Open main menu

Commons:Requests for checkuser

(Redirected from Commons:RFCU)

Shortcut: COM:CHECK· COM:RFCU· COM:SOCK This is the place to request investigations of abuse of multiple accounts or of other circumstances that require use of checkuser privileges.

Requesting a check
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 version generic.svg Possilikely Symbol possible vote.svg Possible
Symbol unlikely.svg Unlikely Symbol unsupport vote.svg Inconclusive
Symbol unrelated.svg Unrelated 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

Please do not ask us to run checks without good reason; be aware of the following before requesting a check:

  1. Checkuser is a last resort for difficult cases; pursue other options first, such as posting on the administrator's noticeboard.
  2. 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, for example: vandalism where a block of the underlying IP or IP range is needed and suspected block evasion, vote-stacking, or other disruption where technical evidence would prevent or reduce further disruption.
  3. Evidence is required. When you request a check, you must include a rationale that demonstrates (e.g., by including diffs) what the disruption to the project is, and why you believe the accounts are related.
    • Requests to run a check without evidence or with ambiguous reasoning will result in delays or the request not being investigated.
  4. The privacy policy does not allow us to make a check that has the effect of revealing IP addresses.
  5. Requests to run a check on yourself will be declined.
Outcome

Responses will be brief in order to comply with Wikimedia privacy policy. Due to technical limitations, results are not always clear. Closed requests are archived after seven days.

Privacy concerns

If you feel that a checkuser request 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.

Contents

RequestsEdit

MySoccerRockEdit

Suspected related usersEdit

Rationale, discussion and resultsEdit

Reason: Half an hour after I splattered their user page with well-deserved warnings, this happens. I was already guessing it would be an LTA, but had no excuse to request CU. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 10:55, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Pinging @4nn1l2 This is what that was about. I suppose impersonating Jcb may be sufficient reason to indefblock Justice-For-All-Syop? - Alexis Jazz ping plz 11:11, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: they added nonsense to your user page. Any LTA you recognize? - Alexis Jazz ping plz 11:31, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
Pinging @Roy17, GreenMeansGo because they're curious. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 11:35, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
I support this Checkuser. Please check for sleepers for each account, especially Justice-For-All-Syop, if possible.--Roy17 (talk) 11:46, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
Well that didn't take very long. GMGtalk 12:01, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
  Comment I blocked MySoccerRock for 2 weeks. Only out of scope posting, a looong list of copyvios, and a few simple logos. This account should have been warned and blocked long ago. All copyvios deleted. Regards, Yann (talk) 14:33, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. Should still run the CU to check for sleepers and probably extend to indef if related. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 21:59, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

いせちか国際空港Edit

Suspected related usersEdit

Rationale, discussion and resultsEdit

Reason: The same pattern as ja:Wikipedia:進行中の荒らし行為/長期/いせちか.--そらみみ (talk) 22:48, 15 July 2019 (UTC)


Sayangarai32Edit

Suspected related usersEdit

Rationale, discussion and resultsEdit

Reason: All blocked as obvious ducks, matching edit patterns, same image subjects, repeating copyvio. Opening request for the record at request of Yann. I may have missed some, these were the ones recorded at AN/U. Thanks. -- Begoon 10:02, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi, This is recurrent socker, please check for sleepers. Thanks, Yann (talk) 10:09, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
The above is   Confirmed for most of them and   Likely for the rest. All accounts are already blocked, and there are several range blocks in place. If anything appears from now, please report again. --Krd 06:33, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

PerisLagios99Edit

Suspected related usersEdit

Rationale, discussion and resultsEdit

Reason:

  1. Similar username.
  2. uploads images of olympics which are all copyvios.

(Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 08:42, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

I tend do decline this per "Checkuser is a last resort for difficult cases", which appears to be not the case here. --Krd 17:38, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
  Declined - Agree with Krd. Neither user has even been "formally" warned about copyvios (formal meaning akin to {{End of copyvios}} rather than only deletion notifications). Also,   It looks like a duck to me. This is not at the level of "last resort" and could be addressed at an admin noticeboard; use of CU tools is not needed here. Эlcobbola talk 18:15, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
I warned both.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 07:54, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

复旦大学张超Edit

Suspected related usersEdit

  1. Бмхүн (talk contribs Luxo's SUL deleted contribs logs block user block log checkuser)
  2. Монгол Баттю (talk contribs Luxo's SUL deleted contribs logs block user block log checkuser)

Rationale, discussion and resultsEdit

Reason: Brand new accounts that edit the same stuff related to the other socks. Could you please check for sleepers if possible?--Roy17 (talk) 18:12, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

I'd call this   Inconclusive. --Krd 17:41, 16 July 2019 (UTC)


Sol-lolEdit

Suspected related usersEdit

Rationale, discussion and resultsEdit

Same files, same methods, same articles as below per this edit.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 04:40, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

  • You're reopening the same case that two CUs just declined without addressing any of the concerns we brought up, nor bringing up any more points of your own? This should go real well for you. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 05:03, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
    @Magog the Ogre: Sorry, I didn't realize Эlcobbola had extended the block to indefinite. {{Withdrawn}}.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 05:27, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
    @Jeff G.: A misunderstanding. No worries. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 15:26, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

New info: Similar interest in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DOKZzbuJQA per this edit by Xoaw and this edit by Naisq.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 03:13, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

@Jeff G.: see, now you're playing whack-a-mole. Told ya. I'm not sure if Naisq will even be related. The link is quite a coincidence, but it might be just that: a coincidence. I'm sure a CU will confirm it though, and you'll be on to find the next mole to whack. Whatever floats your boat. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 09:33, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
No need for CU eh.. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 19:04, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

  It looks like a duck to me --Krd 17:45, 16 July 2019 (UTC)



For older requests, please see Commons:Requests for checkuser/Archives