Commons:Requests for checkuser

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Shortcuts: 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 Ombuds 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 using {{subst:Commons:Requests for checkuser/Inputbox/Sample}} (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.

nothing found

Requests[edit]

Editedcarl[edit]

Suspected related users[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results[edit]

Reason: Both users upload images of the same person, have similar usernames and within minutes of account creation of Dr. Editorial they sent each other barnstars. A few minutes afterwards, the talk page of Editedcarl was blanked and Dr. Editorial seems to have started editing instead. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 18:43, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I confirm that Editedcarl is my account. And I have stopped using it right after the creation of my current account (Dr. Editorial). I believe the barnstars exchange wasn't right and it was my mistake. So, I've removed it. I won't be using the following account- Editedcarl in future. Not at least for this kind of exchange or communication.
My apologies if there is any kind of inconvenience. I will try to educate myself about all the Wikipedia & Wikimedia privacy-policy in the coming days.
Kind Regards
- Dr. Editorial (talk) 17:18, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bananas are NOT drugs[edit]

Suspected related users[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results[edit]

Reason: Users created at about the same time to leave weird messages for admins. They've all made only the one edit globally, and the style of the messages is similar. I don't recognize them as being anyone in particular, but they likely have a history. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 02:51, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Declined - All accounts already globally blocked; no articulated disruption to be prevented by a CU. Эlcobbola talk 19:11, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

More suspected related users[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results[edit]

Reason: Probably the same vandal harassing sysops, there might be more accounts. Hard to decide by behavior only as they don't connect to other projects and do just one edit only. --Achim55 (talk) 19:39, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Artículo bueno.svg Confirmed are the following to each other: Bananas are NOT drugs, Samoan Lavalava Man, SpiritualChina888, SpiritualChina, We are not rich, BirdImportant2022, BigRhinoceros, Loyalty to India, Polar Lis, ManchesterEngland. Data do not identify an older master, so that would need to be determined by behaviour. Эlcobbola talk 19:54, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Suryakant sengar jalaun[edit]

Suspected related users[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results[edit]

Reason: Same type of uploads and same file. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 14:23, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArcahaeoindrisJr.[edit]

Suspected related users[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results[edit]

Reason: Obvious socks requesting something about Horror film on the English Wikipedia, but who is the master? Yann (talk) 21:19, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Checkuser is not for fishing, and is "a last resort for difficult cases". As both users have already been blocked, what disruption is to be prevented by a check? Both queries ([1][2]) relate to w:Horror Film, which suggests this might be Jinnifer (whose (at least) non-stale socks have not edited the Commons). They also reference Andrzejbanas, who might be worth asking; as is, information presented does not support CU action at present. Эlcobbola talk 21:48, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Elcobbola: I think these accounts should be tagged with {{Sockpuppet}}, but of which account? Yann (talk) 14:20, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Per behaviour, this, etc., these accounts are Jinnifer. Эlcobbola talk 15:19, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kingwarnen[edit]

Suspected related users[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results[edit]

See ANV report, same type of uploads but not I'm not fully sure. -- CptViraj (talk) 03:48, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]




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