vote from 2004 that no current editors reference because it is so outdated and has been supplanted by WP:MOS. Only someone who had been around many years ago would still think it relevant.

Likewise, Crainsaw referenced Rockypedia (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) in justifying their edits [79]. Rockypedia was blocked in 2017 and some of their socks got blocked in the following years, IIRC. This is also something very unlikely a brand new user would know. But Renekm would be very aware of it [80]. Both Renekm and Crainsaw focused on villages in Lubusz Voivodeship (not including diffs because there are thousands of similar edits for each account, please take a look at the edit histories).

Continuing, both accounts have used the same obscure source, "gov.genealogy.net" (the "gov" does not stand for "government" there), for example [81] and [82]. This seems to have been noticed by other users in a discussion at WP:RSN (Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#gov.genealogy.net). In fact a very large proportion of Crainsaw's edits on Wikipedia since they started their account in February has been to mass-revert User:Volunteer Marek's and anyone else who reverted Renekm, after Renekm got banned in 2017. For example [83]. Or compare [84] to [85] then [86]. There are hundreds of such examples. AFAIK, Renekm, Kaiser von Europa (Renekm's most likely sock master) and Crainsaw have been the primary, if not the only accounts, to use this source on Wikipedia.

Crainsaw also posted to Tino Cannst's talk page: [87] (citing an obscure essay WP:BABY, another indication it's not a new user). It's not clear how Crainsaw would find Tino's talk page or edits or recently deleted article if they were really a new user. Tino Cannst was subject of a previous Kaiser von Europa SPI (Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Kaiser_von_Europa/Archive#25_July_2021) and declared as a "Possible" sock, although the SPI was in the end closed as "stale". Crainsaw coming to Tino's talk page to discuss recently deleted articles would make sense however if both Crainsaw and Tino, as well as Renekm, are all Kaiser's socks. Tino was defended in that SPI by VikingDrummer (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), another sock, although most likely of User:Icewhiz (another can of worms here, sigh). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:48, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And I don't think if Renknm wanted a sock, he'd come back 6 years after getting banned. Crainsaw (talk) 14:02, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, there has been socking on and off continuously ever since Kaiser’s initial ban, right? Volunteer Marek 04:37, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The only socks of Kaiser were the initial IPs banned in 2015, and Renknm banned in 2017. I doubt Tino Cannst is sock since he came back after 5 years, and the admins also noted here's not enough behaviourally to block. Then 2 years later, I got accused. If Kaiser is the master sock, he seems to have a lot of patience, he's actively creating socks 10 years after he was block, with years on end between a banned sock and a new sock starting editing. Crainsaw (talk) 10:50, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Good points. Very good points for someone who has been here just half a year. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:02, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You realize I can look through the SPI archives. Crainsaw (talk) 13:56, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Which 99.9% editors with more edits and time than you don't even know exist. Btw, how did you find out about this SPI report? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:19, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I beg to disagree, when you edit in a topic where you're heavily interested, you get acquainted with the editors who are there, and who were there. Whenever a sock gets blocked, they put the following template on their user page template:sockpuppet. And you can click on the link for their sockpuppet investigations page. When you go to the investigations page, in the top right corner, you can see the link for SPI small as a redirect. I decided to click on it and see what t is (Since I was a new user), and decided to look through the list of current SPI's to see if anyone I knew was there. Crainsaw (talk) 05:53, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
While you are right, it is very rare for a new editor to became acquainted with either the tools or editors in half a year. I've seen many new editors in may nearly 20 years here, and the speed with which you mastered things is... impressive. Which would be great, except in this troubled topic area, it may not always be a sign of being a newcomer. Which is what neutral admins will investigate, and if I am wrong, my apologies in advance.
Btw, I think you misunderstood my question. I asked - how did you find out about this particular SPI? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:25, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This sockpuppet investigated has made me admit my deepest "wiki-secrete ", which is, I used to have another account before this one, but relax, I didn't edit anything related to Poland-Germany, I vandalized the page of a video game I don't like, I added unreferenced stuff to BLPs, the vandalism (which was obvious) was reverted by an editor as "good faith, but unreferenced". Then I went on to write a toxic report on my user page, and left, only to create this account a few days later, and start making better edits. I hope I used my clean start correctly. P.S. all my edits were from my mobile, and I was informed by another editor through email, he wasn't Tino Cannst, he was an editor I knew from Israel-Palestine related topics. Crainsaw (talk) 05:12, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Which editor? An indef-banned one, perhaps? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:25, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not comfortable telling which account it was, though it wasn't banned, or blocked. I believe Checkuser evidence can confirm that, maybe we should just request a Checkuser. Crainsaw (talk) 05:45, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Mhm. Note to reviewing admins: I realized that I made a mistake in my original report and pinged Icewhiz, who was obviously active in "Israel-Palestine related topics" and has been socking a lot since. Maybe some CU could indeed help ferret a new sock of his. No further comment except - let me WP:TROUT myself for that ping. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:20, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've added the Checkuser requested template Crainsaw (talk) 08:35, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikitext is a simple markup language, with whom I'm well acquainted, I can code in HTML and some complexer syntax based languages. Hence, the ease with which I was able to pick up Wikitext. The only tools I use is Twinkle, which I found out through a user box. I still have a lot to master. And as I keep repeating myself again and again, I've learned a lot from Israel-Palestine related article discussions, you can go to my contributions and see for yourself. Crainsaw (talk) 05:21, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
I'm not a sock, although I understand why you suspect me, I'll explain it to you.
