Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kadribistrica/Archive

23 July 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * The following accounts are ✅ to each other:
 * However, technically speaking they appear to be to ILiriaALB. I've blocked the sock accounts and issued a 1 week block to the master account (Kadribistrica). Could a clerk assist in creating a separate case for these accounts? Thanks! Mike V • Talk 02:23, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I've copied this report from Sockpuppet investigations/ILiriaALB.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  10:07, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * However, technically speaking they appear to be to ILiriaALB. I've blocked the sock accounts and issued a 1 week block to the master account (Kadribistrica). Could a clerk assist in creating a separate case for these accounts? Thanks! Mike V • Talk 02:23, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I've copied this report from Sockpuppet investigations/ILiriaALB.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  10:07, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * However, technically speaking they appear to be to ILiriaALB. I've blocked the sock accounts and issued a 1 week block to the master account (Kadribistrica). Could a clerk assist in creating a separate case for these accounts? Thanks! Mike V • Talk 02:23, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I've copied this report from Sockpuppet investigations/ILiriaALB.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  10:07, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

13 September 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

Just check the contributions. This is obvious. This edit by Kadribistrica is the next revert by Elnegroo. All edits are like that. Absolutely the same reverts of the blocked user. So this is classical block evasion, and nationalist reverts. This sockpuppet should be blocked, and master user blocked for a longer period of time. We should use CheckUser in order to find who is under the Kadribistrica, as that may be the sock also of some other, already blocked user...  Ąnαșταη  ( ταlκ )  14:38, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * The two accounts are ✅. I've blocked and tagged the puppet and upped the master's block to indefinite. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:28, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

09 November 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

See this, for example: and. It is interesting that the move is both times tagged as minor edit.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  23:03, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - endorsing my own request.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  23:03, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
 * The following accounts are ✅:
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:43, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:43, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:43, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

22 February 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

Albanian Historian and Cunmulaj are already confirmed at Commons. The last sock of Kadribistrica was blocked in November, and Albanian Historian started editing in December. He has the same agenda: continuing the section started by blocked sock :. Albanian Historian created the page titled "Kadri Bistrica".  Vanjagenije  (talk)  11:36, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - Can you use the November data to check those two?  Vanjagenije   (talk)  11:37, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * This is the second case in which you asked this question. I'm not sure what you mean by "use the November data". In any event, I'm checking. As an aside, I didn't get the ping.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:25, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * That should mean "to use old CU logs from previous check (which was in November) because it was more than three months ago and accounts are stale".  Vanjagenije  (talk)  19:42, 22 February 2016 (UTC)


 * The following accounts are ✅ to each other and just to the previously blocked socks:
 * I've blocked the three accounts without tags.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:58, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Kadribistrica made an edit today, after your check. Can you re-check with this new data?  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:12, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * -  Vanjagenije   (talk)  20:12, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I just found another interesting evidence: created article "Kadri Bistrica" in Albanian Wikipedia at the same day Albanian Historian created article "Kadri Bistrica" in English Wikipedia. Articles are identical (just translated).  Vanjagenije   (talk)  20:44, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The master’s single edit was with a phone. He has used a phone many times in the past, so it is not surprising. The latest puppets I just checked did not use a phone. Therefore, based on the master’s edit, I would call the suspected puppets.
 * In checking, I discovered another account,, which is ✅. I have blocked and tagged the account.
 * Comparing GjonMarkuu’s edits with Albanian Historian, I can up my finding for Albanian Historian to .--Bbb23 (talk) 21:22, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * All tagged and closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  21:44, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * In checking, I discovered another account,, which is ✅. I have blocked and tagged the account.
 * Comparing GjonMarkuu’s edits with Albanian Historian, I can up my finding for Albanian Historian to .--Bbb23 (talk) 21:22, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * All tagged and closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  21:44, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Created this draft which appears to share consistent writing style with the deleted text at this G5'd mainspace page. Username bears some resemblance as well to previous sock that created this page. Waggie (talk) 17:28, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * , closing. Kevin ( aka L235 ·&#32; t ·&#32; c) 19:21, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Kadribistrica is a prolific sockmaster who was blocked indefinitely in September 2015. One of his most active sockpuppets was, who was uncovered in February 2016 and also blocked. I've noticed quite a few similarities between Kadribistrica's sock accounts, most notably Albanian Historian, and Fa alk.

Fa alk shares an almost identical editing style with Kadribistrica's various socks, writing in intermediate English and citing a combination of obscure Albanian-language books and Albanian media reports. Both Albanian Historian and Fa alk also have the habit of occasionally adding a reference before a full stop, as opposed to after it. 

Both also idiosyncratically use the word "patriot" in the opening lines of some of the articles they've created to describe the subjects of those articles. Another buzz word that Fa alk and Albanian Historian use in the opening lines of their articles is "freedom fighter". 

Like Kadribistrica's socks, Fa alk takes interest in the obscure, niche subject of anti-Albanian massacres that took place hundreds of years ago. The sockpuppet created Rugova massacre. Another sockpuppet, created Massacres of Karadak  Fa alk has created articles such as Dumnica massacre and Massacres of Keqëkolle and Prapashticë, among others. 

In February 2016, Albanian Historian posted to Talk:Novi Pazar and brought up a rather obscure passage from a book, writing: "In 1912, when the invading Serbian Ivan army entered Novi Pazar, General Zivkovich ordered the massacre of all Albanian inhabitants under the principle of solitudinem facing pacem appellant." In April 2020, Fa alk added the following passage to Massacres of Albanians in the Balkan Wars: "When the Ibar Army, commanded by General Mihailo Zivkovic, entered the town, he pacified the Albanian population with the method of "soletudinem facient pacem appelant"."

And finally, Kadribistrica, Albanian Historian and Fa alk have all made edits to the Swedish Wikipedia. Both Albanian Historian and Fa alk also link to Swedish Google when providing references. 

There are many, many other "coincidences" I've noticed but I simply have no time to go into all of them. I'm seeing smoke. Now I just need someone to confirm that there is fire. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 20:52, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''


 * Comment by Maleschreiber
 * The "evidence" presented as a behavioral pattern about a possible link between KadriBistrica and Faalk is a behavioral pattern shared by many editors active in Balkan topics. The massacres of Albanians in the Balkan Wars is not an "obscure, niche subject". Almost every editor from the Balkans I have interacted with has been involved in this "obscure subject". AmanuensisBalkanicus who reported Fa alk just in May started the same AfD twice about the Plav-Gusinje massacres (1912-13) (, an article which Fa alk started, I expanded and in the AfDs almost every single active editor from the Balkans was involved. The subject which Amanuensis calls "obscure" and "niche" in order to link it specifically only with two editors in order to establish a linked between them (Fa alk-KadriBistrica) is a very common topic of choice for editors from the Balkans, including AB. Based on this behavioral evidence, Amanuensis could report me and every other Albanian editor as a sockpuppet of KadriBistrica. Even the use of Richard Hall's book about the Balkan Wars is not evidence. I've probably used the same book myself as a source and many other editors have done so also as it is one the best historical works about the Balkan wars. A behavioral pattern which is shared by all active editors in a topic area is not a behavioral pattern which can be used as a link between two specific editors.


 * In Sweden, there are about 60,000 Albanian emigrants and 70,000 Swedish Albanians (Swedes of fully or partially Albanian ancestry whose ancestors were migrants), all living in southern and central Sweden. It doesn't say much to me that there have been two Swedish Albanian editors who have shown interest in Albanian history. So should we block the third Sw-Alb editor who appears in wikipedia if he shows interest in Albanian history too? Statistical data can't be used to create such links. Also, Fa alk doesn't shy away from his links to Sweden . What sort of person who has been banned in the past and knows that it will be used in a sockpuppet investigation against him, does that? I see an editor who has no problem with highlighting his links to a specific country - an absolutely normal thing to do if someone is not related to any sockpuppetry incidents.


 * Side comment: since December 2019 Amanuensis Balkanicus has created at least four AfDs regarding articles created by Fa alk . There's also one in April 2020. If Amanuensis thought that Fa alk was a sockpuppet all along why did he report him just now, after the latest AfD failed and yet another article remained in wikipedia? I think that this looks more like a content dispute which is now devolving into a report based on flimsy and incidental arguments.


 * As for behavioral patterns, I think that Fa alk is just a better editor than KadriBistrica based on their editing history. With some help from two editors, including me, he wrote a very nice article about Antonio Crutta which appeared in the DYK section of the frontpage. When he started that article, I had started Kryethi, an article about the ancestral clan of Crutta and I was so impressed that someone started an article about A. Crutta that I even asked him, if he did so after reading the article I wrote User_talk:Fa_alk which he hadn't. This also highlights how editors active in the same topics can independently end up starting articles about the same sub-topic, no matter how "obscure" it might look to the general audience.--Maleschreiber (talk) 16:23, 11 June 2020 (UTC)


 * I support the proposal that a Checkuser should check my IP log. They can verify that this is my first and only account. These accusations are completely false, and I have no prior history related to any of those editors. In fact, I'd never heard of them before. I find this accusation highly inappropriate and lacking any serious evidence. The fact that I've come across to the articles mentioned is completely random. They are topics that are important for the Albanian identity and history, and the sources are widely used as they can be found on GoogleBooks, things that can be easily verified. Terms such as "patriot" and "freedom fighter" used by me are found in many Balkan articles, and I can even point out to established editors who keep using them. I do not engage in socking. I rather suspect that this is a planned attack on me due to my active editing, and seeing that my articles have been subject to AfDs by this editor (who makes personal attacks all around the place, such as |linking an Albanian editor with Fascists) just confirms that this, if anything, is motivated by an open dislike against editors of Albanian background. Instead of actually debating me, someone just decided to accuse me of socking, with no credibility. I took a look at the sockmaster's history. It appears that their socks were discovered because they wrote deleted articles and reverted edits of the previous socks. Can the editor who accuses me find such evidence? I have a broad range of interests, while the sockmaster seems to have been focused on crimes committed against Albanians, just as the editor who accuses me is focused on "documenting" crimes committed against Serbs. It is hilarious because they were once blocked for socking. --Fa alk (talk) 20:30, 11 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Do not use this page for exchanging slurs and accusations, try to behave like a gentleman, if you are able to. This is a solid report, compared to many posted here. Your editing is/was problematic as it used a lot of sources which are not RS (very much like some older accounts which have been mentioned) and which further led to several articles being completely cleaned or rewritten by other editors, which should have been your job in the first place.
 * AB's post and arguments are well-founded as you have used several sources which show that you typed in the search bar things like "Serbs + genocide" "Chetnik Serb war crimes" (it's not a quote, just an illustration), which is extremely disturbing and unhealthy on so many levels. Not to mention several deleted attack pages. I'm sorry if it sounds hard, I am just stating the facts.  Sadkσ  (talk is cheap)  22:51, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

I would just like to point out that Fa alk's very first edits to wikipedia consist of fully formed articles, with properly formatted references. Within two days of starting editing, he created about a dozen complete articles. This is atypical behavior for a new user, and indicative of a returning user. Khirurg (talk) 23:45, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment by Khirurg


 * Since I seem to have struck a nerve I think I'll continue presenting further evidence backing up my suspicions. Maleschreiber, it's funny you should bring up Plav-Gusinje massacres (1912-13) (which Fa alk created) because that's precisely what made me suspicious of Fa alk to begin with. Because I've been busy irl I've been somewhat slow in assembling the evidence for this investigation. You see, four years ago I came across a remarkably similar article created by Albanian Historian titled The Defense of Plava and Gucia. It was irredeemable drivel and was unanimously approved for deletion (these were the old days before ethnic-based WP:CANVASSING was as prevalent on Balkan topics as it sadly is today). Albanian Historian was the only one who defended the article, writing: "Explain why the article is nominated for deletion when its properly referenced and written in a context to explain the history of Plava and Gusinje..." As you could imagine, "properly referenced" meant repeated violations of WP:SYNTH and WP:OR.


 * On a thematic note, Albanian Historian referred to the rather obscure term "Arbanaška vera" in his ramblings (a term attributed to Dušan the Mighty). In December 2019, Fa alk created the article Arbanaška vera. I would also like to point out some further stylistic similarities. Fa alk often doesn't add dashes to his ISBNs.    Neither did Albanian Historian.   Neither did, another sock.  Neither did  , yet another blocked sock.  As for the aspersions that Fa alk has cast upon me, I find them remarkably similar in tone and demeanor to these comments made by Albanian Historian towards a user who is now inactive. You be the judge. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 00:44, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't add dashes to ISBNs, too. There are many editors who don't add dashes. The wider problem with your logic is that because you consider a subject to be unimportant, you believe that it is generally unimportant. Arbanaska vera does pass WP:GNG and it has passed 2 AfDs, in which the community (note how few "involved" editors took part) decided that it is notable. You think that because you consider it obscure, it means that if 2 other people find it interesting, it's "suspicious". I've been wanting to write an article about Plavska pobuna, a similar event to the Plav-Gusinje massacres and the deleted Defense of Plava, because it is a notable event in regional history. We had a one-month discussion about the Plav-Gusinje massacres and all of you were disputing whether it ever happened. But in Plav itself, in the village of Nokshiq/Novšice, a project of burial of the fallen was completed in late May . It highlights another problem in wikipedia: how far removed from real life it can become when discussions happen under an intentionally bureaucratic reading of policy. If you're convinced that Α=Β, then you may be led to highlight similarities which are shared by a wider set of editors.--Maleschreiber (talk) 03:40, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
 * And the problem with your logic is that you are cluttering this discussion with red herrings, changing the subject, and filibustering. The topic of this discussion is a user's behavior, not this or that obscure article (and yes, they are obscure, and highly so). Khirurg (talk) 04:19, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
 * If every editor in this discussion has become involved in AfDs about these "obscure" articles, then how obscure can they really be? If the set of editors involved in these subjects doesn't involve just Fa alk and KadriBistrica/Albanian Historian then no connection can be concluded just between those two. I'm not changing the subject, I'm putting its arguments to the test. The elements via which AB is linking Fa alk to KadriBistrica are common elements of a much wider set of editors. A more important behavioral element which has been overlooked is the fact that KadriBistrica has never tried to defend himself in any report, while Fa alk has done so and has even welcomed a check of his IP log.--Maleschreiber (talk) 04:41, 12 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment by Alexikoua
 * I admit that this appears a striking case. Apart from the behavioral evidence the (weird) use of fullstop in reference, as noted above, leaves no doubt that the editor hasn't made a serious effort to cover his tracks.Alexikoua (talk) 07:00, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
to. .--Bbb23 (talk) 16:10, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Tagged and closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  16:04, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

