User talk:Krakkos

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome!

Hello, Krakkos, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may be removed if they have not yet been. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. As well, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  Go Phightins! (talk) 19:43, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

A page you started has been reviewed![edit]

Thanks for creating Vangio and Sido, Krakkos!

Wikipedia editor Falkirks just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

I have reviewed and passed your new article. Great Work!

To reply, leave a comment on Falkirks's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Why I haven't commented[edit]

Since I became an arbitrator, I am getting less involved in disputes at ANI etc so that if they come to ArbCom I don't have to remove myself from a case as being involved. Sorry about that. Dougweller (talk) 16:43, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Okay, i understand. Sorry if i have bothered you then, but i've been addressing you about this as you seem to be one of the few administrators who has made an effort to deal with this problem. Thanks for explaining. Krakkos (talk) 21:27, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 1[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Proto-Turkic language, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Palatalized (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Reply: ANI discussion[edit]

Hi. I saw your ANI report, and I think it's well-written with good rationale. However, I can't write my opinion, because I didn't deal with that guy for several months. Because of that, I'm not familiar with his current activities and his sock puppeteer friend(s). Also, I reported him in the beginning of his edits and admins just blocked him for 24 hours. His edits are obviously disruptive (Andronovo culture is a good case, please see the revision history), and I don't know why admins ignore him easily. I can help you in the other ways if you're interested. You can give me a list of articles that you think they're targeted by disruptive actions. I'll watch them and I can submit relevant reports in the future. Please remember: You're the main editor who found these disruptive activities, so you should be an active user in Wikipedia to be able to solve this problem. In my experience, most POV-pushers won't stop their actions until admins either protect targeted articles or watch them. Your case needs admins' help/attention too, because we're regular editors and we're not able to deal with all of those problems, specially when WP:DUCK happens. So what do you think? Any solution? --Zyma (talk) 12:48, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

On the article Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Tirgil34, i have created a list of articles that he tend to edit. If you would like to help i reccommend adding these articles to your watchlist. If you find anything suspicious you could update the long-term abuse article, file a report on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tirgil34 and request administrator action. Thank your for your concern. Krakkos (talk) 12:55, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Okay, good work. I'll try to watch them (specially the vital/important ones). My suggestion: You can clean up and create socks-free/neutral revisions of those articles. It's not necessary to remove all of his edits if you think some of them are good (it depends on you to let them or not). I saw you did this on some of those articles. I know it's not easy, but it makes other editors' watch and patrolling work much easier if new socks/DUCKs return and try to restore socks' contributions. Also, your edit summaries are an important part, because detailed edit summaries are very useful in the diffs and searches. Regards. --Zyma (talk) 15:34, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Use of CSD G5[edit]

I declined your speedy request of Turukkaeans (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), since it had a large number of edits by others. I also noticed that you have been referencing CSD G5 in the edit summaries of reverts; do note that CSD criteria have no relevance outside the speedy (article) deletion process. LFaraone 01:52, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Okay LFaraone. I also noticed that the article had a substantial number of edits by others. But after looking at diffs from users that are not socks of Tirgil34 (talk · contribs), i reached the conclusion that the content of these edits were not substantial. Here are the diffs from non-Tirgil34 users.[1][2][3] Regarding the other issue, it seemed logical to me that if entire articles created by socks are eligible for removal, then edits should apply as well. The WP:G5 section also mention edits at one point, so perhaps i misinterpreted. I'm not gonna argue here, just trying to explain. Regards. Krakkos (talk) 11:16, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Tirgil34: His Basement[edit]

