Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Athenean/Archive

Evidence submitted by Draganparis
The users Simanos, GK1973, Ptolion, Antipastor, Athenean, and Anothroskon have been acting in concord supporting each others opinions on the pages Talk Macedonia (ancient kingdom), Talk: Saints Cyril and Methodius, Talk: Alexander the Great in particular in connection with the argumentation with Draganparis. The number of occasions when they acted in concord is too large to be cited here.

Their action has been coordinated when the issues like Greekness of the Macedonians, additions of the “Greek” adjective, on the pages treating Macedonia, to various names, like Alexander of Macedonia, kingdom of Macedonia, Macedonians etc. (violating NPOV).

They support each other by the attempts not to consider the sources and by claiming in concord that the sources are not needed (GK1973) - what violates a fundamental rule of Wikipedia (WP:NPOV), and in blind acceptance of the copy-paste references from the propaganda sites without citing that particular biased source, also violating the sources rules of Wikipedia (WP:SOURCES).

It is likely that they use different accounts but act in concord.

They also act in concord not only when an opposite argument is to disapprove but also when an opponent (like Draganparis) is to be removed or silenced.Draganparis (talk) 21:52, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

I am sorry, since the complaint has not been examined yet, I have to add more details.

As I mentioned, a view has been expressed that we do not need to give proves, or cite some references or sources, since this “would bring us nowhere” since we know it all - such a view being against the rules of Wikipedia. Again, this position openly violating WP:SOURCES, introducing complete arbitrariness. Here is what was written:

''“I would advise against making this a reference game. The internet is filled with references of individual scholars, would be scholars etc and would bring us nowhere, since there may be tens of thousands of references as to the Greekness of the Macedonians but the few hundreds at to the opposite would look many in a forum. If we are to seriously debate on this issue, we are supposed to be accustomed with much of the bibliography and the evidence. Those who are not should first research and then suggest an opinion anyways. On my part I would prefer arguments to references. GK1973 (talk) 15:06, 21 November 2009.”''

This point concerns the propaganda material from the Greek nationalistic site that has been dumped by "The Cat and the Owl" 14:58, 21 November 2009 on Macedonia (ancient kingdom). It was taken from: http://history-of-macedonia.com/wordpress/2009/10/08/historians-greek-ethnicity-ancient-macedonians/ (accessed today) In spite of the violation of WP:SOURCES, it has been later cited and accepted as valid sources without any verification and validation.

A week later, the same happens on the article Talk: Saints Cyril and Methodius by Anothroskon (talk) 17:42, 27 November 2009 (UTC). I complained as follows:

I have really disappointing information for us. Our reference-man Anothroskon did something that should not be done. The "exhaustive" list of sources which you can see above (references are unfortunately often incomplete) is, what is really a shame, a compilations from nationalistic pages: http://historyofmacedonia.wordpress.com/2007/02/12/sources-on-st-cyril-and-methodius-greek-ethnicity/ and from nationalistic discussion forum (Ptolemy on 09-19-2007, 11:00 AM): http://www.macedoniaontheweb.com/forum/medieval-macedonian-history/327-cyrillos-methodios-cyril-methodius-4.html This is interesting but unsuitable for this site, unfortunately. I thought that we had a fair, disinterested discussion. Please Anothroskon, do not do it again. If the other commentators have similar tendencies, we better stop this discussion. Draganparis (talk) 13:50, 31 January 2010 (UTC).

Unfortunately this complaint was ignored even by the administrator, and I was later blocked for a week for insisting ON the respect of NPOV and WP:SOURCES (!?).

I complained on “Wikipedia:Editor assistance/Requests” on 7 and 9 March 2010, under the title: Violation of the neutrality policy and insults against editors. There I gave more detailed information about insults by GK1973.

