Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Tajik

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

Tajik-15




,, , , etc.
 * Code letter: B and C Requests for arbitration/E104421-Tajik

I have temporarily blocked these IPs. But he is finding new IPs to get around the blocks.Kingturtle (talk) 15:15, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

❌ These IPs are not Tajik, but Šāhzādé, more detail in Tajik-14. — Rlevse • Talk  • 19:17, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Tajik-14



 * Code letter: B and C Requests for arbitration/E104421-Tajik
 * Code letter: B and C Requests for arbitration/E104421-Tajik
 * Code letter: B and C Requests for arbitration/E104421-Tajik
 * Code letter: B and C Requests for arbitration/E104421-Tajik
 * Code letter: B and C Requests for arbitration/E104421-Tajik

Kingturtle (talk) 20:59, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

These 8 edits by IP 84.59.205.77 will prove that user:Tajik is behind all these sockpuppets. In this edit, he writes like User:Šāhzādé then, hourse later, in this edit he writes like User:Šāhzādé and User:Tajik combined. He writes "Le[t´s] see here"...in the beginning and then changes the style to "But despite Zalmay Khalilza[d’s]"... "Afghanista[n’s]"... To top it off, user:Tajik did this edit and wrote in the edit summary "info + sources added according to talk page", which is letting us know that he was the one who wrote in the end of the talk page of Zalmay Khalilzad. Finally, Tajik is known for writing ā this way, see his latest signatures and his other sockpuppet (User:Al-Fanā). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roge from What's Happening (talk • contribs)


 * Don't forget to check the filer, . Even without my magic spectacles I sense something amiss here. Thatcher 16:20, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

See the admin user: Alison's comments below. These users with this IP starting with 84 are already proven not to be Tajik by the admin Alison. See the one right below (Tajik-13). — Preceding unsigned comment added by SulaimanMountains (talk • contribs) — SulaimanMountains (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. .
 * Requests for checkuser/Case/Anoshirawan may be more appropriate here. -- Avi (talk) 05:39, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * that case had these results: ✅ =  =,  =
 * Tajik is placed under 1RR per page per week by ArbCom per Requests for arbitration/E104421-Tajik after ArbCom lifted the one year ban. The evidence presented here seems like a violation of the 1RR restriction. OhanaUnitedTalk page 21:01, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The above user has only edited this RFCU at this point, which matches (behaviorally) several editors that commented on earlier Tajik RFCUs and which were later shown to be socks of banned users. --Jayron32. talk . contribs  05:53, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, and that user's earlier comments were right before as you can see below. I know Tajik whose IP starts with 82 and I know the other user whose IP starts with 84. The two have similar IP ranges, but if you check more carefully as User: Alison did below, you will see they are in totally different cities and even on totally different ISPs. I'm just commenting to make sure a mistake is not made again because a year ago Tajik was banned for being confused for that other guy but he ended up being unbanned because the admins realized they made a mistake. After checking more carefully they unbanned him. Please don't take my word for it, you can ask User: Alison. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SulaimanMountains (talk • contribs)

Results of Tajik-14, Tajik-15 and crossref to Requests for checkuser/Case/Anoshirawan: There are four sets of users, each separate on technical and geographic evidence from the other:
 * ✅ = 1  =   =  =, did a range block on the 84 range.
 * ✅ =  =  =  = ,  these relate back to Nisarkand
 * ✅ =  =  =  =  =, these relate back to Beh-nam
 * clerks please block and tag. — Rlevse • Talk  • 19:39, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
 * clerks please block and tag. — Rlevse • Talk  • 19:39, 20 December 2008 (UTC)


 * All confirmed accounts blocked and tagged appropriately. I also hard blocked all of the IPs (with the exception of Šāhzādé IPs as a range block has been done) for one week and tagged their talk pages. Tiptoety  talk 20:00, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Tajik-13



