Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Avraham (2nd)

User:Avraham

 * Suspected sockpuppeteer


 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * Report submission by

--Matilda talk 05:09, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Two new wikipedians whose first edits, competently made with signatures, were to vote for keeping an article supported by User:Avraham and strongly supporting his views. first edit by Mongoosed First edit by Adjuro--Matilda talk 05:09, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Evidence

Checkuser is not appropriate until the AfD has been completed and will only be done if the outcome is affected by the votes of these two potential sockpuppets.--Matilda talk 05:09, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comments

I would also like to chime in and say my thoughts re my dealings with avi, he has tried to block me numerous times, i do not think he is a bad editor at all, he is a good and trustworthy valued editor, - where it not for the concern that he scares of new users we should give him all the medals and money of the world to continue doing his tireless wiki work. I must be open, i personally would like him to be desysoped, because his actions are very though and strict with new users, but until the community is tolerant of his antiques my voice will not be heard, it is clear to me from my interactions with him, ly that he is working like a puppet, although i think he is too shrewd to use it like a sock-puppet, i definitely see a pattern in metapoetry, i will try to enumerate my evidence although it may be unconvincing for the community, i urge extra caution since avi is a sysop he should be more responsible and held to some higher standard especially since he evokes his higher status here daily to win edit wars. thanks for everybody who will take the time and effort to comment and investigate further on this cloud of puppetry behavior, because i feel Avi has crossed all lines definitely with me he has succeeded in wasting my time through these above enumerated issues and i hope his name can be cleared so all the pain would be for the good of the projects consensus building, by all means a check-user should be done just to be sure it would be great and encouraging that no socks are involved. i would strongly urge a check-user tool on his name to see what names, if any, are linked to puppeteer from his ip address. Thanks for bringing this up --יודל (talk) 10:52, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Note - I feel really bad about accusing User:Avraham of this and no longer think he is the puppetmaster. I ahve nominated him because of the strong support shown by the two new users. However, in reviewing talk page comments and editing history,  I suspect it is probably User:Adon Emett.  I find the whole AfD rather bizarre - particularly when reviewed against the previous AfD for the same topic.--Matilda talk 05:50, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) when i answer an other user he jumps suddenly in on me to talk instead of that other user.
 * 2) also when i argue with him suddenly other names come in and attack me that i hares him they try to change the discussion.
 * 3) he always diverts a discussion that others hurt him personally when the others talk only about the subject.
 * 4) he usually never answers on his talk page when simple discussions are started but jumps to to decentralize the issue to other talk pages, so it should be hard to follow his discussions around so not be able to detect what comment belongs where and who are the users commenting on it.
 * 5) he has reverted in the past to delete the history of other pupets see his reasoning that we must follow his actions because he knows better.User_talk:IZAK/Archive_30


 * See also Requests for checkuser/Case/Adon Emett which covers some of the same users (but not Avraham). It also lists additional users. Perhaps these lists should be combined. -- A. B. (talk) 12:56, 17 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Response

I believe Matilda has exhibited extremely poor judgement and allowed her personal point of view to interfere with her ability to act as an impartial sysop. We are involved in a discussion about the deletion of the Ed O'Loughlin article, which may be found at Articles for deletion/Ed O'Loughlin 2nd attempt.

Involved in this discussion are a number of new accounts; which she has decided are my sockpuppets.

If she had taken more than 30 seconds to check my editing history as well as the editing history of User:Adon Emett and User:124.191.88.235, not only would she see that the new accounts are most likely tied to the Australian IP, she would see that I had blocked the Australian IP for vandalism related to the Ed O'Loughlin case.

Not to skip the fact that all of the other editors, including herself, are from Australia, and I am from the United States.

I feel as if her point-of-view regarding this Mr. O'Loughlin has prevented her from approaching this case properly, and resulted in at best, a gross violation of the assumption of good faith and at worst, a deliberate ad hominem attack meant to impugn the credibility of a firmly established editor and administrator on ideological grounds. I hope it is the former.