The recent comment by GK1973 on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Draganparis testifies for an absence of good fate and wish to attack the person and continuation of violation of the Wikipedia rules and fair argumentation.Draganparis (talk) 18:16, 16 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I disclosed my identity on my user:draganparis page as a hidden comment. Would you please make sure that the editor GK1973 stops insulting me. I hardly insulted him/her once and this was accidental, but I asked immediately for an apology. He/she is insulting me permanently. Thank you very much indeed.Draganparis (talk) 23:57, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Apologies, but I have to add a short comment. After analysing the intervention of the 3 or 4 accused I realised that their interventions, although opposing the views of “my opponents”, did not necessarily agree with my views! Indeed, their use of my arguments is not a proof that they supported my views – they read my comments and used my arguments, this is quite logical. My opponents also use my arguments and also disagree with me! In fact the “accused” displayed the views that were quite different from my views. The 3 accused displayed clear pro-Macedonian (modern Macedonia) nationalistic points of views which I obviously do not share and never endorsed on these pages. If this would be also your opinion, even if all of them were operating from our common IP address – what I still doubt, then this could NOT BE a case of “sockpoppeting”. In this context, to say, as some of my opponents said, that their displaying disagreement is further proof of them being my sockpoppets, is just absurd. In addition, the fact that this could have been something what I could not control, then I should not be held responsible for this.


 * I would however plead again and again to the administrators to demand the editors involved in this disputes to restrain from mockery on my account (even on this very page as on the page where I reported some of my opponents for the violation of Wikipedia rules!) since this also violates the principle of good faith, reveals intention to insult me as a person and violates the principles of decent communication which are fundamental principles set by Wikipedia. Draganparis (talk) 23:16, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Wow! Antipastor (talk) 12:00, 17 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Yeah, Wow! The troll sock puppet propagandist is accusing others for disagreeing with him. Guess what, if the world doesn't agree with you maybe you're wrong. Go ahead and check our IPs fast please so we can ridicule this troll again. And then ban him please. And his sock puppets. Simanos (talk) 16:25, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I just want to say one more thing (more civil). Yeah of course Greek editors might agree on some issues, this does not mean they are sock puppets. There are 10 million Greeks in Greece alone after all. What makes this case so fun is that even the editors who argue with the Greeks on historic pages do not seem to like this Draganparis dude either. Because he's a troll and a bore. And a proven sock-puppet master. Soon to be proven even bigger sock-puppet master. First it was his family (son and ?), now it's his university students. Yeah right... Simanos (talk) 16:44, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * A very long text indeed and no evidence of any sockpuppetry apart from an "accusation" that we agree with each other... If this is evidence of sockpuppetry then I would like to add many more accounts who, in agreement, also clearly disagreed with the way user Draganparis introduced and interpreted his sources, with his deductions and assertions, who played a role in his getting banned for disruption, admins and users. He proves that he himself does not believe in this ridiculous accusation (a single glimpse in our accounts' histories will easily prove that we are all big contributors in a variety of matters much more extensive than user Draganparis and as such very unlikely socks), when he writes : "It is likely that they use different accounts but act in concord." So, he accuses us not really of being socks of another account but of agreeing in certain matters (even though this is also far fetched for anyone masochist enough to read through the thousands of our contributions). Much more could be said, but I do not see the reason. If any admin has any points he would like me to comment on or clarify, I would be very happy to co-operate. GK1973 (talk) 21:05, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Requested by Draganparis (talk) 21:52, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

case moved from Sockpuppet investigations/Draganparis to /Athenean SpitfireTally-ho! 21:56, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

– Might as well get it out of the way as I expect this SPI case to get very heated in short order. I will note right now that User:Anothroskon is for CU purposes, however, so that cannot be checked. –MuZemike 18:55, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

that Athenean is related to any of the other accounts. that Simanos, GK1973, Ptolion and Antipastor are the same user, but not confirmed. Mackensen (talk) 00:04, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Closing per CU findings. –MuZemike 00:35, 20 March 2010 (UTC)