Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

Steward requests/Checkuser

< Steward requests
This is an archived version of this page, as edited by Easterlies (talk | contribs) at 14:11, 22 January 2021 (→Walker ho@zh.wikipedia: typo). It may differ significantly from the current version.
Shortcut:
SRCU
Checkuser icons
These indicators are used by CheckUsers and stewards for easier skimming of their notes, actions and comments.
{{Confirmed}}:  Confirmed {{MoreInfo}}: MoreInfo Additional information needed
{{Likely}}: Likely Likely {{Deferred}}: Deferred Deferred to
{{Possible}}: Possible Possible {{Completed}}: Completed Completed
{{Unlikely}}: Unlikely Unlikely {{TakeNote}}: Note Note:
{{Unrelated}}: Unrelated Unrelated {{Doing}}: Doing...
{{Inconclusive}}: Inconclusive Inconclusive {{StaleIP}}: Stale

{{Declined}}:  Declined {{Fishing}}: Fishing CheckUser is not for fishing
{{Pixiedust}}: Pixiedust CheckUser is not magic pixie dust {{8ball}}: 8ball The CheckUser Magic 8-Ball says
{{Duck}}:  It looks like a duck to me {{Crystalball}}: Crystalball CheckUser is not a crystal ball

This page is for requesting CheckUser information on a wiki with no local CheckUsers (see also requesting checkuser access). Make sure to follow the following instructions, or your request may not be processed in a timely manner.

Before making a request:

  1. Make sure you have a good reason for the check. It will only be accepted to counter vandalism or disruption to Wikimedia wikis. Valid reasons include needing a block of the underlying IP or IP range, disruptive sockpuppetry, vote-stacking, and similar disruption where the technical evidence from running a check would prevent or reduce further disruption.
  2. Be specific in your reasons. Ambiguous or insufficient reasons will cause delays. Explain the disruption and why you believe the accounts are related, ideally using diff links or other evidence.
  3. Make sure there are no local checkusers.
  4. Please ensure that the check hasn't already been done:


How to make a request

How to make a request:

  • Place your request at the bottom of the section, using the template below (see also {{srcu}} help). 
    === Username@xx.project ===
{{CU request
 |status          = <!--don't change this line-->
 |language code   = 
 |project shortcut= 
 |user name1      = 
 |user name2      = 
 |user name3      = 
<!-- Max 10 users -->
 |discussion      = [[Example]]<!-- local confirmation link / local policy link -->
 |reason          = Reasons here. ~~~~
}}

    For example: 

    === Example@en.wikipedia ===
{{CU request
 |status          = <!--don't change this line-->
 |language code   = en
 |project shortcut= w
 |user name1      = Example
 |user name2      = Foo
 |user name3      = Bar
<!-- Max 10 users -->
 |discussion      = [[:w:en:Example]]<!-- local confirmation link / local policy link -->
 |reason          = Reasons here. ~~~~
}}
  • Specify the wiki(s) you want to perform the check on.

Cross-wiki requests
Meta-Wiki requests

Requests

Walker ho@zh.wikipedia

Status:    Done
List of users
Walker ho (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser)
Zombie joke (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser)
Reason(s): These two accounts were reported before (See w:zh:Wikipedia:元維基用戶查核請求/2021/1#Thomas_1120 and Steward_requests/Checkuser/2021-01#Thomas_1120@zh.wikipedia), but there was not enough evidence to support the check at the time. However, the result above shows that Extremely bus, Pkwy to, Tomy wory, Thomas 1120 and Jacky 1122 are sock puppets, then some of them were included in w:zh:Wikipedia:元維基用戶查核請求/2021/1#Thomas_1120 and Steward_requests/Checkuser/2021-01#Thomas_1120@zh.wikipedia. So it seems that there is more evidence to support the check of these two accounts and have a sleeper check. Thank you. --Yining Chen (Talk) 09:35, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  Doing... --Sotiale (talk) 11:17, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Confirmed Group 1: Walker ho, Zombie joke == Thomas 1120
  •   Confirmed Group 2: Sample user 100, Nnn1981, Qwertyuiop0501, Aaa1232, Pqr1234, Xyz1120, Lph2005, LF20010325, LF20010102, LF2001, Lplp0wjywh5ejyl6wk72kebunko2p0, HthYd7Grdg, Hyy1972, Lww2015, Lww2008, Lww2002, Lww1996, Lww1990, Lww1984, Lww1978, Lww1960, Lww1972, Lww1967, G7f7g87g76t8h88gg7f7, It is a good thing to have a good time and I will be there on a day, Are you going to be able to make it tomorrow or should I just wait?, Everything you have said about you is a bit boring, Eudueueuehvyevubqiqajakka
  •   Unlikely Group 1 and 2
  • No other sleepers found related to Group 1.
  • Group 2 is accidentally discovered in the ranges of Group 1.