 * Code letter: B and C Requests for arbitration/E104421-Tajik
 * Supporting evidence: ,, . Tajik is creating new sockpuppets to legitimize his vandalism and his extreme Persian POVs. He is carefully using his old user name (User:Tajik) to do clean edits with less POVs so he can get good credits. He uses the IPs and his sockpuppets to insult Afghans, Tajik is known for trying to erace Afghanistan, Afghan and Pashtuns. As soon as an admin unblocked him he began using awful Persian curse words. This guy should be indef banned again, he is destroying Wikipedia with his nonsense POVs and insults.--Irozee (talk) 21:06, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Um, could you, Irozee, perhaps share with us the name(s) of your prior accounts? Since you only started editing two days ago, it seems certain this is not your first account, as almost the first thing you did was to find and correctly navigate this rather esoteric page.  --Jayron32. talk . contribs  21:59, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't use Wikipedia, I just read articles and see what people are upto. Do you think readers cannot comment on editors? Get the bad guy banned, don't worry about me.--Irozee (talk) 22:06, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * , for starters, is ✅ as being NisarKand - A l is o n  ❤ 22:07, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Code letter: B and C Requests for arbitration/E104421-Tajik
 * Supporting evidence: ,, . Tajik is creating new sockpuppets to legitimize his vandalism and his extreme Persian POVs. He is carefully using his old user name (User:Tajik) to do clean edits with less POVs so he can get good credits. He uses the IPs and his sockpuppets to insult Afghans, Tajik is known for trying to erace Afghanistan, Afghan and Pashtuns. As soon as an admin unblocked him he began using awful Persian curse words. This guy should be indef banned again, he is destroying Wikipedia with his nonsense POVs and insults.--Irozee (talk) 21:06, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Um, could you, Irozee, perhaps share with us the name(s) of your prior accounts? Since you only started editing two days ago, it seems certain this is not your first account, as almost the first thing you did was to find and correctly navigate this rather esoteric page.  --Jayron32. talk . contribs  21:59, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't use Wikipedia, I just read articles and see what people are upto. Do you think readers cannot comment on editors? Get the bad guy banned, don't worry about me.--Irozee (talk) 22:06, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * , for starters, is ✅ as being NisarKand - A l is o n  ❤ 22:07, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't use Wikipedia, I just read articles and see what people are upto. Do you think readers cannot comment on editors? Get the bad guy banned, don't worry about me.--Irozee (talk) 22:06, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * , for starters, is ✅ as being NisarKand - A l is o n  ❤ 22:07, 3 October 2008 (UTC)


 * and is ✅ as being a Tajik sock. Also  -  A l is o n  ❤ 22:10, 3 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I just wanna bother you one more time, is it possible to check if User:Enzuru is also Tajik's sock, it left a very suspecious and strange message on Tajik's talk page recently.--Irozee (talk) 22:16, 3 October 2008 (UTC)


 * No, that's ❌ to Tajik. Wrong continent - A l is o n  ❤ 23:35, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

- Tajik has been recently unblocked by ArbCom and is vehemently contesting this in email. Can we hold off taking any action on this one until I can figure out exactly what is going on here? I'm not impressed that the banned editor NisarKand is bringing these cases in the first place, so this needs a little more time here, and more in-depth investigation - A l is o n  ❤ 00:37, 4 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Ok, I rechecked this and Tajik is actually to be either of the socks above. Both  and  are ✅ as being the same editor, but Tajik, though geographically very close to them, is on a different network and provider. Tajik has provided me with other information which tends to confirm this. Given that he's recently been unbanned by ArbCom, I doubt this would be something he'd do anyway.


 * I don't know who the other two editors are, but there is extensive logging in and out to evade scrutiny. Hence the list of associated IP addresses above -  A l is o n  ❤ 00:53, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

