Bizovne

Bizovne (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
18 March 2011
Suspected sockpuppets


Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters "~~~~"

Making the same edits on both places. Please note that the IP was blocked for serious offences recently [1] and in case they are the same the previous blocks should show up in the account's block log or somehow get linked to the account. Hobartimus (talk) 21:55, 18 March 2011 (UTC) Hobartimus (talk) 21:55, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

The IP continues editwarring without being logged in to the Wikipedia and without being willing to discuss content changes on the talk pages of the moot articles while the account Bizovne is still active.

[2] [3] [4] --Nmate (talk) 09:01, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
29 April 2011
Suspected sockpuppets


Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters "~~~~"

User:Bizovne seems to have abused his own IP address (by logging out) to make it appear as if there are more editors involved in edit wars/disputes. The most striking ones are the ones made at the Maurice Benyovszky article, but it has happened at the Sándor Petőfi article too. First he edited (or rather, constantly reverted) the article with his "IP account": [5] [6] [7] then about a month later he has appeared as User:Bizovne: [8]. He has followed a similar scheme at the Sándor Petőfi article as well: first he edited it as Bizovne: [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] etc. and then on 26th as his IP account (he didn't edit as Bizovne that day): [14]

Curiously enough he seems to be MUCH more confronting while using his IP account, evidenced especially by his latest posts on my talk page. He has done this editing method on several other articles as well, including Győr and Brezno. Also, by being more confronting with his IP account, he has managed to "blame" all the blocks on his IP account while keeping his registered one clean. Sure, this is all speculation before it's being confirmed by a CU, but the last SPI has been refused exactly for the fact that he hasn't been suspected of evading anything. Now however it became clear that he's using his IP account mostly when he wants to badmouth other users (or Hungarians in general) so that the sanctions affect only his IP account and not his registered one. CoolKoon (talk) 19:00, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

There is no need for CheckUser here, the result can be determined by the usual Sockpuppet Investigation tools, such as comparing edits, editing style (in this case, you can use the User Compare report even, which is substantial when compared to the small number of total edits). In other words there is enough evidence without going for CheckUser that the two are the same. Hobartimus (talk) 20:25, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
18 May 2011
Suspected sockpuppets


Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters "~~~~"

It really looks like Bizovne wasn't bothered by the month-long block. It's quite interesting to see him using an IP account once again to continue with his "good hand, bad hand" tactics in such a short time before his block expires. This new IP user (at least its recent edits that is) bears much resemblance to Bizovne and his previous IP socks. He's not only stalking Hobartimus (like Bizovne did in the past), but his edit summaries also contain the same nationalist overtones as some of the puppet master's summaries (this typical attitude of "you're not in Hungary so you can't do this or that -in fact you're not supposed to do anything at all-"). This user however went even a bit further (than Bizovne that is) as he began harassing other users as well (labeling her edit -obviously made in good faith- vandalism and suggesting that he's removing only vandalism) so I think that this might be one of Bizovne's attempt to evade the block imposed on him. CoolKoon (talk) 20:29, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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
09 June 2011
Suspected sockpuppets


Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters "~~~~"

Just a few days have passed since the expiration of the last block given to Bizovne and he seems to have resumed his old habits of "emphasizing his point" with additional socks if necessary. This happened most prominently at the Ányos Jedlik article, which seems to be his favorite one ([15], [16] and [17]). So when the other editors didn't relent, he just used his first IP then his second just to "emphasize his point". I'm not sure why's he doing this, but if you check the edit logs of the IP addresses (especially 195.28.75.114) you'll see that he's already done this in the past. He has first proceeded to confirm his sockpuppetry by using a forged signature, then he's revealed that both IPs are his by replying on my talk page using his IPs (please see the translation section for details).
All of the events detailed above have happened in the past few days right after his month-long block has expired. Essentially the only difference between the current situation and the one from a month ago (before he was blocked) that he didn't call me a Fascist this time.
Still, there's one more interesting thing about Bizovne's edits and behavior: when doing his reverts he's marked most of them as "minor edits" and stated that he's reverting vandalism, just like Iaaasi did (see [18] and [19]). It's also apparent that at least two of Bizovne's edits ([20] and [21]) were reverts of one of Stubes99's socks, which's also Iaaasi's favorite "hobby" on WP (see [22], [23] and [24]). Both these clues seem to point to meatpuppetry..... -- CoolKoon (talk) 21:25, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Additional note for (unacquainted) admins: Unfortunately I'm 99.9% positive that sockpuppetry will NOT be confirmed for any of the users mentioned above or below (i.e. Iaaasi, Bizovne and Stubes99). Iaaasi is a Romanian editor from Romania (puppet master no. 1), which's confirmed even by some of his edits in Romanian. Bizovne is a Slovak editor from eastern Slovakia, proof of the former is his countless entries in Slovak either on my talk page or at the Zsófia Bosnyák talk page. The problem with the latter is that he seems to be taking detailed orders from/coordinated by Iaaasi and to a quite detailed degree (i.e. that Bizovne is a meatpuppet of Iaaasi). This is evidenced e.g. by "parallel" edits on Commons and EN WP which seem like they were made by the same person: first Iaaasi requests a checkuser for Darkercastel, then a few hours later Bizovne requests an SPI against the same editor on Wikipedia (since Iaaasi's blocked on EN WP), which shows some quite close coordination.
Stubes99 on the other hand is a Hungarian editor/puppet master (puppet master no. 2) which's evidenced by the fact that he concentrates solely on Hungarian-related topics (no Romanian or Slovak editor would do that). Now this editor has somehow managed to annoy Iaaasi to the point where he became obsessed with hunting sockpuppets of Stubes99. Iaaasi has became so obsessed with reporting Stubes99's socks in fact that he's created additional sockpuppets just so that he can report and revert the edits of Stubes99's sockpuppets. Therefore it's quite suspicious if an unaffiliated user (short of admins of course) begins to revert and report Stubes99's socks. I hope that this has cleared things up a bit. -- CoolKoon (talk) 21:17, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Last note: Ok, this SPI entry has gone a bit astray. The original request was meant to be for Bizovne and his 2 IP socks. Please forget about Iaaasi for now and focus on the IPs instead. -- CoolKoon (talk) 23:35, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: This is already been dealt with a few days ago. One was hit for 3 months, other for a week. -- DQ (t) (e) 00:02, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, ok then. I just thought that whenever an action's taken against the subjects of the SPI they'll be noted here as well. -- CoolKoon (talk) 00:46, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by other users

