Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Robert599

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

Robert599 (2nd Request)



 * Code letter: F
 * Code letter: F
 * Code letter: F
 * Code letter: F
 * Code letter: F
 * Code letter: F

User:Gazifikator registered for a month now has a very short editing history and has recently added a controversial category to Ziya Bunyadov, without any discussion. As this particular page was created by User:Zurbagan, a sock account of User:Robert599, there is a possibility of another case of sockpuppetry. Hopefully checkuser will clarify the issue. Thanks. Atabek 06:55, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I added another User:Gurgen87, this one probably needs to be also checked against User:Artaxiad. Atabek 07:08, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
 * --Deskana (talk) 10:53, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Robert599





 * Code letter: G.

A checkuser request has been previously filed on Zurbagan but it was declined, probably because it was not submitted correctly. These suspected sock accounts are mostly involved in the article Ziya Bunyadov. This article was created by and, who are proven socks of. appeared 2 days after the above 3 accounts were blocked, and made his very first edit to Ziya Bunyadov article. After a while another account, appeared and made his very first edit to the same page about Ziya Bunyadov. It is very strange when new users make their very first edits to the same article, considering that it is quite an obscure one. There's a good reason to suspect that those accounts are socks of Robert599, and there's another suspicion that Robert599 is himself a sock of User:Rovoam, who was a party to this arbcom case: and was permanently blocked for abusive use of sockpuppets. This edit by Zurbagan, reverted by the admin, is strongly reminiscent of Rovoam. As of now, the only active of the above accounts is User:Pulu-Pughi, since Zurbagan has been banned for disruptive activity. I would like to ask the admins to check connection of Pulu-Pughi with Zurbagan, Robert599 and other accounts, as there’s a strong suspicion that it is the same person. Grandmaster 05:00, 3 April 2007 (UTC)


 * All of the accounts here are too old to check except for Puli-Pughi, Zurbagan, and Jalaleddin. Results as follows:

that Zurbagan = Jalaleddin

, leaning towards likely, that Puli-Pughi is the same as the above. Puli-Pughi edits exclusively from open proxies, now blocked, which is very fishy, and Zurbagan has edited exclusively from open proxies in the last month. An admin needs to make the call. Dmcdevit·t 07:44, 3 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I've blocked Pulu-Pughi indefinitely. Khoikhoi 07:50, 3 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Then it appears that Robert599 is the puppeteer. He was blocked for 3 days for creation of the previous set of socks. Now he used another 2, so in my opinion repeated abusive use of sock accounts should not be tolerated. However I’m sure that Robert599 is just another sock, the real puppeteer is Rovoam, evading the block. Another proof of this might be this: Considering that Artaxiad was not active in Wikipedia in 2005, he could not have established a contact with Rovoam back then. However taking into account that Artaxiad has recently established an email contact with Zurbagan  everything becomes clear. Not a direct proof, but still. Grandmaster 10:50, 3 April 2007 (UTC)


 * We also have a suspicious bunch of accounts that are involved in creation of hoax articles about Azerbaijan. This AfD resulted in deletion of a hoax article that was created by,  and . These 3 accounts imitated a heated content dispute to create an illusion that the non-existent person "Yossarian Rustamova" was notable for an article. Recently another 2 similar hoax articles have been deleted.   I’m sure that those 3 accounts are throwaway, but I’m not sure whether those accounts belong to the same person as the one who created the above socks. Should I file another RFCU or can I add those accounts to this RFCU? Grandmaster 11:17, 3 April 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.''