From a technical point of view. --Sotiale (talk) 13:12, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you~ --Easterlies (talk) 13:32, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In addition, I have several accounts to offer. They are not about Group 1 but Group 2.--Easterlies (talk) 13:43, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Group 3: Lwx0357, Lwx8789, Lwx8277, Lwx1972, Lwx1973, Lwx9546, Lwx2689, Lwx1970, Lwx0535, Lwx0199, Lwx0000, Lwx9999, Lwx5790, Lwx1277, Lwx1001, Lwx1360, Lwx1127, Lwx1393
  2. Group 4: Pqr2021, Zzz1929, And2021, Mno1990, Www2021
  3. Group 5: Just wanted you have a quick note about your details for more information, If I don't have any further questions or need anything else, please let me know, Either of you have a mistaken number or email to contact us, We have a mistaken number which I have received from you, Everyone else in this world will not have received any information from anyone, Regarding your details, I will not have any more questions about you, Very good news about this one though I have been thinking of going to give you a call, Do I have a conciliation to be able or not be able for general reasons?, 9th of the month for the named recipient and I am sorry for not getting in contact, 25th of this year is for more of the Act than expected, Unfortunately, I have received this email in error
All of above accounts have been blocked locally. You can see that Group 3 is similar to some accounts in Group 2 such as Lww2015 and so on. Group 4 is similar to some accounts in Group 2 like Aaa1232 (3 alphabet + 4 numbers). Group 5 is similar to some accounts with many words in Group 2. What's more, all of these accounts had the same way to register (mobile and via webpage). This is one of the main reaons why I can judge by   It looks like a duck to me. Therefore, why accounts I mention above haven't been checked should be considered. I hope the information may help you with future's check.--Easterlies (talk) 14:10, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Liberalus homo universalus@hr.wikipedia

Status:    Not done
List of users
Lordluka99 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser)
Reason(s): I am not very good with codes, but I'll try to explain. Admins on Croatian wikipedia have asked me to do a user check, because they want to see if I am this person I put into "user name1" section. They don't believe me a word and one of them even banned from editing. I hope you can help me, because I think I messed the form up above. Thank you in advance, I hope you can help me. (Edit: What do you put in the discussion part?) Liberalus homo universalus (talk) 00:49, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, if you request yourself to be investigated, it is generally not acceptable unless it is a special case. Have the admin who said it to you post the request directly with evidence. --Sotiale (talk) 01:24, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have blocked this user based on very strong behavioural evidence that they are Lordluka99. Given that checkuser can't be used to provide exculpatory evidence, I don't see why a check would be warranted here. Appeals should be handled locally. Ivi104 (talk) 02:01, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  Not done @Liberalus homo universalus: I don't know who the admin suggested you checkuser is, but ask that user to post directly. --Sotiale (talk) 02:06, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That person wouldn’t do it. Also,why was I told to do this? That means Croatian wiki admins were lying to me, and again they try to lie to me. Što se tiče tebe @Ivi104, ne poznaješ me i ne možeš govoriti za mene da sam ja netko tko nisam, uostalom zašto vjeruješ onima koji me isto je poznaju? Kad me budeš upoznao onda možemo dalje razgovarati. A sada, ti stavi request da me se provjeri i dokaže moja nevinost, jer ja ne mogu učiniti ništa. Liberalus homo universalus (talk) 12:28, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Vds1216@zh.wikipedia

Status:    Done
List of users
Vds1216 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser)
Bnk1668 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser)
Johncena736 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser)
Randykobe2020 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser)
Romanreigns1234 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser)
Reason(s): Hello. Vds1216 and Bnk1668 are confirmed that they are sock puppets. Then the above five users mainly edit the articles related to Korean music groups, and successively edited the article w:zh:PRISMA(See the log and the deleted contributions); and Randykobe2020 appeared(started editing) only when Vds1216, Bnk1668 and Johncena736 were blocked. So we would like to know the relationship between these accounts. Thank you. --Yining Chen (Talk) 10:09, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  Doing... --Sotiale (talk) 13:16, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Confirmed Vds1216, Leborn2020, Bnk1668, Romanreigns1234, Johncena736, Randykobe2020, Stephenlaulau

From a technical point of view. --Sotiale (talk) 13:32, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See also

Cooperation requests for: comments (local) (global) · translation

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steward_requests/Checkuser&oldid=20995126"