Last modified on 27 August 2014, at 18:22

Commons:Requests for checkuser

Shortcut: COM:CHECK, COM:RFCU

Does your request belong here?
This is the place to request sockpuppet checks or other investigations requiring CheckUser privileges. Checkuser is a last resort for difficult cases. Use other methods first. You can try posting on the administrator's noticeboard for example.
Please do not ask us to run checks without good reason:
These indicators are used by CheckUsers to allow easier at-a-glance reading of their notes, actions and comments.
Request completed
Artículo bueno.svg Confirmed Likely
Symbol possible vote.svg Possible Symbol unlikely.svg Unlikely
Symbol unsupport vote.svg Inconclusive Symbol unrelated.svg Unrelated
Symbol redirect vote.svg Completed Time2wait.svg Stale
Request declined
Declined Checkuser is not for fishing.
Checkuser is not magic pixie dust. 8ball The CheckUser Magic 8-Ball says
Cyberduck icon.png It looks like a duck to me Checkuser is not a crystal ball.
Information
Additional information needed Deferred to
 Doing… Pictogram voting info.svg Info
  1. Running a check will only be done to combat disruption on Commons, or as required to assist CheckUser investigations on other Wikimedia wikis.
    • Valid reasons for running a check include vandalism where a block of the underlying IP or IP range is needed, disruptive sockpuppetry, vote-stacking, and similar disruption where the technical evidence from running a check would prevent or reduce further disruption to Wikimedia projects.
  2. Requests to run a check with ambiguous reasoning will result in delays - please provide a rationale at the time you make the request
    • Show what the disruption to the project is, and why you believe the accounts are related.
  3. Requests to run a check on yourself will be declined
  4. The privacy policy does not allow us to make a check that has the effect of revealing IP addresses.
Outcome
Responses will be brief in order to comply with Wikimedia privacy policy. Due to technical limitations, results are not always clear. Check back regularly to see the outcome of your request. Closed requests are archived after seven days.
Privacy violation?
If you feel that a checkuser has led to a violation of the Wikimedia Foundation privacy policy regarding yourself, please refer the case to the Ombudsman commission.

If this page is displaying outdated contents even after you refresh the page in your browser, please purge this page's cache.

To request a check:

Cases are created on subpages of Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case.

Creating a request
  • Insert the name of the suspected sockpuppeteer (the main account or puppetmaster, not the sockpuppet!) in the box below, leaving out the "User:" prefix. Do not remove the text in the box, add to the end only.
  • Please explain/justify the request by saying what it is you suspect and why it is important that the check be carried out. Indicate the usernames you suspect, using {{checkuser}}. Please do not use this template in the section header, as that makes it difficult to read the account names. Include the diffs or links required to support the request and reason for it.
  • There are people to assist you and help with maintenance of the page. Just ask for help on the admin noticeboard if you really are stuck, or take your best shot and note that you weren't completely sure of what to say.
  • If a case subpage already exists, edit the existing page instead, either adding to the currently open section (if the case is not yet archived) or adding a new section to the top (if the case has been archived). When editing an existing case, be sure to list/transclude the subpage here.
Example
If you want to request a checkuser on User:John Doe, enter the text Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/John Doe then click "Request a checkuser." You will be taken to a page where you can fill out the request. Please make your request there brief and concise.


Then transclude your subpage on the top of the list at Commons:Requests for checkuser and remove {{Checkuser requests to be listed}} from the top of the case subpage.