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

Tajik-12


Anoshirawan was blocked 7 times for disruption, edit-warring and 3rrs. He was given many many warnings to quit vandalism but has continued until today. Anoshirawan's latest edits are all vandalism, he is removing and falsifying information in articles. Also, he is in fact a long-time sockpuppet of banned editor Tajik and I can prove this. Both Anoshirawan and Tajik live in the same city in Germany if you can check the IP numbers. Tajik's IP Special:Contributions/82.83.132.92 shows that it is in Germany with phone number 49 6196 523 0864. If you check Anoshirawan's IP it will have the same information. Both Tajik and Anoshirwan are involved in editing the same articles, with exactly the same POVs in mind on everything. The following are the diffs between Tajik and Anoshirawan: ,
 * Code letter: F
 * Supporting evidence:
 * Supporting evidence:
 * Tajik: showing anti-Turkish feelings on Jalal_ad-Din_Muhammad_Balkhi-Rumi article.
 * Claiming that Afghanistan was created in the late 19th century.
 * compromise? In any case, the term "Afghanistan" should be avoided, because it was "invented" 100 years later
 * Notice he sometimes uses several dots (...) in sentences. ooops ... sorry Khoikhoi,
 * Tajik was blocked 1 April 2007 and his screen name was closely monitored by several administrators.
 * Anoshirawan: (23:24, 3 April 2007 Anoshirawan New user account)
 * Showing anti-Turkish feelings on Jalal_ad-Din_Muhammad_Balkhi-Rumi article.
 * Claiming that Afghanistan was created in the late 19th century. Afghanistan was created in the late 19th century and it was always part of Greater Iran... Afghan is an ethnicity in Afghanistan
 * Khorasan is a more reliable name for Abdali's kingdom because Afghanistan was created in the 19th century... please check the talk page
 * Abdali had nothing to do With Afghanistan.
 * THeir ws no Afghanistan during his time.... Stop Fabricating articles
 * Afghanistan was created by the british decades after Timor Shah
 * 
 * 
 * Removing suspected sockpuppet tags of Tajik over and over and over and over and over...one time Anoshirawan then the 82 Germany IP., ,
 * Extra evidence: Tajik and Anoshirawan were obsessed with editing Hotaki dynasty article and if you see history of that page you see Tajik editing, then Anoshirawan after Tajik got banned including the Germany IPs that are used by Tajik until very recent.


 * - first off, the IP editor making this report is User:NisarKand. Blocked now - A l is o n  ❤ 23:56, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I stopped regularly checking RFCU a few months ago, and these guys are still at it creating socks to report each other for, you guessed it, creating socks. I'm personally of the belief we stop running checks for them. I'm bored of catering to requests from banned users. --Deskana (talk) 00:42, 10 May 2008 (UTC)


 * ❌. Anoshirawan is in the US. Thatcher 12:49, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Tajik





 * Code letter: B
 * Supporting evidence: Administrator Dmcdevit already confirmed here that Al-Fanā and the various 82.83.0.0/16 IPs editing is the banned editor Tajik. As for Tahmasp, he is behaving same as Tajik by removing Pashto everywhere he comes across it. Bigger clue is here when he removed content from his recent indef-block account's talk page.--DirDar (talk) 22:48, 22 February 2008 (UTC)




 * - - the edit you refer to above can also be explained by WP:RPA -  A l is o n  ❤ 23:35, 22 February 2008 (UTC)


 * And also ✅ that DirDar is NisarKand. Now if you would stop socking you wouldn't have to keep creating RFCUs for each other. Dmcdevit·t 00:44, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Both DirDar and Al-Fana blocked and tagged. Keilana | Parlez ici 03:51, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Tajik




The banned editor Tajik is either using these new sock accounts himself or is proxying for the banned editor Behnam, which is also sockpupptry or meatpuppetry so he can be banned as a sockpuppet. The above IP and those reported previously are used by nobody else but Tajik because he always responds to other editors as someone who is directly speaking for Tajik. That's probably one of the oldest tricks online. Banned editor Tajik is involved in the following Afghanistan related articles: Demography of Afghanistan, Hotaki dynasty, Kabul, Kandahar.--203.175.65.29 (talk) 02:32, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Code letter: B
 * Supporting evidence:
 * I've added user:07fan because I'm totally sure it's Tajik using this new name as a secret cover up. How coincident that both use the english slang "my bad", one time under his usual IP and once under his sockpuppet., further clue is that 07fan edits mostly the same articles as Tajik.--ZmaGhurnStaKona (talk) 15:12, 12 February 2008 (UTC)


 * = see Requests for checkuser/Case/Beh-nam where some of these accounts have been proven by checkuser to be User:Beh-nam - A l is o n  ❤ 06:50, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
 * If you can check whether or not o7fan and 82.83.152.85 are same people. Looking at RFC of Beh-nam, the IP of Beh-nam is 75.22.91.60.--ZmaGhurnStaKona (talk) 07:01, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


