Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:27, 4 September 2024

This is Favonian's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58Auto-archiving period: 7 days

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

UTRS appeal #91703

I wonder how you feel about my comments for this appeal since you are the blocking admin. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 07:49, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@0xDeadbeef: I have commented at UTRS, though the privilege rightfully belongs to 331dot, as I merely removed the applicant's talk page access. Favonian (talk) 18:29, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Blocked user is evading again

Hello, I noticed that you reverted some edits by this user. They are back on a new IP account and are reverting edits again with no explanation. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 18:47, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry and BLP violations

Hello Favonian,

I have witnessed disruptive editing by User:Παλαβός in the article of Karel Komárek. It ticks too many boxes and I'm not quite sure how to deal with it, as it is sockpuppetry, and a violation of BLP, and possibly also undisclosed paid editing. Frankly, I wouldn't know which noticeboard to use which is why I'm contacting you on your talk page instead. I'm also pinging User:Ymblanter and user User:Daniel Case in this matter because they are already familiar with one aspect of the case. User:Edwardx, who is one of the article's main authors, has also been contacted, but this was of no avail (cf. User talk:Edwardx#FYI).

Since 27 August, Παλαβός has been trying to add a "Ties with Russia" section to the article of Karel Komárek. This section is a violation of Misplaced Pages's WP:BLP policy, cf. Special:Diff/1240235073/1242518602; the edits have also been automatically tagged as possible BLP issue or vandalism, and this becomes especially obvious if the revisions are filtered for edits tagged as that, cf. .

Why do I believe that the addition is a violation of WP:BLP?

• The text is negative in tone, makes ridiculous claims, and is largely based on questionable, unreliable, biased Ukrainian-language and Russian-language sources. Furthermore, it contains multiple duplicate references, and even if we pretend the sources were citable, the text addition has added heavy WP:UNDUE weight to a single point of view, considering that the article was increased from 18,000 bytes to 30,000 bytes.

• If it wasn't so severe, I would be amused by the fact that the only reliable English-language sources (The Telegraph and The Guardian), added in that set of edits, are contrary to the section's claims; The Telegraph's headline reads Billionaire "cuts ties with Kremlin-backed Gazprom", and The Guardian writes "Komárek publicly condemned Vladimir Putin after the invasion of Ukraine". Παλαβός's "Ties with Russia" text reads that "Russian special services" agents currently hold positions in Komárek's Moravia Gas Storage firm, or that Komárek owns the Russian Samara terminal which provides the Donetsk People's Republic with oil.

• The grammar errors Παλαβός has made are atypical of native English speakers, and per WP:SPADE, I say that most of the text was written by Chat GPT or DeepL. I doubt that Παλαβός is able to compose a text compelling enough for (English) Misplaced Pages.

That said, Παλαβός passes the WP:DUCK test, i.e., his account is undoubtedly a WP:SPA account, and the sockpuppetry is so obvious that a WP:SPI is not required, cf. Special:Contribs/Παλαβός:

• on 8 January, the account was created and immediately started editing random Greek articles to obtain the autoconfirmed user right. Note that someone spent about one and a half hours of uninterrupted editing, i.e., the account was just used once in a single account levelling event.
• From 8 January until 27 August, the account went dormant;
• on 27 August, the account was reactivated to perform these edits (Special:Diff/1240235073/1242518602) in the article of Karel Komárek.
• After Παλαβός's edit was reverted on 28 August, an edit war took place (), in which Παλαβός logged out of that account and used the Hungarian IPs 78.131.76.168, 80.98.145.168, and 195.38.102.149 to perform disruptive edits. The edit summary he has used is so unusual — "ties with Russia returned", especially the verb "return" in that context — that I argue this is proof for sockpuppetry per the WP:DUCK test.
• Interesting to note is also that immediately after the edit warring started on 28 August, Παλαβός used the 80.98.145.168 IP address to request page protection for the article (). When User:Daniel Case asked Παλαβός whether he would be okay with the fact that he wouldn't be able to edit the page using the Hungarian IPs, Παλαβός used the 195.38.102.149 IP to write "no problem at all. I'm OK with that" knowing that he would be able use the autoconfirmed Παλαβός account to circumvent the silverlock.
• Another interesting note: the text that Παλαβός has written on WP:RfPP using the 80.98.145.168 IP address suits the text in the Komárek article very nicely in terms of grammatical errors.
• The last detail is the editing of the user page and user talk: Παλαβός quickly created a user page and a talk page prior to resuming the edit war on 30 August, presumably to avoid having a red-link user page and talk, cf. (, , Special:Diff/1243102062)

The editing pattern that Παλαβός has shown is too sophisticated for someone who is just trying to edit a page. I doubt that a newcomer would make use of WP:RfPP, and, in addition to that, deliberately blue his user (talk) page prior to entering into an edit war. It's highly likely that Παλαβός is an undisclosed paid editor whose job is the opposite of "enhancing" an article on Misplaced Pages.

On 2 September, an increase in protection level to bluelocking was requested at RfPP (Misplaced Pages:Requests for page protection/Archive/2024/09#Karel Komárek), but eventually, the protection level wasn't increased. I believe this may be a misunderstanding; User:Daniel Case wrote "The edits reverted were made before " but it's actually that the disruptive edits to be reverted were made after User:Ymblanter had silverlocked the article.

