Misplaced Pages

:Requests for checkuser/Case/AdilBaguirov: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser | Case Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 19:59, 29 June 2007 editLuna Santin (talk | contribs)65,325 edits Archiving.← Previous edit Revision as of 18:28, 4 July 2007 edit undoFrancis Tyers (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users7,572 edits →[](4th request)Next edit →
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
=== ] (4th request) ===
{{rfcu box|case=AdilBaguirov|filed=18:26, 4 July 2007 (UTC)}}
*{{checkuser|AdilBaguirov}}
<!-- Add suspected sock puppets and IP addresses below this line. The above line will list an account matching the pagename. -->
*{{checkuser|Ehud Lesar}}
*'''Code letter:''' D
Likely to be the Adil due to activity on similar, obscure, articles. See contributions for details. - ] ] 18:28, 4 July 2007 (UTC)


<!-- BEGIN ARCHIVE TEMPLATE --><noinclude> <!-- BEGIN ARCHIVE TEMPLATE --><noinclude>
<!-- <!--
Line 9: Line 18:
<center>''The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a ]. <font color="red">'''Please do not modify it'''</font>.</center> <center>''The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a ]. <font color="red">'''Please do not modify it'''</font>.</center>
<!-- END ARCHIVE TEMPLATE --> <!-- END ARCHIVE TEMPLATE -->



=== ](3rd request) === === ](3rd request) ===

Revision as of 18:28, 4 July 2007

AdilBaguirov (4th request)

request links: main • edit • links • history • watch • talk
Filed: 18:26, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Likely to be the Adil due to activity on similar, obscure, articles. See contributions for details. - Francis Tyers · 18:28, 4 July 2007 (UTC)


If you are creating a new request about this user, please add it to the top of the page, above this notice. Don't forget to add
{{Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/AdilBaguirov}}
to the checkuser page here. Previous requests (shown below), and this box, will be automatically hidden on Requests for checkuser (but will still appear here).
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a Request for checkuser. Please do not modify it.

AdilBaguirov(3rd request)

request links: main • edit • links • history • watch • talk
Filed: 21:51, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

The following three users are not suspected of being AdilBaguirov's sockpuppets, but were directly or indirectly involved and could be the sockpuppeteers.

Recently on June 19, 2007 there was an edit war on Church of Kish page, For which I requested page protection Four single use/throw away accounts were used to revert war and vandalize Church_of_Kish, Movses_Kagankatvatsi, Justin_McCarthy_(American_historian), Gandzasar_monastery, Syunik and House_of_Hasan-Jalalyan All four users were blocked indefinitely. The vandals edits was directly or indirectly connected to users Atabek, Parishan and Ateshi-Baghavan. A similar checkuser was conducted, which included myself, Hetoum I, TheTruth4578, an anon. IP and Hakob, the results were negative. I would like to AGF and apologize to Atabek, Parishan and Ateshi-Baghavan, for including their names in the list. The only reason your names are included is because you were involved in the Church of Kish conflict. VartanM 08:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

 Likely. AdilBaguirov = DrAlban = Otvetniyudar = Aramgutan = Naharar. Also HachikTumanyan and AlexParKinson. Others not related. Voice-of-All 03:16, 27 June 2007 (UTC)


AdilBaguirov (2nd request)

request links: main • edit • links • history • watch • talk
Filed: 22:10, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
  • F:
  • The user just got blocked for edit warring, than Atabek pops up. Regarding his comment, Atabek comes right after Adil gets blocked funny how its not even him who he is talking about, Artaxiad 22:10, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

 Unlikely. Based on location, I don't beleive they are related. Essjay (Talk) 23:48, 20 February 2007 (UTC)


AdilBaguirov

request links: main • edit • links • history • watch • talk
Filed: 01:16, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Code letter: A

The following users may or may not be sockpuppets of AdilBaguirov, but one thing is for certain, all these accounts have been started by one person, and if necessary, please do a seperate checkuser of these usernames to see if their IP's match or are relatively the same: Atabek, Elsanaturk, Roazir, and Elnurso have all made the exact same types of personal Attacks against me. Elsanaturks attack: Atabek's attack (last sentence and header of section he started, putting my name in quotations): Roazir's attack: Elnurso's attack (see edit summary): . Also, notice how their talking is relatively the same and that they all really appeared out of nowhere, many times after long absences, in January to help with reverts on certain articles: AdilBaguirov's contributions (see past 500, notice how he became active again in January after a period of absence): Elnurso's contributions (see past 500, became active on December 31): Atabek's contributions (past 500, became active on January 21): Elsanaturk's contributions (past 500, became active on January 13): Roazir's contributions (became active on January 15): Tengri's contributions (became active on January 26): . Notice how Elnurso stopped editing on January 11 and Elsanaturk started editing on January 13, just two days later (also notice the "El" infront of both of their names). Furthermore, notice how AdilBaguirov has been accused of having multiple accounts before (evidence is presented here), in this case regarding Dacy69: . These users have appeared out of nowhere, in intervals, and have all engaged in edit wars in overlapping articles. Some make comments on talk pages supporting each other, and some help with reverts. Basically, here is a quick summary: a) same type of personal attacks, b) all came out of nowhere in late December or January, c) all involved in relatively the same topics, and d) all have the same tone and writing style.Azerbaijani 01:16, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

no Declined If personal attacks are occurring, they should be addressed first so that there's a basis for running a checkuser on suspected puppets of the account established as abusive. --jpgordon 01:57, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Here is where I was recommended to ask for a check user: . Also, I have reported these personal attacks twice, this was the first time: and this was the second: . Please reconsider this checkuser.Azerbaijani 02:01, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
The diff you provided says, "If you believe he used another account/IP to evade 3RR, you an file a Checkuser request: WP:RFCU." Where is a 3RR block being evaded? --jpgordon 02:05, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Here (read Khoikhoi's edit summary): Besides, isnt the evidence I posted above enough for a check user? Also, I have shown that I tried to deal with the attacks twice, but they still continued, so I decided to do a check uers.Azerbaijani 02:09, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
What does the "block-evading anon" mentioned in that diff have to do with anything? All you need to do is show me just what block you think is being evaded by these editors, if that's what's going on. Since you asked: the things you list as "personal attacks" above do not rise to the level of anything actionable, in my estimation. --jpgordon 02:20, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
What about the evidence I posted? You cant just do a check user? By the way, Elnurso was the one that got blocked for 3rr and came back under that IP to continue his edit warring, that was the evading. Also, regarding the rest of them, they have brought up doubt that they could be the same person, does this not warrant a check user? I suspect that these are all sock puppets created to make it appear as though its more than one editor and to help with reverts and opinions. This warrants a check user does it not?Azerbaijani 02:29, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Oh I apologize, I think I was supposed to post this in the IP check section, not the check User section, correct? My mistake, can you make the transfer or should I?Azerbaijani 02:31, 28 January 2007 (UTC)


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the Request for checkuser. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent requests related to this user should be made above, in a new section.