 * ✅ - the following:




 * - -  A l is o n  ❤ 07:01, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


 * ❌ - -  A l is o n  ❤ 07:01, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


 * - as usual, the editor filing this case is ✅ as being banned editor User:NisarKand. Also, -  A l is o n  ❤ 07:22, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
 * all confirmed accounts blocked. -- lucasbfr  talk 09:49, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Tajik




The banned editor Tajik is using these new sock accounts to vandalise Afghanistan related articles. He is very easy to spot because he write things in a very similar way plus he always involvs himself in edit-war with others over ethnic disputes. Thanks!--203.175.65.174 (talk) 04:35, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Code letter: B
 * Supporting evidence:


 * Adding per recommendation on an unrelated Safavid dynasty page, to which banned User:Tajik, a.k.a.User:German-Orientalist, etc. (see other Tajik checkuser requests) returns over and over again with the same ethnic POV, attempts to remove sourced material, from the same anonymous IP range. Here are some examples of time-consuming POV pushing  at Talk:Safavid dynasty and mainspace edit on Ak Koyunlu - . Atabek (talk) 21:29, 30 January 2008 (UTC)


 * User:German-Orientalist is using IPs from the Hessia area, my IP is from Hamburg. The admin should check that, if he does not believe me. All other accounts are from the USA/Canada. But interestingly, it does not surprise me at all, that User:Atabek is once again cooperating with banned User:NisarKand (IP: -203.175.65.174) in order to post slanders. In fact, it is User:Atabek who is pushing for nationalist POV. The current version of the article has also been criticized by another user as well. And of course, Atabek also accuses him of being "Tajik". Atabek's ultra-nationalist and POV position is known to many. He has been party to two ArbComs and is set on a 1RR parole because of his nationalist POV edits. He is in constant "fights" with Greek, Armenian, and Iranian users and usually with anyone who does not support his Pan-Turkist views. He proved this a few days ago, when he unilaterally removed a template from the article Ak Koyunlu, leaving this message on the talk board. Interestingly, he only removed the "Greater Iran" template, while leaving the template "History of Turkey", although the Ak Koyunlu are usually discussed within the history of Iran and not that of Turkey (see this scholastic article in Encyclopaedia Iranica).
 * As for the ban of User:Tajik, please contact admin User:Alex Bakharev or see these comments by various other users.

See Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Tajik for response. Atabek (talk) 17:17, 1 February 2008 (UTC)


 * ✅ - this is actually the banned editor User:Beh-nam -, , , , , , , , , , , , ,




 * ❌ - -  A l is o n  ❤ 22:12, 4 February 2008 (UTC)


 * - this relates to Requests for checkuser/Case/Beh-nam - A l is o n  ❤ 00:13, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Blocked everyone as being socks of Beh-nam. I am not familiar with the Tajik case, but are these related to Tajik or would it be better to move this case to Requests for checkuser/Case/Beh-nam? --  lucasbfr  talk 15:13, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Tajik-8



 * Code letter: B (User:Tajik has been banned indefinitely through RfArb: E104421-Tajik.)

An anonymous contributor engaged in editing the same old Safavid dynasty article, in a non-neutral manner, then left clearly provocative and uncivil comments at Talk:Safavid dynasty - ,  as well as my talk page , , and later, after leaving those comments, accused me of collaborating with these IPs, and continued on with usual User:Tajik accusations against User:Thatcher131 -  here. This seems to be as very complex provocation, so would like to checkuser for clarity and safety. Both IP ranges trace to old User:Tajik checkusered IPs. Thanks. Atabek (talk) 07:54, 31 December 2007 (UTC)


 * as both accounts mentioned are . Judging from the IPs, their edits and previous cases, it's likely - Alis o n  ❤ 14:25, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Keilana <font color="9955BB">talk<font color="#990066">(recall) 00:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * These two diffs make the relisting a bit confusing; does either add the sort of information which would require further CU response, given the staleIP reply above? – Luna Santin  (talk) 07:51, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm guessing the matter is moot since is indef blocked as a sock of NisarKand? I'm going to, and bring Alison's attention to it. --  lucasbfr  ho ho ho 14:15, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


 * - nothing to do here - A<font color= "#FF7C0A">l<font color= "#FFB550">is o n  ❤ 21:14, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Tajik-7



 * Code letter: B (User:Tajik has been banned indefinitely through RfArb: E104421-Tajik.)

