| General help |
|
|
| Report abuse |
|
|
| Request assistance |
|
|
| Noticeboards |
|
|
- WP:RFCU redirects here. You may be looking for Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct (WP:RFC/U), CheckUser policy (Wikipedia:CheckUser), or Wikipedia:Changing username (WP:CHU).
|
Read this first
This is the place to request sockpuppet checks and other investigations requiring access to the Checkuser privilege. Checkuser is a last resort for difficult cases. Whenever possible, use other methods first. Possible alternatives are listed below.
Acceptable requests
| Code |
Situation |
Solution, requirements |
| A |
Blatant attack or vandalism accounts, need IP block |
Submit new section at #Requests for IP check, below |
| B |
Evading blocks, bans and remedies issued by arbitration committee |
Submit case subpage, including link to closed arb case |
| C |
Ongoing, serious pattern vandalism with many incidents |
Submit case subpage, including diffs |
| D |
Vote fraud, closed vote, fraud affects outcome |
Submit case subpage, including link to closed vote |
| E |
3RR violation using sockpuppets |
Submit case subpage, including diffs of violation |
| F |
Evading blocks, bans and remedies issued by community |
Submit case subpage, including link to evidence of remedy |
| G |
Does not fit above, but you believe check needed |
Submit case subpage, briefly summarize and justify |
Unacceptable requests
| Situation |
Solution |
| Obvious, disruptive sock puppet |
Block, no checkuser needed |
| Disruptive "throwaway" account used only for a few edits |
Block, no checkuser needed |
| Checkuser on yourself to "prove your innocence" |
Such requests are rarely accepted, please do not ask |
| Related to ongoing arbitration case |
Request checkuser on the arbitration case pages |
| Vote fraud, ongoing vote |
Wait until vote closes before listing, or post at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets |
| Vote fraud, closed vote, did not affect outcome |
List at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents or Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets |
| Other disruption of articles |
List at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents or Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets |
| Open proxy, IP address already known |
List at Wikipedia:WikiProject on open proxies |
| You want access to the checkuser tool yourself |
Contact the arbitration committee, but such access is granted rarely or by invitation only |
General procedure
- If submitting a new case subpage, use the inputbox below; if adding to an existing case subpage, see WP:RFCU/P#Repeat requests.
- Choose one code letter that best fits your request. Provide evidence such as diff links as required or requested. Note that some code letters inherently require specific evidence.
- When listing suspected accounts or IP addresses, use the {{checkuser}} or {{checkip}} templates. Please do not use this template in a section header.
- Sign your request.
Specific procedure
After submitting a request
- Responses will be brief in order to comply with Wikipedia's privacy policy.
- Due to technical factors, results are not always clear.
- Check back regularly to see the outcome of your request.
- Checkusers and clerks do not generally issue blocks. You may need to do this yourself or submit a request at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
- Case subpages are typically archived several days after a checkuser responds.
Privacy violation?
|
|
File a Checkuser Request
|
Cases are created on subpages of Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case.
If you require help or advice, ask at Wikipedia talk:Requests for checkuser.
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 (if the case has been archived). When editing an existing case, be sure to list it here or add Category:Checkuser requests to be listed to the subpage.
If creating a new case subpage, add the name of the main account (or "puppetmaster", not the sockpuppet!) in the box below. Leave out the "User:" prefix. Do not remove the text in the box, add the name to the end only (that is, append the name to the existing text). Then press "Request a checkuser" and you will be taken to a page where you can fill out the request.
- Example: if you want to request a checkuser on User:John Doe, enter the text:
Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/John Doe
|
| Indicators |
| Request completed: |
 Confirmed |
 Likely |
 Possible |
 Unlikely |
 Unrelated |
 Inconclusive |
 IP blocked |
 Stale |
 Completed |
| Request declined: |
 Declined |
 Unnecessary |
 Checkuser is not for fishing |
 Rejected |
 Checkuser is not a crystal ball |
|
| Information: |
 Additional information needed |
 Deferred to |
 Note: |
|
| Clerk actions: |
 Clerk assistance required: |
 Clerk note: |
 Delisted |
 Relisted |
Outstanding requests
I came across Ome Henk with a speedy-delete copyvio tag. The alleged copyvio source URL is a comotose website and no obvious copyright violation. The WayBack Machine shows extensive revisions to the website up until about a year ago. All the pages seem to be in Netherlandese, so a copyvio is unfounded.