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

Also, it is more than obvious that Bizovne is a meatuppet of Iaaasi. According to this ANI-report on 27 April 2011

"Banned user Iaaasi is sending e-mails to myself and at least two other editors in attempt to get people to edit Wikipedia on his behalf. He says that if people don't file sock puppet reports and do his bidding in other ways, it means he is allowed to engage in sock puppetry. I have cut off his e-mail access but he already has the addresses of several users."
And in addition, yesterday Bizovne commenced even one another checkuser investigation concerning Stubes99 [35]--Nmate (talk) 09:01, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion, user Nmate does not like Slovak editors (just look at his blocking history and his activity on Wikipedia). I don't know lassi and Nmate's allegations are ridiculous. Good night to all :) --Bizovne (talk) 22:28, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
20 August 2011
Suspected sockpuppets


Both of these users seem to be hung up on me just like [Bizovne was]. What's more "Jurkojanosik" has even used almost the same pejorative phrase regarding the Hungarian language (Hungarian (...) sounds like a dog's barking vs. language of the barking dogs). So Jurkojanosik's been indefed and a mere day or two after that a "brand new" Slovak user comes out of the blue and attacks me on AN along with User:Hobartimus. I think that this is more than enough for an SPI. -- CoolKoon (talk) 14:22, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
  • Aside from TransilvaniaROU, there is no obvious reason to suspect that any of these are socks, let alone of Iaaasi (or Bizovne).  Additional information needed: Please spell out the connection more plainly. AGK [•] 14:21, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

October

WestSVK is a Confirmed match to Bizovne. TNXMan 14:39, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

14 May 2012
Suspected sockpuppets


Well, the fact that the name of the account translates to "CoolKoon fucks his mother" was the first giveaway that this is Bizovne (he told me unflattering things before). The second is the fact that his edit log consists of nothing BUT openly swearing at me in Slovak PLUS (and this is the interesting part) a revert of an edit in the Miklós Horthy article, because it doesn't fit his agenda that he's described on my talk page in the past.
As for Savneli I've presented my arguments in an SPI entry too, which should be more than enough for an SPI. -- CoolKoon (talk) 13:25, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Both are blocked and I saw no other accounts, so I'll mark for close. TNXMan 14:48, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

18 June 2012
Suspected sockpuppets


I see certain editing similarities between User:River party and User:Savneli and User:CoolKoon jebe svoji matku. For example:CoolKoon jebe svoji matku inserted the same POV as River party to the article Miklos Horthy [36][37] And at the article John Zapolya, there are also editing similarities between Bizovne and River party : [38] [39] Furthermore, Savneli's and River party's editing pattern also show certain similarities here and here-- Nmate (talk) 11:11, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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
02 July 2012
Suspected sockpuppets


It seems to me that Bizovne's starting to seriously get out of control. The diversity of the IPs shown above proves that he's obviously seeking out every chance to "get back" at me for (probably perceive or fictional) grievances he blames me for (let it be a free McDonald's AP, free wifi in the bus/on the train, a friend/acquaintance in Prague etc.).