He is again editing Safavid dynasty,, , and also inserting tags without explanation. Note that his other sock User:German-Orientalist has been banned for editing the same article from the same IP range, using the same material in the edits.Atabek 03:21, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Here, despite denials, the anon IP pretty much confirmed being Tajik, an experienced though banned contributor. He is also making personal attacks. Atabek 18:07, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


 * This is the 50th or 60th time that you accuse others of being socks. This site is the best proof for your extremly disruptive behaviour, and for your general bad faith mentality. I think that there is no other user in Wikipedia who has accused so many others of being socks. And just take a look at this site. In all cases, you were proven wrong. And it seems like you have a new friend: User:Rabeenaz. Even if he is not your own sock, he is acting as disruptive as you. He was already on your talk page, asking you for some advice against Tajik. And without any permission, he has vandalized different accounts, taging them as sock accounts of Tajik. Someone should check your relationship with that user. Seems to me that your and his actions are coordinated, and his contributions further confirm my suspecion. 84.58.175.216 19:30, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Here is an earlier conclusion by User:Dmcdevit - . The IPs again trace to Hessen, banned User:Tajik again edits Safavid dynasty in a disruptive manner, and again attacks and even insults Azerbaijani and/or Turkish contributors. Most importantly, a contributor of 2 days old, would be unable to comment like above. Thanks. Atabek 20:57, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Note It appears unlikely that the IP addresses will be officially confirmed, however, they are in the same ISP and geographic neighborhood.  I have semi-protected the article for a week. Thatcher131 18:20, 30 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Besides which, as long as you have the IP, and Tajik has used it so much it is public at this point, there is no need for a CheckUser. Just find an admin on ANI to revert/bloc/protect/etc. and reset his ArbCom ban. Dmcdevit·t 01:59, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * per Dmcdevit. --Deskana (talky) 16:23, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Tajik-6



 * Code letter: B (User:Tajik has been banned indefinitely through RfArb: E104421-Tajik.)

The evidence for this one was too difficult for me to ignore. has been a bit persistent about getting the blocks of and  overturned, just recently replying to a thread about the matter that began in June. His reply, in my opinion, gives a rather unlikely explanation as to how Tajik and Tajik-Professor are two different people from Germany Beh-nam knows personally. Furthermore, Tajik's and Ben-ham's fields of interests aren't too far away and both characteristically almost never use edit summaries despite being longtime contributors. Additionally, Beh-nam used to be named (similar username). So, the purpose of this request is two-fold: to confirm (or perhaps de-confirm?) that Tajik and Tajik-Professor are one and the same and to find out whether Beh-nam is also a sockpuppet. --  tariq abjotu  02:31, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I've added several sock accounts of banned and want to comment here. I know User:Tajik very well, he was deported from the United States in 2003 to Germnany where he has legal status there. Even in prison he was causing trouble and had to be constantly sent to the hole, which is punishment inside prison. User:Tajik is Qizilbash nationalist from Kabul now living in exhile in Germany, while User:Beh-nam is from Badakhshan Province of Afghanistan now living in exhile in Toronto, Canada. Both of these users are partners in crime here on wikipedia, tag-teaming, using socks, annon IPs, and also sharing each others member names. I'm sure that Anoshirawan is User:Tajik. Tajik and Beh-nam view people from other ethnicity or nations as their enemies that have to be destroyed, washing every article from information that they do not like. I use wikipedia just to search and watch what editors do here.--Rabeenaz 11:44, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * . No way of checking anything against or . --Deskana (apples) 15:59, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Having receieved additional data in private, which I have no reason to dispute, it seems all accounts are ❌ to each other. --Deskana (apples) 16:37, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Since people are using the previous statement as an opportunity to totally misquote me, I will point out that the previous tag of "Unrelated" relates only to the sockpuppets. I am not saying Tajik and Tajik-Professor are unrelated, nor am I saying they are related. --Deskana (talky) 13:50, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Tajik-5



