Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser

From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia:RFCU)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

CheckUser is the process of checking information about two or more users (including named users and IPs). Special users are able to check if two or more accounts have been used from the same computer. These users also see User agents. This can help them decide if two accounts are related in the way described above. It is also possible to see if a user is editing from an open proxy.

On this page, users can request some users or IPs to be checked. Good reasons should be given for why a checkuser is needed; you should provide links which show the questionable edits, etc. Questions should usually be created so that they can be answered by yes or no. Responses will be short in order to comply with Wikipedia privacy policy. Sensitive information (like the IP addresses used by an account) are usually not reported. The results are not always clear, and a decision should not be made only on the basis of checkuser results.

Use of the tool[change source]

This tool is to be used to fight vandalism, to check for sockpuppet abuse, and to limit disruption of the project. It must be used only to prevent damage to the project.

The tool should not be used for political control; to apply pressure on editors; or as a threat against another editor in a content dispute. There must be a valid reason to check a user. Note that alternative accounts are not forbidden, so long as they are not used in violation of the policies (for example, to vote more than once or to make it look like more people support an idea). Checkusers will refuse a request, if the reason for checking is not good enough to warrant the use of the tool.

Please see the CheckUser policy for all the rules related to CheckUser.

Users with CheckUser access[change source]

The technical list can be found at Special:ListUsers/checkuser.
User:BarrasUser:JamesofurUser:VermontUser:Operator873User:DjsassoUser:Lofty abyssUser:PeterdownunderUser:BarrasUser:Bsadowski1User:JamesofurUser:Fr33kmanUser:The Rambling ManUser:MajorlyUser:EptalonUser:CreolUser:M7


Archives[change source]

Current requests[change source]

Please add requests to the top of the list.


Archives
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011-2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020


Krystalpage[change source]

Both involved in editing the Anshuman Tiwari (Musician) spam page. Krystalpage created the page but Macyn82 also edited it, so I'm not 100% certain it's them. --Ferien (talk) 17:24, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have looked at it, as a Checkuser, and so far, I am not convinced either. We are looking at a page which is up for RfD, so depending on the result, it may be deleted. As to the users: both have very few, very focused edits. --Eptalon (talk) 09:57, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Krystalpage created the page hence I'm definitely sure it is them and it also appears Operator873 has now globally locked the second account so I'm not sure if anything more needs to be done here. --Ferien (talk) 09:59, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

One more account related to AnshumanTiwari. MathXplore (talk) 06:46, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Confirmed Barely needed the tool for that. I locked several other accounts related as well. Operator873 connect 07:27, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Niehddydudyd and UserKravKsydYdu[change source]

These accounts are constantly spaming User:Andrzejbanas's talk page. [1], [2], [3] are some references. The pattern of writing are same on three accounts. Also they are cleaning his talk-page in order to prevent us from verifying that whether it is a vandal work or not. Please check it ASAP.--Jyoti Roy (talk) 08:40, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-checkuser observation) I already blocked both of the accounts as clearly evading the block placed on Chenzjrmfjdid and other accounts. Also TTP1233, just remember that CUs can't comment on whether an IP and account are related. --Ferien (talk) 17:34, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ferien: See also en:Wikipedia:Teahouse#Interwiki canvassing. GoingBatty (talk) 01:06, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm also getting it on [[4]] Wikiquote now, and I don't even know where to report it there. :/ @Ferien:. Andrzejbanas (talk) 01:58, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Andrzejbanas: I sent him a message on your talk page there. Hopefully that's enough to get him to leave you alone. Mwiqdoh (talk) 02:05, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ferien:, thnx for blocking them. These cases are clearly sensitive.--Jyoti Roy (talk) 02:08, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Andrzejbanas, on Wikiquote, you can ask about it on the administrators' noticeboard. --Ferien (talk) 09:38, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Can't comment on the IP, but yes, the two users match...--Eptalon (talk) 10:02, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Soldierirani[change source]

Misuse of spare account. Creating custom pages in all Wikipedia languages. User accounts:

--Persia (talk) 13:49, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Only two of the above accounts are registered here, and both are locked. Only one has an edit, creating Reza Goodary, which is currently at RfD. Not sure a check would be helpful. Vermont (talk) 01:18, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Roushil Thoi Singla and Jacob Louis Mathew[change source]

Both have been involved in the creation and recreation of https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priyakanta_Laishram and in the RfDs (x2) in an apparent attempt to garner more support for it to be kept than it should get. They are both voting multiple times in the same RfD with the same general language. Neither have any history outside of that article and related articles. Blissyu2 (talk) 09:38, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The two accounts are confirmed to each other. Thank you for the report. Best, Vermont (talk) 14:26, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mohdzaki 07[change source]

