Commons:Requests for checkuser
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. | 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:
- 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.)
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
Requests
[edit]Roxibaby
[edit]- Roxibaby (talk • contribs • Luxo's • SUL • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log )
Suspected related users
[edit]- Meglavoie (talk • contribs • Luxo's • SUL • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log )
- Related IP address, if any (talk • contribs • IP address, if any/lookup WHOIS • IP address, if any.html RBL • tools • luxo's • IP address, if any crossblock • block user • block log
Rationale, discussion and results
[edit]Reason: see: Commons:Deletion requests/File:IMG rox bruneau.jpg , both users uploaded same image in very near time. i suspect sockpuppetery. modern_primat ඞඞඞ ----TALK 18:37, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- Declined - This is, at best, premature. The first warning either account received was at 16:29, 9 July 2024. Neither account has edited since then--Roxibaby last edited 16:18, 9 July 2024 and Meglavoie last edited 16:26, 9 July 2024. ("Checkuser is a last resort for difficult cases; pursue other options first"). I thus see no evidence that the two accounts are being used to circumvent scrutiny, stack votes (indeed, neither has edited a DR, let alone a DR for the other's file(s)), or otherwise edit disruptively. They haven't even edited concurrently. Roxibaby has only a single edit; all of Meglavoie's edits have come thereafter and, again, before a talk page warning that there was a copyright issue. Эlcobbola talk 19:36, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- Now, however, Katheb05 has just emerged and uploaded the image again; so Doing…. Эlcobbola talk 20:00, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- Possilikely/ Likely based on technical evidence. Эlcobbola talk 20:03, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. modern_primat ඞඞඞ ----TALK 20:09, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- As I look further, Made417 and Naomielalande01 have also been created today (9 July 2024) as SPAs to upload this image. This may be a case of the subject using social media (or another means) to ask others to change a profile image they dislike. Meatpuppetry is, of course, abusive use of multiple accounts and the aforementioned have been so blocked. We do not, nor should we, have a meatpupet template, so {{Sock}} has been used for organisation, not necessarily to assert literal sockpuppetry. Эlcobbola talk 20:24, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- Possilikely/ Likely based on technical evidence. Эlcobbola talk 20:03, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- Now, however, Katheb05 has just emerged and uploaded the image again; so Doing…. Эlcobbola talk 20:00, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Keylansual3882
[edit]- Keylansual3882 (talk • contribs • Luxo's • SUL • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log )
Suspected related users
[edit]- Keylansual3882 (talk • contribs • Luxo's • SUL • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log )
- Malttew9983 (talk • contribs • Luxo's • SUL • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log )
Rationale, discussion and results
[edit]Reason: Possible new sock of Malttew9983. Same pattern of uploading political flags under fair use (specially from Panama). Taichi (talk) 06:35, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Malttew9983 is stale, nothing to check. --Krd 18:39, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
Marwenwafi
[edit]- Marwenwafi (talk • contribs • Luxo's • SUL • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log )
Suspected related users
[edit]- Roberto9191 (talk • contribs • Luxo's • SUL • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log )
Rationale, discussion and results
[edit]Reason: This user appeared just a few days after Marwenwafi started editing the Quality Images Candidates page. During those few days, all of Marwenwafi's photos were dismissed as technically very poor. Roberto9191, after registration, appeared immediately on QIC. There, he tries to promote all of Marwenwafi's photos. He also does other reviews, but in my opinion, this is an account created specifically to promote Marwenwafi's photos.
- Examples: 1, 2, 3. Sheltercover (talk) 20:01, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Inconclusive. Эlcobbola talk 20:30, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- I confirm he wants to earn more quality photos Mounir TOUZRI (talk) 07:10, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- {{Pro}} This user was not willing to comply with the guidelines for QIC. Many users tried to explain him the idea of categorizing images unser QI standards. But he never changed anything to his nominations. The suddenly appearing user Roberto9191 behaved in the same way. --August Geyler (talk) 18:46, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- TOUMOU and August Geyler, this is venue to request use of the checkuser tool, not for "supporting" non-existent proposals or offering unhelpful personal opinions. The check has been done per above, and Roberto9191 is blocked; there is nothing more to be done. Эlcobbola talk 18:52, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- I am sorry. I did not know this. Thank you. August Geyler (talk) 18:57, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- TOUMOU and August Geyler, this is venue to request use of the checkuser tool, not for "supporting" non-existent proposals or offering unhelpful personal opinions. The check has been done per above, and Roberto9191 is blocked; there is nothing more to be done. Эlcobbola talk 18:52, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
A3cb1
[edit]- A3cb1 (talk • contribs • Luxo's • SUL • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log )
Suspected related users
[edit]- Mercedes310 (talk • contribs • Luxo's • SUL • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log )
Rationale, discussion and results
[edit]Usual edit pattern. Please check also for other possible SP.--Friniate (talk) 17:33, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Likely Krd 05:04, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- For older requests, please see Commons:Requests for checkuser/Archives