Commons:Requests for checkuser

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
(Redirected from Commons:CHECK)
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]

Ricardinho da Souza Silva 7

[edit]

Status: resolved • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 13:29, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results

[edit]

Reason: Another duck. Massive banking-related edits in Commons, extending to eswiki and enwiki as well. --Stïnger （会話） 13:29, 13 December 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Confirmed --Krd 05:47, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Loveisamoracle

[edit]

Status: resolved • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 05:30, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results

[edit]

Reason: Context: a few weeks ago there was an election in UY. For the benefit of the doubt, these three accounts could be just activists colliding in their editions, because they have a strong ideological and partisan bond. Maybe, they just have some kind of coordinated effort, and nothing else.

But the three of them uploaded several images taken from the internet in copyright violation, even through license laundering (via Flickr). As you may see in their User talks, a lot of images were already deleted, and two of this three accounts were blocked here, one of them indefinitely. They insisted in trying to include these images in SP:WP showing the same behavior: edit wars, incivility and sarcastic remarks, ignoring warnings sistematically, etc. Two of them were already blocked on SP:WP.

The problem here in Commons is what you see in their User Talks, as said above. Is it a case of multiplle accounts or just false alarm? Loveisamoracle is the older one by far, the other two were created a year ago, more or less.--Rastamby (talk) 05:31, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is technically Inconclusive or a weak Possible. --Krd 08:34, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Summerry2024

[edit]

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

[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results

[edit]

Reason: Files uploaded by Armurdo (talk • contribs • block log • filter log) had the same pattern as files uploaded by users below. . These files are usually again screenshots and clippings and subjects seem to be related (evangelists, Latin America, also found among the socks below). --Lymantria (talk) 14:12, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Possible or Likely Krd 14:24, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Greydiomond67200

[edit]

Status: resolved • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 22:53, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results

[edit]

Reason: File:Kd Sri Selangor was attacked by the Indonesian.jpg, uploaded by Mesbmr6710, was uploaded as File:KD Sri Selangor was ambushed in 1964.jpg by Greydiomond67200 a few weeks ago. I would appreciate confirmation that it's the same user before issuing a block. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 22:53, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 It looks like a duck to me --Krd 07:49, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bakel8Yazid

[edit]

Status: resolved • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 00:00, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results

[edit]

Reason: All three accounts have uploaded the same non-free logos/posters related to the Dhoom franchise. Once enough logos get deleted on one account, they switch to the next. Copyvios with overlaps include File:Dhoom logo.png (Bakel and renamed), File:Dhoom Film Poster.jpg (renamed and 12), and File:Dhoom 3 logo.png (all three). I'm going to go ahead and indef باقل محمد 12 per DUCK and abuse of right to vanish, but considering that they've gone through three accounts in 10 days, I think it's likely there are sleepers. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 00:00, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed, as well as
--Krd 08:06, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OTOT98

[edit]

Status: resolved • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 12:57, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results

[edit]

Reason: uploaded a previously deleted photo from a blocked user User:Hninsiphyutoxica, and add the photo to the same article. Ninja✮Strikers «☎» 12:57, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed --Krd 07:54, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kriestovo Nysian

[edit]

Status: resolved • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 15:44, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

[edit]

Per discussion and behavioral evidence in Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#Mass_vandalism/falsification_on_'Slavic'_issues. List of IP addresses is unfortunately not conclusive, there are more in these ranges. Constantine ✍ 15:44, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See also COM:ANU#Mass vandalism/falsification on 'Slavic' issues.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:54, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What exactly is the goal for the check? Krd 16:10, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If confirmed, blocking the accounts and IP ranges. Plus detecting if possible whether there are more accounts, that would be very useful, as the disruption is chronic and on a massive scale and there are definitely more accounts that the above active. Constantine ✍ 16:24, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The mentioned accounts are not directly related, but it appears not impossible to draw some connections anyway. It will need some time to sort this. Krd 06:37, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Krd (talk · contribs). Another likely (albeit stale) sock account on behavioral grounds: Vojtech Ctvrtnik (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  Constantine ✍ 12:48, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note that User:ArchVKL has also again been pushing the hoax idea of a "Slavonic dance notation" on Wikidata ([1] [2]), which is a dead giveaway. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:16, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Added yet another recent sock account: Romnsrcs (talk · contribs). Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:08, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have to also add another suspected sock: Silar (talk • contribs • Luxo's • SUL • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log ). Although it does not fit the pattern as exactly as the others above, the pseudo-historical and pseudo-scientific nonsense it produces (cf. [3] or [4]) in precisely this rather niche area is worryingly similar. Constantine ✍ 23:21, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
While I can understand your suspicion (I too noticed that Silar sometimes has surprisingly idiosyncratic notions about categorization), I must say I don't think they can be a sock. For one thing, they have reliably reverted Kriestovo socks on multiple occasions and over a long period of time, and been reverted by the socks in turn (and I don't think it's Kriestovo's style to fake edit-war against themself). They also have been around for much longer – since 2005, in fact – and have a wider range of interests. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:10, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am also far less certain than with the other cases as the MO is different, but the amount of similarly fringe 'Turboslavic' things this account has produced in this very specific, niche area of Commons is almost too much to be a coincidence, and I have seen them both feeding off each other, using one another's categories. This may be the accidental result of similar interests and POVs, but it definitely warrants checking. Constantine ✍ 20:33, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed:
Possible:
Possible:
Please suggest how to conclude. --Krd 11:59, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All 6 accounts you listed are very clear behavioral matches to each other and to the banned sockpuppeter, so I'd suggest blocking them all. I'd also suggest considering range blocks on 2001:9e8:5400::/40, 195.12.232.0/24, and 83.135.190.0/24, all of which have been used exclusively by this person as far as I can tell (the 195.* one has been stable for 2 years). Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:21, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done as suggested. --Krd 14:31, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Krd and Future Perfect at Sunrise. Constantine ✍ 18:52, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Krd: can you please also check on the last account I mentioned above (Silar)? The behavioral evidence is getting stronger the more I encounter his contributions. Constantine ✍ 19:58, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unrelated Krd 07:51, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Constantine ✍ 08:06, 13 December 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=971361427"