Both involved in creating the spam article Mohd. Zaki that was already deleted at RfD. --Ferien (talk) 12:47, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

CU was inconclusive. If UPE, behaviorally speaking, they're possibly multiple people working together on it. I'm not opposed to other admins making a paid/promotional editing block. Best, Vermont (talk) 23:27, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

2601:8C:4180:3510:F908:35A2:FA42:B375[change source]

Based on this unregistered user's history here it appears similar to a previous IP vandal edits towards Deaths in 2021 and Cat Deeley (look at both of their history edits). I feel this user will just continuously vandalize Deaths in 2021 as I've dealt with them before. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 22:32, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there's much a checkuser can do here. Yes, that account has two edits; the other account is also an IPv6 address. As to single users wrecking mayhem, any admin can deal with it, and block them, as they see fit. --Eptalon (talk) 22:42, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MariaMiller30[change source]

Looks pretty clear that this is a sock of Angelmunoz50 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · SUL · CA · checkuser (log)) a.k.a. LiliaMiller2002 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · SUL · CA · checkuser (log)) and others, but since they only only made one edit here I want to refer the case to CU. Similar edits, dead children, incorrect dates and other info. (I forgot which name the vandal goes by on this language version. ) Sjö (talk) 15:31, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Angelmunoz and LiliaMiller didn't edit in the last 90 days, so there's no CU information.--Eptalon (talk) 22:53, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tamilianda[change source]

All these three were blocked on en.wiki[5][6][7] at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sweetindian. They are now editing along with the 157.49.*.* IP range noted in the SPI to push their POV. The IP range has created deleted articles in en.wiki especially Annamalai Kuppusamy(this article was deleted multiple[8][9][10][11] times and was repeatedly created). They have added content across multiple pages here which were reverted in en.wiki for Original research and fictional references. The IP range has started to edit from 17 August 2021 and only uses Visual editor, I can't go for a lesser range as nearly every edit disappears. Suneye1 (talk) 16:15, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As usual, can't comment on the IP range and whether it's connected or not. However, the accounts are  Confirmed along with some others. Operator873 connect 16:59, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bobor001[change source]

Both of their editing involves the 9jabased Wiki and also their signatures are very similar. Bobor001's signature LionbobLion's signature If they end up being related, a global lock should be requested for LionbobLion. --Ferien (talk) 17:58, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be curious to see if User:444metaphor is related at all as well. I placed a block there after they basically straight up admitted to being a sock, but the editing pattern is similar in some ways. --Gordonrox24 | Talk 21:02, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Both those accounts have been blocked. Bsadowski1, you may also want to check 444metaphor. Thanks. --Ferien (talk) 09:47, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

BolsaOObsequios[change source]

Undisclosed paid-for spam which creates spam pages in an identical manner (not saying here). They've been around for over a year on en.wp: en:Category:Suspected_Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_BolsaOObsequios.

Recently reactivated en.wp socks blocked by myself:

Check the deleted contributions. MER-C (talk) 18:23, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, the accounts listed under recently reactivated don't exist. Secondly, the edits by the accounts above looks like pretty normal Wikipedia edits. One of them, Allensyllos, I think created a page which was deleted as advertising (at Rfd), and again deleted as QD. So far, I do not see any behaviour where a checkuser is required. If a block is needed, a regular admin can block the user.--Eptalon (talk) 19:04, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think you read the message wrong, the two in that section are ones on en.wp not here. -Djsasso (talk) 20:05, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, as I wrote above, I don't think the few we have listed above have shown problem behaviour here...--Eptalon (talk) 20:22, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I sent you an email describing the abuse pattern. MER-C (talk) 10:26, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi MER-C, thank you for the report. 15 accounts blocked. Vermont (talk) 20:03, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Back in June, I noticed this pattern and began to question if it was just a school doing it or something. I will go through the accounts I found back then and block them. ---Bsadowski1 03:28, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have blocked over 75 accounts based on behavior/checkuser. --Bsadowski1 17:20, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Brand new account that simply removed an RfD tag on an article created by Lauikas (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · SUL · CA · checkuser (log)) (who was blocked as a sock of BolsaOObsequios) and also removed the request from RfD. Very likely related to this user. --Ferien (talk) 19:05, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Now blocked by Bsadowski1 --Ferien (talk) 20:57, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

HungryHighway[change source]

Previously blocked on en.wp[12] for spamming. Repeating the same here including removing deletion template from IP using fake edit summary[13]. Listed the IPs as there might me more socks. Ramaswar(discuss) 20:29, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We can't comment on IPs and since there is only one account here it will be up to an admin to judge what needs to happen. -Djsasso (talk) 20:12, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