I googled some IE/Central Asian/Turanist revisionists and pseudo-science topics and I find something that will interest you. This needs serious attention by admins. Tirgil34 is an active member of The Apricity Forum. His main user name/account is Kipchak Håkan (just like Wikipedia, he has multiple accounts on there too). He refers/links to his WP edits/revisions on forum's posts/threads. It looks like that he and his friends cooperate to attack Wikipedia from there, because their posts are similar to disruptive edits on targeted articles. I think that forum is a basement for him and his meta-puppets. You can easily find the connection between those Apricity's accounts and Tirgil34's activity on WP. It's more than just a regular sock puppetry and fringe POV-pushing. See his profile info and posts. That guys is a perfect anti-European troll and ultra Turkish nationalist with a Turanist mind. My point: It's important to tell admins about this issue. Also, is there anyway to add this to that Long-Term abuse? --Zyma (talk) 10:39, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Nice research Zyma, very interesting. I strongly reccommend that you add this information to Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Tirgil34, perhaps the Other notes section. How do you plan on addressing the admins about this issue? Krakkos (talk) 10:57, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
After doing some research on my own here, i find that you are definately correct. For example check out this post on 24 June 2014 by Kipchak Håkan,[4] where he refers to a 23 June edit by Tirgil34 sock Agaceri (talk · contribs).[5]
I don't know how to report this, plus if you read and review his posts on that forum, you'll find more horrible things (looks like new and future-planned attacks). This is the reason why I call his behavior is something more than just a simple edit-warring or POV-pushing. It looks like an organized job, non-stop, and a systematic attempt to insert Turanist fringe contents on WP. I suggest to mention this stuff on the talk page section + direct report to some admins (provide WP diffs and related posts on Apricity Forum. Please ask admins about this, because I'm not familiar with this policy (disruptive edits that established and launched from 3rd-party websites). Despite his fringe povs, I think his forum-friends act as meta-puppets, anonymous editors (IPs), and IP-hopping editors. Read talk pages, you'll see their BS everywhere, just like those cheap posts on that forum. Do more searches and tell admins about this. Good luck. --Zyma (talk) 12:24, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
Okay Zyma, i'll see what i can do. I have also discovered that Tirgil34 has also been very active at Wiktionary and Commons, so it seems like this problem extends beyond Wikipedia towards the entire Wikimedia Foundation. Krakkos (talk) 13:22, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
Those edits are just for block/SPI evasion. He uses different personalities for each of his socks. This is popular among most sock puppeteers, because I submit some SPI cases and I'm familiar with them. As I said before, his behavior/activity is beyond our user rights and admins should decide about him if this (WP) is a real encyclopedia. I don't care about his edits and dream (everything is Turkic!) if he behave like a normal editor and stop his sock puppetry (I guess he started from 2009 or 2010), but it looks like sock puppetry and puppetry is a natural part of him. The real problem is: He adds a lot of unreliable or misrepresented sources to push fringe theories and weaken scholary/most-accepted views by experts. Cheating in edit summaries, manipulating referenced texts/contents, aggressive attacks against other editors, and etc. Some of his sources are not problematic, but the way he adds and presents them on articles is awful/disruptive. Don't expect anything from someone who thinks Ancient Near Easterns and Indo-Europeans were his dreamy 100% Turanid Turkic group, and Turks are the source for every ancient thing in this world! Did you read his claims on that forum? In his mind, all Central Asia regions and half of Europe were fully Turkic, then racist scientist ignored this fact, because they are Anti-Turk! A perfect example of pseudo-science + pan-nationalism. Best regards, bye. --Zyma (talk) 14:39, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
Zyma, could user Temple of Time at Historum be the same as Kipchak Håkan/Tirgil34? Krakkos (talk) 14:04, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Maybe, it's possible. Every time he makes a change on WP articles, his edits appear on these history forum, and they know the revision history of those articles. That guy with "Black Panther" avatar is an interesting one! I mentioned The Apricity as an example (they manipulate articles and refer to manipulated articles because WP has its own reputation). There is no need to find this troll outside of WP. As I said above, this case is beyond regular users and needs serious attention by admins if they think WP is a reliable encyclopedia based on academic/expert sources. Off-topic, helpful for your future edits: The Indo-European Homeland from Linguistic and Archaeological Perspectives --Zyma (talk) 16:13, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
wait are you accusing me because i am also in apricity? kazekagetr 17:45, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Sockpuppet[edit]

Are you retard? How the hell did you write me down as a sockpuppet. Have you looked at my contribs or accomplishments? kazekagetr 13:34, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

oh now i get it, you are greek right. i cooperate with armenians and greeks on turkey/turkish related issues cause i am georgian, not turkish. but accusing me as a sockpuppet wihout any solid evidence, this makes me crazy. kazekagetr 17:27, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

@KazekageTR: I will revoke my nomination of you as a sockpuppet of Tirgil34 (talk · contribs). You can read a detailed response at the SPI in question. Krakkos (talk) 20:25, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
@KazekageTR: Off topic. A Georgian communist trolling turks.[6] Reminds me of a particular persion. Haha. Krakkos (talk) 21:07, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

¿Krakkos ~ Akodymos?[edit]

http://epoznan.pl/index.php?section=forum&subsection=user&user_name=akodymos — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.10.74.195 (talk) 20:09, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Accusation[edit]

Hi Krakkos. You have mentioned me in spi. lf you check my edits, you can understand that i am not tirgil34. l edited Wusun in the past. Differing from Tirgil34's, my additions were the sources that support the indo-european identity of Wusun. Please check my edits before accusation. Regards. ArordineriiiUkhtt (talk) 21:42, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

l have just saw the ANl report that was opened by Tirgil34 last week while i was looking at your last contributions in order to understand what's going on. Tirgil34 claimed that, user Zyma, Ergative rtl, Rajmaan...and my account are your sock accounts. Now, you have mentioned me on SPI and claimed that i am sock of him. lt is ridiculous. Can you please take a look at the history of Wusun? l have NO edits about Turkic theory. And even there is no edit by me about Turkic-related articles. You should check the contributions well before such accusations. ArordineriiiUkhtt (talk) 22:22, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm not a sockpuppet of Tirgil34[edit]

Is true I edit in mostly Turkic pages ( and sometimes other ) but I have nothing to do with Tirgil34. WorldCreaterFighter (talk) 14:49, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

hallo![edit]

Dear Krakkos, unlike yourself I have no agendas, I only strive for the truth and objectivity.

It was very lowly from you to mention me as a sockpuppet of somebody you do not like. I never heard of this person and have nothing to do with him.

You are evidently pushing an agenda and consequently you attack as a sockpuppet anybody that holds different views from yours, and this is not in the spirit of Wikipedia.Aldrasto11 (talk) 05:01, 6 March 2015 (UTC)