First the IP socks 95.102.187.187 and 88.101.59.19. These have been surely used by (or edited on behalf of) a single user: the first one has made an ANI report about me, which (less than a week later) has been followed by a second ANI report filed against me, where the reporter -cynically- comments that there's a problem with me again. Now I'm no detective, but how big is the chance for 2 so different genuine IP users knowing me (and following my edits) without knowing each other (or being the same person)? Close to zero I'd say. The fact that these IP socks have targeted me in the first place speak of their connection to Bizovne too, since he's very hung up on me (he even created a harassment account called User:CoolKoon jebe svoji matku=CoolKoon's fucking his mother), so it's usually him who's behind anything that has an even remote chance of affecting me negatively. Moreover 95.102.187.187 has even partaken in a content dispute where 195.28.75.114 has been active too.

Now the 3rd IP account (195.28.75.114) is a particularly interesting one. It's been subject of countless SPIs in the past, and in one of them (please refer to the entry from 09 June 2011) he's basically admitted (by a mistake) that this IP belongs to him. Now I've done some basic research (e.g. nslookup and stuff), and found that the IP resolves to gw0.ruskov.net, which seems to be owned by the village of Nový Ruskov (a small village in eastern Slovakia) that maintains a "village LAN" this way (FYI bizovne means "certainly" in the eastern Slovak dialect). Thus I'm led to believe that Bizovne uses his home connection to harass me and others, partake in edit wars, do some POV pushing/heavily tendentious editing etc. (and to get away with all of this of course). Since Bizovne seems to be editing most frequently from this IP, giving this IP a long-term ban might greatly aid in enforcing the ban against him and reducing his constant harassment.

Now I know that you're not allowed to (publicly) link IPs to accounts, but some sort of remedy could be applied at least per WP:DUCK, which might at least curb his obsession with my harassment and editing frenzy (with no regards of the fact that he's blocked obviously). -- CoolKoon (talk) 00:17, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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
26 July 2012
Suspected sockpuppets


User:Bizovne is a blocked meatpuppet of User:Iaaasi. Once already I reported River party on the grounds that I suspect(ed) that he was/is a sockpuppet of Iaaasi (see:[40]), but the investigation was declined saying that I would have yet to collect more pieces of evidence in order for the case to be investiged [41]. Recently, there are certain edits to the article Bratislava that may be related to both Iaaasi and Bizovne here[42] and here[43] i.e. River party may be Bizovne and Balatoth may be Iaaasi. Note that I also reported Balatoth here [44] as a suspected sockpuppet of Iaaasi.-- Nmate (talk) 17:00, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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
30 August 2012
Suspected sockpuppets


It's quite unfortunate that there were already two SPIs filed and no action has been taken. The problem with this is the fact that the user is a clear-cut clone of Bizovne. This means that he's either a sockpuppet, or a meatpuppet. Other than the evidence already supplied by User:Nmate in the last two SPIs his whole (recent) edit log is a cornucopia of evidences: he's been "diligently" deleting Hungarian settlement names on a mass scale ([45],[46],[47],[48],[49],[50],[51],[52]), refuses to communicate with anybody about his actions, makes anti-Hungarian edits most of the time, his English is quite bad (just like that of Bizovne) and the account is "brand new" (registered on June 15, started editing the same day). Really, the only thing that's missing from the list of evidences is Bizovne's frequent verbal attacks against me (either on ANI or on my talk page in Slovak). Since Bizovne's "permanent" IP address has been blocked as per a previous SPI, I have a feeling that the IPs of River party won't match that of Bizovne (meaning that the account is either a meatpuppet or a work/school/generally non-home IP address used by Bizovne for this single account). All in all I doubt that River party would pass the WP:DUCK test either. -- CoolKoon (talk) 16:25, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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
12 December 2012
Suspected sockpuppets


I am writing this hoping for the correction of a error from 5 May 2012, when you blocked Samofi [53] because of his alleged sockpuppet Savneli which in fact belonged to Bizovne. I do not deny that the technical data of Savneli and Samofi could have been similar, considering that both Samofi and Bizovne, the real sock master, live in Slovakia. But the behaviour evidence indicates clearly that Bizovne is the owner of Savneli account. More exactly, Savneli put messages about "prof Cavalli" [54] [55] just like Bizvone had done in the past: [56]

Also Joseph Petzval page was edited by both Savneli [57] and Bizvone [58] [59] [60]

CoolKoon, which is not a fan of Samofi, agreed that Samofi was innocent here [61]. Also Nmate, another enemy of Samofi, stated on the same thread "of course it is possible that Savneli was Bizovne"

Please reanalyze the case, because an innocent user (Samofi) was indef blocked for someone else's action. Irji2012 (talk) 15:39, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is sad that administrators refuse to correct their mistake, when behavioiral evidence are so obvious. Bizovne confirmed to me that this account is his. It is very possible that he used a proxy server, considering that his usual IP [62] is blocked. Please check Savneli's IPs. It is possible that he used 77.93.216.69 from proxy site http://anonymizer.in/anonymizer/ that he wrote me about in the period when Savneli was editing. Irji2012 (talk) 07:43, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
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
More