As for Yudel/Yid, he has been blocked for disruption before, has been castigated for improper allegations before, has exhibited a total disregard for wikipedia policies and guidelines before, has apologized and returned to the same actions before, and a perusal of his editing history will clearly demonstrate the problems with this editor. He has been long trying to claim I deserve desysopping, because I have the "gall" to uphold wikipedia policy and guidelines where he finds it annoying. Oh well, every established editor eventually gets his or her "fan club".

-- Avi (talk) 15:34, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Avi i was very open that u have tried to block me weekly by stating that i break policies, i am i clean? u bet i have my flowes. Please refrain from making this page about u or other editors, if u r a good decent editor like i say u should let this page be about the puppetry accusations others have on u, i strongly urge the community to be tolerant of Avi and not block him if the checkuser finds he has acted like a puppet, all we want in this page is clarify some heavy feelings we may have that hinders our community collaboration with avi. thanks--יודל (talk) 15:51, 17 January 2008 (UTC)


 * At the time of nomination, the most vociferous editor on the AfD was Avraham, the apparent puppets supported him, hence my nominatin of him as puppet master. It may well be someone else but since checkuser is not allowed, we can't find out and I can't make an altrnate accusation other than the one I have already suggested above - Adon Emmet.--Matilda talk 19:39, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Why is check-user not allowed, if Avi agrees to this why shouldn't we make this check, after all not only u has raised this issue, why not finelize it once and for all?--יודל (talk) 19:43, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It is amazing how every time you edit, you just prove my long-standing point that you completely disregard wikipedia policies and guidelines, Yid/Yudel. Read WP:RFCU before making inappropriate suggestions. --- Avi (talk) 19:46, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Avi this isn't my page initially but if u do not agree to make a checkuser i will at one time take the day off my job and collect all the evidence, right now i agree with u that we should not make a check user since u r evidently against it. love and peace.--יודל (talk) 19:53, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

(<-)I've been involved with the AFD discussion page. While I don't know who the puppetmaster is -- or if this really is a csae of sockpuppetry -- I doubt it's Avi. It's just not his style. I can understand why Matilda may have thought Avi was behind it, but I'd wager that a closer look will exonerate him. I hope both Avi and Matilda can put this episode behind them. Cheers, Majoreditor (talk) 20:12, 17 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I note Requests for checkuser/Case/Adon Emett (which was raised on the basis of code G - Request doesn't fit any of the criteria but you believe a check is warranted anyway) has found it unlikely that the various users nominated there were the same editor, specifically:
 * As two of those users are the same as nominated here and a third was my suspected alternate puppet master I withdraw this nomination. I fully accept Avraham's denial of being a puppet master.--Matilda talk 21:03, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * As two of those users are the same as nominated here and a third was my suspected alternate puppet master I withdraw this nomination. I fully accept Avraham's denial of being a puppet master.--Matilda talk 21:03, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * As two of those users are the same as nominated here and a third was my suspected alternate puppet master I withdraw this nomination. I fully accept Avraham's denial of being a puppet master.--Matilda talk 21:03, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * As two of those users are the same as nominated here and a third was my suspected alternate puppet master I withdraw this nomination. I fully accept Avraham's denial of being a puppet master.--Matilda talk 21:03, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * As two of those users are the same as nominated here and a third was my suspected alternate puppet master I withdraw this nomination. I fully accept Avraham's denial of being a puppet master.--Matilda talk 21:03, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * As two of those users are the same as nominated here and a third was my suspected alternate puppet master I withdraw this nomination. I fully accept Avraham's denial of being a puppet master.--Matilda talk 21:03, 17 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Conclusions


 * Withdrawn by nominator - see comment re Requests for checkuser/Case/Adon Emett and acceptance of Avraham's denial--Matilda talk 21:03, 17 January 2008 (UTC)