1.) The edit about adding templates early on [88], was from the mobile app, when I created a new account I also downloaded the app. In the app there's an edit tab where there are always 3 suggested edits. A: add article descriptions, B: add image captions, C: add image tags. When you click on add article titles, it shows you the lea of the article and a type bar where you can write the description and the template is automatically generated.
2.) I was reading about a Polish town when I clicked on its Gmina and looked through a few settlements, and thought since the larger town had a German name in the brackets, shouldn't Wikipedia also mention the German names for the settlements? When I looked through the article history, I saw the German name had been removed by Rockypedias socks. And since then I've been adding the Germans names to Polish settlements.
3.) I know of the Gdansk vote because in talk:Gdansk, there's a notice {{Gdansk-Vote-Notice}}
4.) I know about Rockypedia precisely because clicked on the editor's profile ho removed the German name, and found the banned as a sock of rockypedia template
5.) When looking through the edits of one of Rockypedia socks, I saw he'd removed a reference from the cite, when I clicked on it, I found the Verein für Komputergenealogie, aka gov.genealogy
6.) I've also extensively edited the Warmian–Masurian Voivodeship [89][90][91]. I've also made other positive changes such as moving articles from older names to their newer ones Lemierzycko, I've also removed "before 1945 the area was part of Germany... its native inhabitants were expelled" on numerous occasions, give me some time I'll find a diff.
7.) I know Tino Cannst because I was reading the Battle of Grunwald, where while checking out the history I saw he made a large edit which was reverted so I checked out his profile.
8.) I know WP:BABY because unlike Kaiser von Europa or Renknm I also edit other areas such as Zionism, where User:Iskandar323 introduced me to WP:BABY talk:zionism#Question I've also edited topics reklated to the britsh raj talk:British Raj#Mussulman term.
9.) As for why both Tino Cannst and me were at the same RSN thread, I had just finished discussing another thread Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#PLEBISCYT 1920 ROKU.
I hope that clears up any issues/suspicions. Crainsaw (talk) 13:59, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Łysonie [92], renknm added the statement "before 1945, the area was part of Germany" which I removed. Crainsaw (talk) 14:14, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and I forgot to add, my edits are not automated, it's an efficient way to make such edits, you open the gov website, and open the settlement names in other tabs, then you copy and paste the titles into gov, which then shows a map, you choose your voivodeship/county and there it shows the Germans, Polish and other relevant names along with when they were implemented. After that you copy the German name, paste it into the article with the templates. Quickly add the edit summary, and publish. It might sound like a lot, but after some time you get muscle memory. Crainsaw (talk) 15:54, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Right... I can't say I am 100% sure about who is the sockmaster here. But I am 99.999% sure you are not a new user, registered early this year. I've mentored ~1000 students and other new editors and they don't pick up new wiki skills as quick as you did. This is a tell tale of most socks. As I said, I've voiced my concerns, and now neutral admins will decide if they have any merit. I don't have much else to add. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:02, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What even is "wiki skills"? Is it simply adding templates? Which FromCzech introduced me to. Is it knowing wikitext? Because I don't, I often have problems with references and sfn/efns which were introduced to me in Israel related topics by Nishidani. Crainsaw (talk) 06:10, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. Somehow I don't think that "I'm not a sock puppet I just independently chose to make exact same *mass* edits as a sock puppet of a banned user" is a very strong argument. Or very credible. Also worth noting that Renekm was blocked for sock puppetry AND "disruptive editing" [93], so "I just restored a bunch of disruptive edits" is kind of adding more bad on top of bad. Volunteer Marek 22:34, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt I'd come back 6 YEARS after getting banned. Crainsaw (talk) 02:50, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There have been a number of socks in the intervening years. Volunteer Marek 04:27, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And all of them added stuff like "Before 1945 the area was part of Germany... its native inhabitants were expelled". I've not added any of those statements, and even removed them from articles I've edited. There's a clear stylistic difference. The socks were also focused only on articles related to Germany and Poland, whereas I've edited a wide range of topics from Zionism and Israel, to the British Raj, ⁣ Prussian administration, and medieval Germany. I've also significantly expanded/translated the Taunus and Hofheim am Taunus. I've created articles of Prussian districts and castles in Germany, along with members of the Frankfurt Parliament. Your argument basically boils down to me adding German names in Polish settlement articles, which is not disruptive. You are trying to blacklist anyone trying to make such changes, because one sock did it many years ago. Even if it doesn't match stylistically, the newer user edits a much wider range of topics, and has also removed edits by the socks. There are many inconstancies in this theory, why would I ask Tino to collaborate if we're the same person? Why would I make suggestions, if I could execute them without asking, since I'm Tino? And isn't collaboration the spirit of Wikipedia? All of my edits in the Lubusz Voivodeship have been after 12th July. And most of the articles there haven't been touched by Renknm, Rockypedia, Kaiser