Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Anoshirawan

''The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a Request for checkuser. Please do not modify it .''

Anoshirawan (Third)

 * Code letter: D
 * Supporting evidence: For example, similarities at Fariba Nawa by User:Anoshirawan and by User:Šāhzādé, and at Habib Qaderi by User:Anoshirawan and User:Šāhzādé. Kingturtle (talk) 22:08, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * This report was filed by User:Kingturtle. JodyBtalk 23:51, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * This report was filed by User:Kingturtle. JodyBtalk 23:51, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

✅



-- Avi (talk) 05:05, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Šāhzādé blocked and tagged. Kingturtle (talk) 13:03, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Please do NOT archive yet. It is related to Requests for checkuser/Case/Tajik, where the subject User:Tajik is under 1RR restriction and evidences from that CU case suggests that Tajik broke the ArbCom's restriction. OhanaUnitedTalk page 21:07, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

See results of Requests for checkuser/Case/Tajik, can archive now.  — Rlevse • Talk  • 19:15, 20 December 2008 (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.''

''The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a Request for checkuser. Please do not modify it .''

Anoshirawan
Anoshirawan used the above alias names to commit vote fraud, and the annon IPs (from Germany) to conceal his identity at the same articles where he was involved in edit-wars with others. Anoshirawan is very easy to recognize because of his level of English writing. He always talks about Pashtuns being Afghans, and always helping the bannd editor Beh-nam in edit-wars, disputes, and conseses. The above alias names, IPs and Anoshirawan have the same exact POVs. All of the above names and IPs are him with no doubts, and if you need further information explain and I will provide it. Thanks,--Zimbobman (talk) 01:52, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Code letter: D
 * Supporting evidence:
 * Code letter: D
 * Supporting evidence:
 * Code letter: D
 * Supporting evidence:
 * Code letter: D
 * Supporting evidence:
 * Code letter: D
 * Supporting evidence:
 * Code letter: D
 * Supporting evidence:
 * Code letter: D
 * Supporting evidence:
 * Code letter: D
 * Supporting evidence:
 * Code letter: D
 * Supporting evidence:


 * - NisarKand socking again and trolling on my talk page. Blocked. Note to NisarKand, Beh-nam and others. File vexatious checkuser cases and you and all your socks are just as likely to be blocked as anyone else - Alis o n  ❤ 02:26, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

''The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a Request for checkuser. Please do not modify it .'' http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Khaled_Hosseini&diff=176732773&oldid=176669493 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Khaled_Hosseini&diff=177838167&oldid=177625292 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Khaled_Hosseini&diff=178442599&oldid=178252197 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Khaled_Hosseini&diff=178613977&oldid=178520101 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Khaled_Hosseini&diff=178883546&oldid=178881463 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Khaled_Hosseini&diff=178891580&oldid=178891203
 * Code letter: C
 * Supporting evidence:
 * Supporting evidence:

This is really just a single instance of this user's disruptiveness on Wikipedia. Despite an overwhelming majority of editors seeing things a certain way and providing valid sources, he continues to revert all changes and restoring his own controversial edits. This behavior goes beyond just one article. Aquabee (talk) 05:34, 19 December 2007 (UTC)


 * ❌ - however, is, of course, as is
 * - the person filing this report, is the indefblocked editor


 * - Alis o n  ❤ 19:23, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Just to be clear, Alison, TheNewPianist and Aquabee should both be blocked as confirmed, right? -JodyBtalk 19:43, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Both of them are ✅ as being socks of blocked/banned editors. is ❌. I've no comment as to what happens next but would like to point out that I am more than aware that User:Beh-nam has been filing vexatious cases here of late. He stands to be blocked just as readily as those he's complaining about! - Alis o n  ❤ 19:58, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, the two were blocked indef by me. User:Beh-nam is already indef blocked. -JodyBtalk 20:08, 19 December 2007 (UTC)