New requestsEdit

Rizky IconiaEdit

Suspected related usersEdit

RationaleEdit

  • Reason:This account looks like a duck, similar account name, both created at id.wiki. Both of them are edit warring at File:Kit body acm1112t.png and the sockpuppet seems to be created to continue the editwar. Both accounts support the same version of the file. If those accounts are related it means that Rizky Iconia is evading his block and in that case I will change the duration of his block. Natuur12 (talk) 18:20, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

ResultsEdit

LeonardiraniEdit

Suspected related usersEdit

RationaleEdit

  • Reason: Same type of problematic uploads here on Commons combined with both users making promotional edits to en:Kade Chan. Might be meatpuppetry rather than sockpuppetry of course. LX (talk, contribs) 10:52, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

ResultsEdit

I tend to put this request on hold. There have been only a few contributions in a single series, and I see no evidence for bad faith yet. I have deleted the rest of the uploads, though, as they are obvious copyvios. --Krd 14:05, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Completed requestsEdit

85.s3iEdit

Suspected related usersEdit

RationaleEdit

ResultsEdit

Over the LimitEdit

Suspected related usersEdit


RationaleEdit

  • Reason: continual creation of new accounts with the same behaviour. Mobile edits, copyvio uploads of often the same wrestling images for the same articles, identical edits on enwiki. I (or others) have blocked all of the accounts on enwiki. I am hoping there is some underlying IP range than can be blocked for a while to convince them to go elsewhere. I delayed this as the second to last sock account (Undertaker Tombstone), possibly accidentally, uploaded a correctly licensed image from flickr but the latest (Over the Limit) has continued the poor trend. Peripitus (talk) 10:12, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

ResultsEdit

  • Artículo bueno.svg Confirmed, also Hall of pain and M7md eltb3y. A range block would not be effective in this case. I've left the main account (Over the Limit) unblocked hopefully to encourage edits to remain confined to that single account. Over the Limit can, of course, be blocked based on behaviour. Эlcobbola talk 22:20, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

LucamoreiraEdit

Suspected related usersEdit

RationaleEdit

  • Reason: These accounts have been uploading copyrighted images about Luca Moreira, Luca Rocha and Luca Fernandes (pages that were deleted and protected from recreation on Portuguese Wikipedia). This is a long-term abuse, since the main account was blocked indefinitely on Portuguese Wikipedia on 6 March 2014. However, sockpuppets and IP addresses have also been used on Portuguese Wikipedia for block evasion (see category). Francisco (talk) 15:36, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

ResultsEdit

Christiam OliveiraEdit

Suspected related usersEdit

RationaleEdit

The user keeps uploading copyright violations mainly related to some Romanian singer called "Inna". All accounts have also been used on the Portuguese Wikipedia project to insert the copyright violations and edit war with the CommonsDelinker bot. Christiam Oliveira is currently blocked a second time for one month for uploading copyright violations. I believe that should be extended in light of the block evasion and sockpuppeteering. All sockpuppets should be blocked indefinitely and all uploads deleted. LX (talk, contribs) 21:01, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

ResultsEdit

AlbianmoonlightEdit

Suspected related usersEdit

RationaleEdit

ResultsEdit

  • For starters the following accounts do not exist on Commons:
  • The following accounts are stale:
  • The following accounts are Artículo bueno.svg Confirmed socks of one another:
  • The following are Artículo bueno.svg Confirmed socks of one another:
  • While both groups Geolocate to different areas, they both share the same User Agent. I will say it is Symbol unlikely.svg Unlikely/Symbol possible vote.svg Possible that they are related. Also, no comment with respect to the IPs, of course. Tiptoety talk 16:20, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
Same uploads. Blocked as socks per Duck.
Maybe we should rerun the CU? Quack, --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 04:38, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

FutbaseEdit

Suspected related usersEdit

RationaleEdit

  • Reason: After Futbase was indef blocked for overwriting files without consensus, the other accounts started making the same uploads. There are probably many more accounts, and I just haven't found them. This is part of the long running football kit logo upload war, which is detailed more at a currently running COM:AN/UP thread. Sven Manguard Wha? 07:41, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

ResultsEdit

✓ Done

All are Likely the same person. All were already blocked, except Jun19 who had been blocked three times previously and I have blocked indefinitely. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:20, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

