Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Pejman47


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Pejman47

 * Suspected sockpuppeteer


 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * Report submission by:

Atabek 00:40, 31 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Evidence

The page Azerbaijan is unblocked and Azerbaijani came back with 3 of himself rv'ing to the same rev.: Pejman47 and Mardavich. This Azerbaijani is unable to stop his POV and come to consensus on Talk:Azerbaijan page, so that we can move onto unblocking it. Now he has two suspected sockpups, RVing for him. Atabek 00:40, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Comments made at Talk:Azerbaijan


 * 1) Both of you need to read WP:NPA and stop calling other users' edits vandalism.Azerbaijani 06:40, 28 January 2007 (UTC)


 * 2) Both of you need to read Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy WP:NPA. Comment on content, not on contributors; and don't label other editors' contributions as vandalism. --Mardavich 00:19, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

See any similarity?


 * Looks suspicious. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Atabek (talk • contribs).


 * Comments


 * There is already a checkuser request at Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Pejman47. --Akhilleus (talk) 01:19, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Checkuser was declined. MER-C 08:28, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I think it's unlikely that Mardavich and Azerbaijani are socks of Pejman47. The evidence supplied by Atabek is weak, the checkuser was declined, and all three accounts are active and contribute to different articles from each other. In addition, there's a relevant arbitration case, where Atabek apparently alleges that Mardavich and Azerbaijani are socks, but doesn't mention Pejman47--it looks like Atabek has changed his mind about who the sockmaster is. I recommend closing this case with no action. --Akhilleus (talk) 18:02, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Closing per above. --Akhilleus (talk) 16:27, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Conclusions