7bcxl0[change source]

Looks like an obvious sock of Kimsa Sok. For reference see w:en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kimsa Sok. --Trezoo (talk) 12:02, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think that can be duck blocked. SHB2000 (talk) 12:09, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@SHB2000: Agreed. I just didn’t know where to make the request, so I put it here. --Trezoo (talk) 12:11, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I just reported the account to stewards + VIP. Generally though, they get locked quicker than blocked because, we have some admins here, uhm... find identifying LTAs to be... very difficult. SHB2000 (talk) 12:14, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion, we have many admins who can identify lots of LTAs, especially in comparison to smaller wikis (e.g. enwikiquote). --Ferien (talk) 09:49, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ahyieulan[change source]

Suspecting unpaid COI. Reminds me of these socks I found some time ago. Made-up name, similar editing styles, edits company articles. Etoza (?) 15:32, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Friday3jason.webp[change source]

First edit appears to be an edit to User talk:Sakura emad in a discussion where a couple of socks were recently blocked by Bsadowski1. Requesting CU for sleeper accounts. SHB2000 (talk) 01:42, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

When Bsadowski blocked the user, he certainly checked for sleepers...--Eptalon (talk) 12:15, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
this account popped up right after those accounts were blocked. SHB2000 (talk) 12:27, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Check for sleepers. Derpdart56 (talk) 16:48, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry that is being watched. -Djsasso (talk) 16:49, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Socks at Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2021/Susovan Sonu Roy[change source]

Likely socks used to keep the Susovan Sony Roy article and disrupt the RfD process. Added an IP that might be related although I know you can't comment on IPs. And the last user is the person who created the article. SHB2000 (talk) 04:34, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also pinging @Achim55: about this. SHB2000 (talk) 04:42, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Added two more accounts. —Yahya (talkcontribs.) 18:55, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No comment on the ip, as promised. Antezblik, Sikpink, and Gringotee are likely the same user. Onukrit, Colaheed, and Caresthen are unrelated to the first three, and to each other.--Eptalon (talk) 19:49, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Omkmandy (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · SUL · CA · checkuser (log))
Vineunify (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · SUL · CA · checkuser (log)) (added 12:00, 25 September 2021 (UTC))
Another user is acting similarly. --Ferien (talk) 09:02, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Bsadowski1 ran some checks, and found that Omkmandy,Vineunify,Onukrit,Colaheed and Caresthen are lkely connected/the same user. Blocks were put in place. --Eptalon (talk) 09:26, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

SmileylolXDXD[change source]

Both were involved in the Wikidestruction article and they keep editing each others' talk page. Darubrub (Let me know) 15:07, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

pointless: cu's are not allowed to associate usernames and ip addresses.-Eptalon (talk) 15:25, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Also, they're all blocked now. Ferien (talk) 15:26, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Eptalon what do you mean. 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 15:28, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I mean that according to the Checkuser policy, checkusers are not permitted to give out information (on RfCU) that would allow to link an account and an IP address. What is listed above is one account name, and two IP addresses.--Eptalon (talk) 17:19, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Face-smile.svg Thank you sorry for late reply. 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 15:08, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Possible connections?[change source]

Hi, I think these two accounts might be connected to an article I spotted yesterday and sent to RFD. --Derpdart56 (talk) 13:10, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as socks. -Djsasso (talk) 21:01, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Xenen1970[change source]

Per en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Xenen1970. MER-C (talk) 17:25, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked. -Djsasso (talk) 21:11, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PDL[change source]

You may be wondering why I'm reporting PDL. Well, lets say we had a little incident on the Africa stub and PDL accused Auntof6 of admin abuse (Wow Antaradus was right) and made a personal attack at her. He was blocked for 6 months due to Onestrike and soon abandoned his account. However, I saw this vandalism only account pop up. Is it impersonation or was PDL "back for revenge"? (Antaradus' observation page is actually useful). PDL has a history of socking on the en-wiki, so I'm not so sure this is just an impersonation. If it is discovered that these are the same person(s) then please globally ban PDL and extend the block here to indefinite. Also, PDL, if you're reading this, I said I wouldn't interact but hey, curiosity got the cat. Ely - Talk 04:04, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there; the account with the ..nn.. has less than 20 edits; and I have to say that as to addresses, there's no overlap. As to blocking, both users are currently blocked, so there's little to do here anyway.--Eptalon (talk) 19:47, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Seems to be impersonation. Thanks for the report though! Best, Vermont (talk) 04:03, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]