What do you think and how can this be remedied? I certainly can't edit the page because it's silverlocked, entering talk page discussions has proven fruitless, and I also think that Παλαβός would simply create — or already has created — new accounts to continue the disruptive editing. Thank you. 63.67.4.175 (talk) 11:37, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

I apologize ... you are correct. I had confused the editor you were complaining about with the one making the complaint.

But at the same time this isn't a cut-and-dried case of disruption. Facially, the edits are sourced reliably; I will have to actually look at the articles cited. Daniel Case (talk) 17:55, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

@User:Daniel Case: Don't worry, it's not easy to spot. You're making a good point here, facially the edits are sourced reliably, but on closer inspection they aren't. If you take a second look at it, you will see that, most footnotes refer to Ukrainian-language and Russian-language sources that are not well-suited for a BLP, with most drawn from social media posts with the outlets disclaiming any liability for publishing. I have analyzed the referencing in the first three paragraphs of this revision:

• Reference 10 refers to Radio Prague International. At the point it is used, the Misplaced Pages article reads "in 2006 Karel Komarek initiated cooperation with the Russian monopoly Gazprom". The source says that negotiations between MND and Gazprom took place. The source doesn't say that Komárek initated a cooperation. In fact, the source mentions Komárek once in an explanatory comment in the last sentence, i.e, this is at least a failed verification. Per WP:FAILV and WP:BLP, the sentence thus "should be removed immediately". Unfortunately, most references in the text addition are built like this.
• Reference 11 refers to polpred.com which seems to be a database, i.e., a primary source, and it is forced into line with Russian state media. Including Komárek's article, Misplaced Pages has just three BLPs in which this source is used. It is definitely not a reliable source for a BLP, and also not for any other article on Misplaced Pages.
• Reference 12 is used for this sentence: "Komarek lobbied for the construction of a gas storage facility to store Russian gas in the Czech Republic, bypassing Ukraine's gas transportation system." The source doesn't mention Karel Komárek, it doesn't describe lobbying, and it also doesn't discuss a "bypassing of Ukraine's gas transportation system". Actually, the sources discusses that MND and Vemex agreed to build a gas storage facility in the Czech Republic.
• References 13, 1, and 17 (The Guardian) refer to the first proper source cited, but, it was used in a very misleading way. The Guardian writes "Komárek has condemned Russia’s “brutal” invasion of Ukraine", and "Russia’s all-out invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 is understood to have kickstarted efforts by KKCG to extricate itself from the co-investment with Gazprom". Παλαβός's text doesn't mention that, and per WP:SPADE, I say this was done on purpose.
• Reference 14 refers to a Gazprom press release; I hope it doesn't need explaining that sources like that should be omitted in a BLP.
• Reference 15 is used for the following sentence: "The board of directors of Moravia Gas Storage a.s. includes (...) Russian managers of the Russian monopoly, many of whom have been identified by Russian opposition media as former or current employees of Russian special services." Source 15 is an article written by Hennady Sikalov (Геннадій Сікалов) who in fact makes the described claim. The problem though is that no other reliable sources seem to support what he claims. He is an unknown figure, English Misplaced Pages doesn't mention his name once. But what can be said for sure is that Sikalov seems to be a Pro-Ukrainian activist, i.e., has apparently been convicted of fraud, and presumably supports a heavily biased opinion, and it cannot be established whether or not he is a reliable source. Therefore, the source should not be cited in a BLP.
• Reference 16 (Proekt) is a reliable source, but it doesn't mention the subject's name, i.e., it discusses something totally unrelated.
• Reference 17 is a duplicate of references 1, and 13.
• Reference 18 is a court register excerpt, a primary source.
• Reference 19 (also a duplicate of 21, and 22) refers to NEXT.io, a source that is cited in just one other article on Misplaced Pages. That is because prior to 2023, NEXT.io didn't exist. The source describes itself as "a content-driven events, media and publishing company that delivers news and insight to investors and iGaming professionals". However, I doubt that. Just look at its "about us" page; I think it's obvious that it was composed by AI. To be clear: NEXT.io appears bogus.
• Reference 23 refers to Radio Liberty, but, again, the claim "In turn, Radio Liberty noted in its own investigation that Karel Komarek owes the success of his business to the Russians" is not supported by the source. Even if it was, "Komárek owes the success of his business to the Russians" is not an encyclopedic sentence.

I hope this suffices to demonstrate why the content is so problematic. I have already explained why the editing behavior is also problematic; it doesn't need repeating at this point. I don't want to produce a wall of text by also analyzing the second half of the added paragraphs, but I guess the results wouldn't be any better. Thank you for having a look at this! Best wishes

2603:3003:E81:C000:344B:3F59:37E7:BDC6 (talk) 18:27, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Uh, thanks...

... but also, what the hell hahaha. So random. I'm barely active these days. Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 17:34, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Our enemies have long memories. Favonian (talk) 17:40, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm truly baffled, this behaviour is frankly eerie. The fake selfnom text is almost spooky in how credible it is. I think I'd much rather have insults hurled at me. 😅 Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 17:50, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Maybe it was done with the help of ChatGPT or one of its ilk. Steeling a line from Leonard Cohen: "I've seen the future, brother // It is murder." Favonian (talk) 17:55, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

• Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery