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
Confirmed  Technically indistinguishable
Likely  Possilikely
Possible Unlikely
Inconclusive Unrelated
 No action Stale
Request declined
Declined Checkuser is not for fishing
Checkuser is not magic pixie dust. 8ball The CheckUser Magic 8-Ball says
 It looks like a duck to me Checkuser is not a crystal ball.
Information
Additional information needed Deferred to
 Doing…  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. (This is not a venue for requesting administrative action such as blocks or file clean-up.)
  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.
    • Requests to check accounts already confirmed on other projects may be declined as redundant.
    • Requests to run a check on yourself will be declined.
  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.

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.

Checkuser requests to be listed‎ (empty)
nothing found

Requests[edit]

A3cb1[edit]

Status: resolved • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 08:37, 17 March 2024 (UTC)


Suspected related users[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results[edit]

Usual edit pattern. Please check also for other possible SP.--Friniate (talk) 07:37, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed. --Krd 06:02, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]



Hannoveraner1981[edit]

Status: resolved • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 14:30, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Suspected related users[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results[edit]

Reason: Similar editing pattern of BLP violations. Trade (talk) 14:30, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Declined. Per COM:RFCU "Checkuser is a last resort for difficult cases; pursue other options first" and "Running a check will only be done to combat disruption on Commons". Both accounts are already blocked locally and globally. Эlcobbola talk 14:48, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The other CU requests are also for accounts that are blocked locally and globally but that didn't seemed to be an issue?--Trade (talk) 15:51, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is w:WP:OTHERSTUFF, and incorrect anyway. If you have a request that conforms to the instructions at COM:RFCU, you are welcome to make it. Эlcobbola talk 15:57, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But you just told me we are not allow to request checks for accounts that "already blocked locally and globally" Trade (talk) 16:23, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Trade: There is no point in doing that when the subjects are already blocked and locked. The subjects of the other requests were not already blocked or locked at the time the pages were created.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 16:26, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait how? Both Adamvase and Gapingprolapse were blocked the 8th April and the CU were created the 9th Trade (talk) 16:31, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Trade: That was a formality, and Trijnstel is a former Steward, and therefore already had CU access.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 13:27, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No. While I don't believe in dignifying fallacies by entertaining them, to the extent there is confusion about the Adamvase RfCU: those who actually read that RfCU, and read critically, will note my comment of "I did look into this yesterday when you pinged at ANV but forget to note the same". The check was done the day before the RfCU was opened and before all potential socks were blocked. As above, Trade is objectively wrong and, like his failure to follow plain instructions 1) to transclude properly, 2) to remove the listed indicator, 3) to read RFCU instructions, and 4) to read OTHERSTUFF, is not genuinely engaging with information available to them. If there is request that conforms to the instructions at COM:RFCU, feel free to make it. Эlcobbola talk 14:12, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adamvase[edit]

Status: resolved • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 12:27, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Suspected related users[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results[edit]

Reason: LTA, similar vandalism. Both accounts are blocked (see here and here), but maybe there's an IP range to block? Trijnsteltalk 12:27, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Babysuccess[edit]

Status:  to be archived • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 19:44, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Suspected related users[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results[edit]

Reason: Babysuccess and Agilityman are both globally locked accounts that have uploaded multiple images here, with all of Agilityman's images deleted and I've got a pending request on all of Babysuccess's images. The uploads are consistent in that they appear to be screenshots, have focus issues and use the same odd license {{3dpatent}} and often mention the same wordpress site as the author. On other wiki's, they've created promotional articles on often borderline (at best) people where they add the images they've uploaded here. Warrideybigo was created a few days ago and uploaded several images, including one for Isaiah Ogedegbe who has been a common element in the articles they've created. The images use the same licensing and have the same screenshot / poor focus appearance. Warrideybigo has only edited here, so this is realistically the best CU option. Ravensfire (talk) 19:44, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Likely Krd 06:51, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For older requests, please see Commons:Requests for checkuser/Archives
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Requests_for_checkuser&oldid=868976662"