Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Alex Bakharev 2

message: User:Yodo's vote should not be counted, even if he changes it to a vote in support. Yodo is obviously a sock of User:Bonaparte. Here is some of my evidence: 
:1) at 10:54 17 February 2006, User:Node ue votes in support of Alex Bakharev; 
:2)at 11:29 17 February 2006, Alexander 007 votes oppose for Bakharev's RfA.
:3) at 12:01 17 February 2006, an anonymous IP makes this edit;
:4) at 12:13 17 February 2006, User:Yodo appears again after over a month of silence (January 7, 2006).
The editor was probably trailing Alexander 007's contributions or trailing Node's contributions, or both (User:Bonaparte is known to have spied on both of them); then the editor comes across this RfA; then (not logged in) he posts a message at WP:RWNB. About 10 minutes later, he logs in as User:Yodo, exhibiting Bonapartian behavior. The conclusion is obvious. ---Alexander 007 14:44, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you think it'd be worth it trying one of these again. --Latinus (talk (el:)) 15:14, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say so. The timing is uncanny. 11/12 minutes after the post at WP:RWNB, User:Yodo reappears after over a month of silence, displaying Bonapartian tactics...Alexander 007 15:17, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I would rather not disclose email correspondance. Alexander 007 15:31, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Here we go again....let's just promote him so we don't have to go through all of this once every month! :)Gator (talk) 14:50, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: By the way Bonaparte, since you are reading this: I turned you in because your edit behavior under these various IP's and accounts is highly disreputable, and in fact damages what you are trying to improve. Not to mention that about a week or two ago you swore up & down to me that you are not sockpuppeting... don't lie to me. Alexander 007 15:41, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Whoever doubts, see  and this. The way to go, is to check whether IP used by Yodo is an open proxy. I bet the bottle of any beverage of your choice that it is. --Irpen 19:19, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Also, some anon coward, pbbly a proxy, is posting messages to Ukrainian and Polish boards. Disgusting! --Irpen 19:19, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you sure? If you mean the boards in the English Wiki, I didn't notice any recent anon activity. Maybe I missed it... Alexander 007 20:39, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Postscriptum: Bonaparte did indeed read this page; he sent me an email yesterday. He understood about me thinking it was him, but he denied the anon IP for sure, and I think (he wasn't clear) that he denies the User:Yodo account. He told me, "It is Irpen!" (but he didn't say which is Irpen: the anon IP, User:Yodo, or both; but we already know the anon IP is not Irpen, and I don't think Yodo is Irpen either). He wrote this after I already made such allusions (which I withdraw but do not apologize for; this is a Spy Game after all). Alexander 007 17:20, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Ah, no. I'm serious. I don't think you are behind User:Yodo. But I think Bonaparte does :-) Alexander 007 17:55, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: {{vandal|Yodo}}

message: #::Oppose due to low use of edit summaries for major edits.    
#::Oppose because I'm not sure it was correct for you to solicit users on the Russian Wikipedia to come here to participate in this vote.  .   
#::Oppose Unfortunately the candidate did not seem to handle gracefully the powers of adminship. An administrator should be willing to explain and unwilling to provoke edit wars. Wishing the best to the Russian community of editors   
#::There are plenty of admin candidates; no point in taking a risk on one with this much controversy.     
#::Oppose Afraid, Alex Bakharev has got a POV on the national issues, which I wouldn't like to see in an admin       
#::My support to the policy of neutrality. 
#::You've been asked to elaborate: I'd consider that a necessitation.   
#::Yes, I would say it is always necessary to back up such a strong complaint with evidence of wrongdoing.     
#::Does the fact that Ghirlandajo wants Alex to be admin means that Alex will be pushing POV?      
#::Very Strong Oppose The candidate has strong POV, he supported an offensive Russian user Ghirlandajo that insulted and got to disputes with several other contributors based out of his dislike for their nationality for example(Polish Mafia, rv idiotic Moldovan nationalism). #::Alex Bakharev went beyond pure support, but expressed an opinion that the user should have more rights than an anonymous trolls. Supporting a known offender, involved in serious disputes with other contributors, and wanting him to posess more rights then other users(insulted as trolls), doesn't speak good for Alex Bakharev's neutrality.      
#::Here are a few edits by Alex Bakharev on Transnistria that Bonaparte may be referring to  . —    
#::Oppose It's inappropriate to call other admins "stupid". Here it is: .     #:Auhh..that link does not lead to the word "stupid".   
#::Uhm, you probably were not careful enough, I quote: It is not Ghirlandajo's fault that the admin was incompetent and/or stupid --Just a tag 17:47, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yodo is a sock of Bonny going through an open proxy, see above. --Irpen 19:20, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I realize it may be the case.  However, until it's proven through WP:RCU, the vote can only be discarded by the closing bureaucrat.—Ëzhiki (ërinacëus amurënsis) 19:25, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Yodo's reasons

message: I think I can do contact with User:Kelly Martin or User:David Gerard. Please, someone say me exactly what must be checked. --Neigel von Teighen 16:18, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: User:Yodo vs User:Bonaparte and his known IPs, I guess. User:Uapatriot takes responsibility for the anon IP at the Romanian notice board, and his story rings true, so no need to check the anon IP. Alexander 007 16:23, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I have sent a message to Kelly Martin and told her to reply on this page rather than in my user talk. Now, we should wait. If in a reasonable time he doesn't answers, I'll try with David Gerard (I hope he remembers me from my work as advocate of a case that he will surely remember). Ah, I posted a CheckUser request for Irpen so he can show Alex what he wants. --Neigel von Teighen 23:19, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Checkuser 

message: Ladies and gentlemen! This RfA has turned into a circus (which is already noticed by some other users). I was crucified an insulted, although it is Alex who is the only legal target here. But I'll live with it. What's more important, the whole discussion went in a very biased way. Three friends of nominee went discrediting virtually every user who voted "oppose". IT'S UNACCEPTABLE since irrelevant. If a given user is not a proved sockpuppet, nobody allowed to crucify him here. And nobody should turn the election into a topical discussion.
If this is not stopped, I see no ways for me but to interfere, politely questioning pro-Bakharev voters (although I don't know almost any of them). That we'll be a complete circus for sake of balance.
So, here is my peace suggestion (a road map:):
#Campaigners for Alex stop questioning "oppose" people 
#Everybody stops asking questions for nominee
#We negotiate and implement a radical reshuffling of the comments to votes, e.g. I cut my comment, Irpen,Kazak and Ghirla delete their countercomments; we also edit our irrelevant questions to other voters; as a result, we vote on the edition on this talkpage
#If needed, someone negotiates bureaurats (sysops, Jimbo Wales or whatever) for pro-longing (not re-running!) the election
Do you think it's technically possible? I'm not very familiar with Wikirules hence asking Ukrained
:For once I agree with you, that certain people (not mentioning any names) did turn this into a circus, and particulary the insults that I got from one certain nationaly-conscious clown (again not mentioning any names), makes point №3 very attractive. Although an apology would also be much appreciated - but if it means an insult to national pride of the insulter, well I can't force people to become more civil but my prayers go out to them ;). --Kuban Cossack 21:25, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Kazak, please ask somebody neutral (and normal) to read and explain you your own writing :))) Ukrained 08:01, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Believe me I am conscious of what it says and mean every word of it.--Kuban Cossack 10:18, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A peace treaty suggestion