On 15 October 2015, Albanianhistory pasted a draft of Zhuj Selmani to their talk page. On 1 January 2016, the Kadribistrica sock Albanian Historian created the article Zhuj Selmani. The text is identical. Also note the similarity between the user names of Albanianhistory and Albanian Historian. Additionally, like Kadribistrica's other socks, Albanianhistory knows Swedish and has made edits to the Swedish Wikipedia. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 18:19, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * This account made no edits in 5 years. SPI is for ONGOING abuse. I'm closing this.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  21:19, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

This new account exhibits behavior typical of Kadribistrica socks, not least their shared obsession with alleged early-20th century massacres targeting Albanians. Some earlier examples:  In a very short span, AteTrimi has created Draft:Drin massacre and Draft:Podgor massacre. A draft article as one's first edit is a dead giveaway that this is a returning user. AteTrimi and Kadribistrica's other socks also gravitate towards some of the same articles. See:

Another tell-tale sign is the Swedish .se top-level domain. For example, here is the referencing provided by an earlier Kadribistrica sock: Here is AteTrimi:

Also, instead of using a template for foreign-language renditions, the account writes "Alb:". See Fa alk: AteTrimi:

I know Fa alk would be stale by this point, but I will request CU anyway because I would like to see if Kadribistrica has any sleepers. This has been going on for the better part of a decade and has to stop. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 17:50, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I consider the above evidence a pretty clear link between AteTrimi and Kadribistrica. CU evidence is to the checkuser logs, and  is ✅ to AteTrimi., closing. GeneralNotability (talk) 23:52, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
Like the original sockmaster Kadribistrica and one of his other socks Fa alk (contribs) Luleozaro has an obsession with creating and editing pages about alleged massacres of Albanians, with a heavy focus on the Massacres of Albanians in the Balkan Wars article. 1

Both Fa alk and Luleozaro use 100+ year old sources (mostly newspapers), 2 3, especially when adding lengthy paragraphed quotations in the "reaction" section: 4 5 67

One of the articles created by Fa alk was the "Topojan massacre" 8 Information about a massacre in Topojan was added to the article by Luleozaro 9

Both Fa alk and Luleozaro have used a source to write that the event was the "first ethnic cleansing" 1011

Both Fa alk and Luleozaro use the .se domain name 1213 1415

When adding quotations to their references, both Fa alk and Luleozaro add it in the format of "edition=" instead of the standard "quote=" 16 17 18 19

I know CU is stale for Fa alk by now but given the long history of socking, I am requesting one to see if there are sleeper accounts. Griboski (talk) 16:59, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Best I can say from a technical standpoint is that they're in the same country as past socks. No sleepers immediately visible. GeneralNotability (talk) 00:59, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks GeneralNotability. I blocked because the evidence is clear enough. The question is what we do with the articles created by the sock. We can delete them, but I don't know that that's necessarily good for the project. User:Griboski, you've been here long enough to have an opinion, and maybe this is a matter that should be taken up on the WikiProjects for Albania/Kosovo/etc. Drmies (talk) 20:17, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for dealing with this User:Drmies. At least two of them are POV-forks (Persecution of Albanians in Yugoslavia (1941–1999) & Montenegrin expansionism) of already existing content on wiki. The first combines and synthesizes all bad things that have happened to Albanians over the course of the 20th century (a continuation of this creation) and presents it as a never-ending persecution, which is inappropriate and contrary to bibliography. I can tag both of those for speedy deletion G5 or if contested, file AfD. --Griboski (talk) 20:52, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
 * . Nothing left to do in terms of SPI. Closing. MarioGom (talk) 22:17, 27 August 2023 (UTC)