von Europa or anyone really. Another inconstancy is the random creation of my account, it wasn't a sleeper, since I've registered in February 2023, it wasn't created when another sock as banned. Why didn't I immediately start editing Polish settlement articles? Why did I use my phone at first, but switch to computer later? Because Kaiser and his socks were all computer editors. Many questions are left unanswered. Crainsaw (talk) 04:52, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, many questions, like how exactly did you know that “Kaiser and his socks were all computer editors”, which apparently led you to use your phone first then switch to a computer. I presume you’re not actually a check user yourself. Volunteer Marek 05:32, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Because edits from phones are tagged as mobile edits. And the edits of Kaiser which I've seen weren't tagged. Crainsaw (talk) 05:36, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And I switched from Phone to Computer I didn't even know about Kaiser, I did it because editing from Computer is better. Crainsaw (talk) 08:21, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Another unanswered question is why didn't I defend myself the last times? If I am Kaiser, the IPs, Renknm, and Tino Cannst, then I would've surly defended myself in the SPI before. Crainsaw (talk) 08:32, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
VM, thanks for stopping by. I think you are more familiar with me with this subtopic area. If Molobo was still with us, he might have additional insight, ditto for GCB. Oh well. I am glad you agree with my analysis. I think this is a case of WP:DUCK, but in the end, others have to weight in. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:59, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All in all Crainsaw's explanation comes down to "look there were all these multiple coincidences which make me look like a sock. Just bad luck, really!". Come on. Also, one peculiarity that Tino Cannst and Crainsaw share is that their incessant irredentism and mass edits of adding German names isn't confined to just obscure Polish villages. All four had a habit of doing it too to *Czech* villages and places too. For example- Crainsaw [94] [95] [96] [97] [98]. Tino [99] [100] [101] [102] [103] [104] [105]. Just another "coincidence" I guess. Volunteer Marek 23:09, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The first diff regarding the Ore Mountains was me simply adding the CZECH and German names to the lead. The diffs about the districts were genuinely wrong, and were from when I was a very new user, me and FromCzech and a discussion about it which ended with me saying sorry and saying I’d revert them, though I seem to have forgotten some districts. User talk:FromCzech#Czech districts. Also, I saw Tino's edits, and didn't agree that they should be on every Sudeten towns article, so I added the info to Republic of German-Austria#Borders. Crainsaw (talk) 02:40, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think these edits to Tino Cannst's talk page by another banned sock, User:VikingDrummer are also relevant: [106] [107] There’s so much smoke here it’s hard to breath. Volunteer Marek 21:01, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Now you're accusing me being a sock of VikingDrummer and there by Icewhiz? Users are allowed to talk to one and other, and it will happen when they edit similar topics. Crainsaw (talk) 05:56, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't seen any evidence about the misuse of my account, Kaiser was initally banned for disruptive edting which I haven't done. He had an obsession with adding "The native inhabitants were expelled" and "Before 1945 the area was part of Germany", which I haven't done and have even presented evidence to the contrary. My edting isn't automated, because if it were why didn't I add 100s of German names to Polish articles each day? The rest of their arguements boil down to me picking up skills faster then other users, which I'll take as a compliment, some useres learn slowly, others are faster. And sometimes users have more discussion with more expereinced users, then other new users. The list of the same pages me and Renknm edited only contains about 50 pages, with most of them having atleast 5 years between the edits, and are contrasted by my ~2600 edits. Volunteers Mareks "evidence" of me and Tno Cannst being socks is also contrasted by me disagreeing over Tino's edits aout adding "In 1918 Czech troops occupid the town" to former Sudeten Towns, so I added it to Republic of German-Austria#Borders. Now both of them are saying that me and othr banned users were on te same talk pages as evidence, while Voluteer Mark is displaying a Barnstar by Rockypedia on his talk page. And Volunteer Marek accused me of "incessant irredentism" which is bordering WP:CIVILITY and WP:NPA. Crainsaw (talk) 08:04, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is a prime example of Wikipedia’s Intentional Distortion of the History of the Holocaust p.187 "as it enables the distortionist group
to write off every editor who opposes them as an Icewhiz [in this case Kaiser von Europa] sock or delegate." Volunteer Marek and Piotrus should also remember WP:BRANDNEW. And Marek saying I'm a sock of Renknm and Kaiser because I reinstated their edits which he reverted is dubious because not every edit made by a sock is incorrect. WP:Dealing with sockpuppets#Reverting edits. I haven't violated any policy on meatpuppetry, or single purpose account. I also haven't violated any policies and guidelines to my knowledge, because if I had Volunteer Marek of Piotrus would've surely pointed it out by now. Crainsaw (talk) 07:09, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've talked with admins at Administrators Noticeboard/Incidents#SPI. Consider their input before taking action. Crainsaw (talk) 13:58, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from clerk section. MarioGom (talk) 18:12, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Kaiser_von_Europa/Archive&oldid=1174669521"