@Jameslwoodward: Barcashirt, Basefut and Interfutiba aren't blocked and never were either... maybe it's wise to block them as well? Trijnsteltalk 19:01, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
I thought all but Jun19 were marked as blocked in the CU response, but I guess not. ✓ Done now, thanks. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:14, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Suspected related usersEdit

RationaleEdit

  • Reason: Same behavior as above. Socks spotted by Principal adjoint. There are likely more as well, as Futbase seems to be burning through them at a clip of one a day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sven Manguard (talk • contribs) 01:01, 21 July 2014‎ (UTC)

ResultsEdit

The 11 accounts below are all Likely socks of Futbase. All have been blocked previously by others or now by me.

.     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:53, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

PhilippineRevolutionEdit

Suspected related usersEdit

RationaleEdit

  • Reason: The same editpattern (nonsense filemove requests etc.) as user PhilippineRevolution. --Steinsplitter (talk) 14:23, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

ResultsEdit

FlamarialEdit

Suspected related usersEdit

RationaleEdit

  • Reason: Flamarial has been blocked by Hedwig because of suspected of being a sockpuppet of Pava. Flamarial's contribution pattern is different from Pava's though and I am not sure that there stands the same person behind the two users. In order to be sure not to block the wrong person a CU is needed. SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 07:30, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

ResultsEdit

If this request were to have shown up under "normal circumstances" (i.e., without a preemptive block), I would have said Declined because:

  • 1) Flamarial has a far better command of English;
  • 2) Flamarial has never edited in Italian; and
  • 3) Flamarial and Pava edit in very different subject areas. Flamarial edits almost entirely related to the Mongol Empire, which is not something that Pava appears to have edited.

I wonder whether Hedgwig somehow took Pava's "Mongoloide" comment as a connection to the Mongols? Without any evidence of a connection, I'm not inclined to run a check merely to confirm per Checkuser is not for fishing. @Hedwig in Washington:, do you have a substantive reason for the sockpuppet block? If so, could you please reply here (or email me, if necessary)? In the absence of such a reason or evidence of a connection sufficent to warrant a block, Flamarial should be unblocked. Эlcobbola talk 14:33, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Elcobbola, I didn't ask a CU for fishing. I know this is not it.wiki but though unusual, is not abnormal on our home wiki to ask for a CU for excluding a connection between two suspect users, rather than proving it. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 18:47, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
Per the meta CU policy, "There must be a valid reason to check a user." Our own RFCU page says "Show what the disruption to the project is, and why you believe the accounts are related." (emphasis added) Neither of these have been done. "Hedwig said so," the only evidence here, does not in my opinion meet the meta threshold of "valid reason". Indeed, Hedwig provided no rationale whatsoever, and behavioral evidence, as you yourself say, does not suggest a link. Without a rationale as to why the accounts are related, this is nothing but a fishing request. Hedwig needs to respond here. Эlcobbola talk 18:57, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
OMG, I made a big blunder. I've been looking through the unblock requests and wanted to ask Sergio about Pava. I have no clue how I came up with Flamarial being a sockpuppet of Pava. I am very sorry about this mistake. Flamarial is unblocked and I left an apology on hios talk page as well. Thanks for keeping an eye on me Sergio! --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 00:50, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Oh, those Germans! :-) :-) Ok, no problem, anyone can make a mistake sooner or later. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 10:31, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

TredgertEdit

Suspected related usersEdit

RationaleEdit

  • The only contribs of these 2 new accts are DRs of files uploaded by Lawline/Tredgert. This is repeat behavior of the old Lawline/Tredgert socks I checked and blocked earlier (Category:Sockpuppets of Tredgert). I added a Lawline page to cu.wiki including the needed cu info for Tredgert and other socks. INeverCry 01:08, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

ResultsEdit

  • Artículo bueno.svg Confirmed and blocked. Tiptoety talk 02:20, 11 August 2014 (UTC)


ArchivesEdit