Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mihkaw napéw/Archive

Evidence submitted by Rjanag
User:Mihkaw napéw was de facto banned from responding to questions on the Language Reference Desk in January 2010 (see ). This month Mr.Bitpart started editing and leaving many responses that were similar in writing style to Mihkaw's, sometimes incorrect or misleading, and almost always incomprehensible. See, for example, The times when the two users edit line up, see  and. r ʨ anaɢ (talk) 00:28, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims. I think my writings have some purity to those who are very well educated readers (those who studied the language in-depth and who simply knows the language--linguists, grammarians, social scientists, etc.). However, I do not want an argument with someone on whether I can make any comment in WP or not. If there is problem from administrators, I will just simply stop any further posting.

It is sometimes a lifetime achievement if someone to be able to discuss with many unrelated parties openly and be able to provide some reasonable arguments. It is of course the fact that few of us can actually cite the rules by which the language pattern work.

I have had very good background education from some famous teachers. Their publications are very well known locally and globally and are still used as textbooks for advanced studies. To the  students, this is an added academic gift and worldwide recognition as such anyone to simply guess about. If educated readers value other posts and see my posts as lack of standards, what I can say is nothing else but--the readers deserve those kinds of edits and my apology. That is all. Mr.Bitpart (talk) 03:41, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Comments by other users
Seems WP:DUCKey. NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 06:15, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
– Mihkaw napéw is for CheckUser purposes. This will need to be determined via behavioral evidence alone. –MuZemike 01:20, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

It is of my opinion that Mr.Bitpart = Mihkaw napéw based on editing patterns and behaviors. However, after reading Wikipedia talk:Reference desk/Archive 66, I am not certain that any consensus for a ban is there; given that this is 6 months after the fact, I think it may be a better idea for the community (or a cross-section thereof) to establish a consensus to impose a ban on Mr.Bitpart from the Language Reference desk, rather than have an administrator impose that will, which may or may not be in their best interest. –MuZemike 22:01, 18 July 2010 (UTC)