=Why this happened===
(copied from request for checkuser)
Um, how long should I expect to wait? Progress on the entire set of articles is on hold pending the outcome of this checkuser.  
This is ridiculous. I'm here trying to create a better encyclopedia and this is the support I get? Hell of a turn off.  
While there are about 1000 administrators on wikipedia, only 14 of them have checkuser permission and 99% of the cases here are answered by just two of them, so you may have to be patient.  No article is so important that the sky will fall if it is stuck in the "wrong version" for a few more days.  You can try a request for comment on the article to get some outside opinions if the usual editors can't agree.  
Sounds like this system is broken. Only 2 of the 14 people actually do the work? Time to replace some people. Or put some kind of disclaimer that this isn't very timely. Something to let people know not to expect results.  

 I'll be damned if I'm going to put up with that kind of abuse.  (talk) 

How about judging it on it's merits rather than your personal feelings?  

, seconded in the strongest possible terms. And CovenantD blocked for 24 hours for disruption.  (Talk) 
I'm just coming into this, but that seems more than a little harsh. Can't wikipedia have operational disagreements without assuming it's personal attacks, resulting in blocks? Or is there something outside this discussion I'm not seeing? -T-C 

I think the cascade of abusive comments directed at the checkusers were more than enough justification for blocking for disruption; common sense says you don't come ask for help and then start taking swings at the people you're asking for help. By the way, just for future note by anyone watching, the reason that it takes a while to get a response is because we have to deal with things like this; if people were, you know, patient/pleasant/appreciative, then we might be a bit more inclined to run checks. As it stands, we gain very little but constant abuse from all sides for volunteering our time to do this.  (Talk) 

Anyone else going to accept; it would be nice to see requests being upheld on the merit of the case rather than the behaviour of the applicant.   Talk 

==