Wikipedia talk:Requests for checkuser/Case/Atabek

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

• Comment: Hajji Piruz, I understand the frustration with the recent blockage of sockpuppets and sockpupeteers [1] who participated in your revert warring efforts [2],[3]. But this is not tit-for-tat issue, it's a matter of following Wikipedia policies, so before filing this kind of requests, I suggest you check here [4], instead of continuing to take community's time for something already done. Assume good faith.Atabek 06:22, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

• Comment I have lost count of how many times you and your friends did check user on me, did I ever complain, did I ever come and convass trying to destroy your image? No. I knew that I had no socks and I waited it out and nothing ever happened. This checkuser is perfectly legitimate, as this user came out of nowhere just to revert to your versions... Calm down, if its not you, then nothing will happen, why do you even feel the need to defend yourself here when you k now that the sock isnt yours? THis is a completely different check user.Hajji Piruz 13:14, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for confirming my position above that this filing of yours is simply in "retaliation" and not based on firm suspicions. I don't mind running another checkuser on myself :), but as I said above, filing this report by yourself to include my name is simply a waste of community's time. You do need to assume good faith and research a little on the history of editors. User:Batabat was previously accused yet recovered his reputation during the ArbCom. As his page hints he resides in Hungary (quite a remote location of the planet from where I am). And your continuous attempts to harass me with accusations of sockpuppetry are futile. Unlike yourself with User:Behmod/User:Pam55 yesterday, I don't make use of socks, as those would only unduely damage my scholarly contributions in articles. This issue has been extensively discussed in previous ArbCom and cleared there. Thanks. Atabek 16:36, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

What are you talking about? Retaliation for what? The sock came and reverted several articles to your version, that is very good evidence.Hajji Piruz 18:25, 20 June 2007 (UTC)