 * Code letter: B

is an obvious sock account that was created to rv controversial articles. was banned by the arbcom decision: Requests_for_arbitration/E104421-Tajik, and the edits of OnlySpeak are very similar to Tajik. Grandmaster 10:52, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Comments: Added few more suspected IPs and suspected accounts reverting currently or previously on the same set of pages. Assuming good faith with regards to all contributors listed, just looking for resolution regarding socks. It's becoming increasingly difficult to contribute at all in presence of a massive sock/meatpuppetry on Safavid dynasty and other pages. Atabek 15:06, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

❌. The users accounts listed are not related to each other. So no serious enough reason to out anyone's IPs.  Voice -of-  All  23:31, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Tajik-4



 * Code letter: B

User:Tajik has been banned indefinitely by the admin: and the arbcom case formalized his permanent ban. . User:AlexanderPar was registered at the end of April 2007, and since June 2007 has been engaging in very similar edits and aggressive revert warring, , , , , , more along the lines of claiming non-existent consensus as a reason for reverting or removing references. Just want to clear the suspicions. Thanks. Atabek 06:54, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

❌.  Voice -of-  All  20:59, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Tajik-3



 * Code letter: B

User:Tajik has been banned indefinitely by the admin: and the arbcom case formalized his permanent ban. Despite that, Tajik is editing Safavid dynasty and other artcles under anonymous IPs and sock accounts. There have been already two previous checkuser cases which caught sockpuppetry.

Can you somehow take care of this, perhaps, another semi-protect would help solve the situation. But then he also appeared here. Atabek 16:27, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

.  Voice -of-  All  21:30, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

User:Tajik-2



 * Code letter: B

User:Tajik has been banned indefinitely by the admin: and the arbcom case is on a voting stage to formalize his permanent ban. Despite that, Tajik is editing Safavid dynasty and other artcles under anonymous IPs and sock accounts. Grandmaster 07:36, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

.  Voice -of-  All  20:51, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

User:Tajik



 * Code letter: B

There is a suspicion that User:Ariana310 is a sock- or meatpuppet of the banned, User:Tajik. These users have a history of editing the same set of pages,. After the ban upon User:Tajik and couple of IP socks thereof, User:Ariana310 now resurfaced on Safavid dynasty page again edit warring, reinserting the same quotes without any discussion on the talk page. Please, check for sanity. Thanks. Atabek 17:18, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * need a link to the ArbCom decision, per code letter B. --ST47 Talk 18:08, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Provided the links above to ArbCom and admin decisions. The user is currently banned, so if the letter must be F instead of B, I can change that. Thanks. Atabek 18:18, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

.  Voice -of-  All  02:48, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Tajik





 * Code Letter: B

Tajik was recently banned indefinitaly by administrator (Dmcdevit) and is now using his other sock puppets and IPs from his area (which begins with 82.83.....) to make edits. As Tajik stated to Dmcdevit that he was the main person to work on the Qizilbash article, well, checking the history of that article and Mardavich sending welcoming tag to the last IP that editted Qizilbash article is suffient proof that both Tajik and Maldavich are one person. Tajik-Professor is also his sock puppet, using the same 82.83....IPs.Keepter 12:31, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Tajik seems to be unblocked now.  Voice -of-  All  16:24, 10 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Technically Tajik is banned and was warned by an admin to not edit until a decision is made by the board, that's considered being banned for the moment (Requests for arbitration/E104421-Tajik), at that time Tajik stated he was going on a 1 month vacation, which sounded like a lie something most trouble makers come up with, and probably a way to evade block. Since then he has been using different sock puppets (some his former ones that nobody recognized in the past and some new names like user:Tajik-Professor along with IPs from Amsterdam). He is spreading the same POVs in the same or similar articles, which is the main reason most sock puppeteers end up getting caught by.Keepter 17:28, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
 * cut and pasted the above comments from Requests for checkuser/Pending. -- lucasbfr <sup style="color:darkblue;">talk 18:03, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

❌. Mackensen (talk) 18:13, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I was about to ask for more info/diffs, but no need now.  Voice -of-  All  18:16, 10 May 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.''