Ome Henk has a long history of bogus tags on the article, so I removed the latest. Very soon it was retagged, and I reverted. Again it was retagged and another admin deleted. I left a message for the admin to reassess the deletion and the IP reverted my message. I blocked him for two weeks and noticed a pattern of 217.233.*.* targeting the article, so I blocked 217.233/16 for 72 hours (anon only). User P.F.O.S.B. immediately reacted, so I blocked him—permanently—based on his editing history. His pattern of sophisticated knowledge of Wikipedia and targeting Ome Henk must be the same person attacking from this IP range. I'd like to confirm the range block corresponds to the user to verify the block is appropriate. —EncMstr (talk) 19:57, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
- Confirmed. Sam Korn (smoddy) 20:48, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
-
- Thank you! —EncMstr (talk) 20:52, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
- Completed. No socks found. Three open proxies are blocked -- all other IPs are dynamic so there's no point in blocking them. Sam Korn (smoddy) 17:07, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
- Supporting evidence: We seem to have a sockfarm here belonging to Anvil Media Inc. Anvil's business seems to be, er, editing Wikipedia for profit. Per WP:COIN and WP:ANI discussion, there could be many accounts involved. Some blocks have already been handed out. I suggested a CU an ANI to sort this right out, and met with support, so here goes. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 11:45, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
- I wonder if a look down their client list and cross-checking against any suspicious recent edits to their client's entries (if they have them) may also help? GBT/C 12:09, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
- That's a good idea, although I fear most may not have entries. Care to help me do it? ;-) Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 12:12, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
- Sure - am picking them at random and having a look - there's definitely some out there... What I may do is copy them to a subpage on my userspace, then we can work on them together, crossing them off, notes, etc.? GBT/C 12:19, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
- That sounds good to me, yeah. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 12:21, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
- Done - at User:Gb/Anvil. If you want to start at the bottom, I'll start at the top - strikeout those that don't look compromised, or don't have articles, and scribble notes alongside any others. GBT/C 12:24, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
-
- Confirmed that Mrtriviamaniacman is 70.89.191.245. Anvil Media Inc is not obviously related per . You knew that already, of course! The other users you give are too old to check. Others that are likely to be the same include:
- Eric and Sherridan
- Nierengm
- KimKnees
- Srschram
- Possibly also connected
- Lnp5019
- Mattschmidt
- Propulsionml (these three are certainly related to each other)
- This is all that appears on the ranges being used. Sam Korn (smoddy) 12:25, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for that - ignore the below for the time being, but I'll pop the ones that we turn up down here as they come to light, then formulate a proper request later.
- Supporting evidence: I suspect that these two accounts are the same person in an attempt to circumvent a 3RR violation on American Airlines while removing interwiki links to the Arabic Wikipedia. These accounts have also signed each others talk page posts with the other username. I also believe that the IP address is the same from vandalism to my user talk page [20], [21], and [22].
- Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/QualityControl3533
- QualityControl3533's removals: [23], [24], [25], [26]
- Wikiman9223's removals: [27], [28], [29]
- IP vandalism to American Airlines: [30], [31], [32], and [33]
- Signing talk page posts with the other's name: [34]
- Thanks in advance for checking, -MBK004 00:45, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
- Note: Accepting this case based on the evidence above, the SSP case already filed and the fact that the main account has just been blocked pending checkuser. Please don't do "pending checkuser" again, as there's the possibility that the RFCU case may be declined. I see the page blanking here, but still - let's not block on the strength of one page blanking here.
- Confirmed - QualityControl3533 (talk · contribs) = Wikiman9223 (talk · contribs), as the editor has since admitted in the last unblock request. The unblock request is plausible, however, the following accounts are also confirmed:
-
- Edit880 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
- Edit8809 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
- Airline2 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
- Braves99 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
- All of the above accounts have also been active on Talk:Southwest Airlines. Given this comment, however, it looks like it could just be a confused new editor who is creating one account after another without realizing the ramifications of doing so.
- The above IP addresses are Unrelated, BTW - Alison ❤ 06:11, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
- Could the clerk who blocks these also re-block my blocks related to this case and tag appropriately and deal with the unblock request. -MBK004 06:24, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
|
