Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Artaxerex

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

Artaxerex



 * Code letter: F

The user Artaxerex has repeatedly resorted to sockpuppetry before. He has also been confirmed of resorting to sockpuppetry (using Arteban1 and Arteban11) to evade blocks. The users Arteban, Artaban, Vazgen, and Arteban1 have all been editing the Guity Novin article, and new user names (Artaban and Vazgen) have been created on this page after the block of Arteban1, and edit in a manner very similar to users Artaxerex and Arteban1, with similar POV pushing, adding the exact same blocks of text, and showing exactly the same characteristic mistakes of this user (e.g. adding ~ ~ ~ ~ as a signature in edit summaries). The most convincing point is the fact that all users often forget to sign in when editing, and all have shown the same ip address (which has been used frequently by Artaxerex). The probable use of sockpuppets has also been noted by other editros active on the same page. I would like to ask for a checkuser to remove any doubts and bring light into this matter. Link to previous blocks of this user and his puppets can be found at, , and. Shervink 23:17, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

✅. All of them.  Voice -of- All  13:21, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Artaxerex





 * Code letter: F

The user Arteban1 has joined the discussion on Talk:Mohammad Reza Pahlavi right after User Artaxerex (and his sockpuppet Faranbazu) were banned for sockpuppetry and violation of 3RR on this page, supporting the arguments presented by Faranbazu. Arteban1 has also immediately filed (albeit on an incorrect page) a request for checkuser directed at all those opposing the arguments of Artaxerex/Faranbazu, presenting practically no evidence for his claim. It therefore seems likely that Arteban1 is just another sockpuppet introduced to evade the ban on Artaxerex. It would be good if this could be checked.

Link to previous discussion and decision on the ban:.

Link to Arteban1's edit in support of the sockpuppets and accusation of sockpuppetry directed at many editors opposing his opinion:.

Thanks. Shervink 08:47, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Dear admins, I am sure many of you are interested in providing good and balanced articles on wikippedia. Please look at Faranbazu's contribution on Mohammad Reza Pahlavi's discussion page. I hope you agree with me that he has provided a large number of references for his balancing arguments. Unfortunately, a group of Persian editors from belogs places like Iran Chamber have blocked or reverted all his edits and through a coordinated efforts have caused him to be blocked. Is it not the case that in wikipedia one has assume good faith? Is it not the case that in wikipedia a criterion is verifiability? Is it not the case that in Wikipedia another criterion is NPOV?

Why then these editors are allowed to stop any efforts to provide some verifiable facts about Reza Shah's sympathy with Nazis? A large number of respectable Western historical sources (if not all) agree that it was because of these sympathies that allied forces removed him from power. The Persian editors say that this is "allied propaganda"!! (please see the discussion page on Reza Shah). They want to stop any discussions on how the two Pahlavi shahs destroyed the constitutional democracy and created the today's political misery in Iran.

It is possible that again some young and innocent editor who does not understand these issues block me, as they blocked Faranbazu, and inadvertently help this group of editors to promote their agenda. But there is also a chance that some editor decide to investigate this issue, and this why I am here to plea this case. There have been some positive intervention in the past by editors like Scott Wilson, and Melca that had resulted in some NPOV voice in those articles. But apparantly the Persian editors have decided to rewrite everything back to their POV. I appeal to you to stop this. There are many students that are using Wikipedia as their source. It would be wrong to allow a lopesided view to prevaile. Please check the contribution of Shervink, Mehrshad123, SG_talk, Azalea-pomp, Jahangard, Behnam, Khorshid, and some other Persians who want to recreate a copy of their IranChamber belogs on Reza Shah (please read the discussion about title of "Great" in the discussion page of Reza Shah). Arteban1 02:46, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

✅. Dmcdevit·t 02:47, 28 March 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.''

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

Artaxerex





 * Code letter: E

There is evidence for sockpuppetry by the above users, which is given here, and a CU would be useful to remove any doubts. The following diffs show a suspected use of sockpuppets to violate the 3RR rule:      Shervink 10:45, 22 March 2007 (UTC)shervink


 * For other evidence, see Suspected sock puppets/Artaxerex. The Behnam 16:13, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I have removed the IP addresses, as the Privacy policy prevents checkusers from commenting on them. PTO 23:57, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

✅ with regard to Faranbazu. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 18:47, 25 March 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.''