Commons:Requests for checkuser

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
(Redirected from Commons:RFCU)
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 (1 P)
Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/TO4848

Requests

[edit]

TO4848

[edit]

Status: open • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 09:11, 21 November 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. See also Commons:Deletion requests/File:Queen NKZY.jpg Ninja✮Strikers «☎» 09:11, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sileudneseo

[edit]

Status: open • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 10:00, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results

[edit]

Reason: Same user behavior pattern as the previous request. --Chiyako92 (talk) 09:01, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

АнИгМа

[edit]

Status: resolved • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 17:41, 20 Novemeber 2024 (UTC)

[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results

[edit]

User started editing shortly after User:АнИгМа (formerly User:Igors Cernovs [1]), User:GrIgMaNN, User:Tetradont and User:Biosciense were blocked. Their edits have been essentially the same - uploading photos, mostly of people and aviation stuff and making the same mistakes. They overwrote files with AI-upscaled photos (e.g. File:Shaposhnikov170.png or File:Petre_Antonescu.jpg or File:Viacheslav Fetisov Panini 1979.jpg and many others), exactly like what the problem was before. They upload similar overwritten modified versions (e.g. cropped and background-removed File:Alfrēds_Rubiks_(2014).png or improperly File:Putin_at_Obukhovskiy_zavod.jpg). While mostly Russian-person focused, they have a similar occasional Latvian person/subject focus. Most tellingly, they restored a previous sock's upload at File:RIAN_archive_612748_Valentina_Tereshkova.jpg, File:RIAN archive 888102 Soviet cosmonauts.jpg, File:Степан Анастасович Микоян.jpg and File:Ināra_Mūrniece_piedalās_Valsts_policijas_dibināšanas_97.gadadienai_veltītajā_svinīgajā_sanāksmē_(23217090060).jpg. They also edited these pages touched by АнИгМа [2] and [3] to modify "author's" displayed name. On English wiki they have edited the same page en:Riga Civil Aviation Engineers Institute. On Latvian a few but notably lv:Frīdriha Candera Jauno lidotāju klubs. On Russian wiki, they have overlapped a bunch [4]. There may be more stuff, but there's a lot to look through. All of this sums up to some extremely unlikely coincidences. —  HELLKNOWZ ∣ TALK ∣ enWiki 17:42, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed, user blocked. Please check and clean up their edits. --Krd 04:03, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Adebisi Ramadan

[edit]

Status: resolved • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 15:03, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results

[edit]

Reason: Repeated upload of File:Adebisi Fathiu.png, which appears to be a profile pic of the user and fails COM:SPEEDY#F10. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 15:04, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Likely, all blocked. --Krd 16:56, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A3cb1

[edit]

Status: resolved • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 12:22, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results

[edit]

Usual edit pattern.--Friniate (talk) 12:22, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Inconclusive / Unlikely --Krd 03:36, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]



Baginda 480

[edit]

Status: resolved • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 10:43, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results

[edit]

Reason: Both like uploading images related to Mahathir Mohamad, with some copyright issues. A1Cafel (talk) 10:43, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd call this Inconclusive, but Muhd Mahadzir (talk • contribs • Luxo's • SUL • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log ) is Confirmed to be related to InterEdit88 (talk • contribs • Luxo's • SUL • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log ), whose uploads doesn't look good either. Can you check and tag them? --Krd 06:55, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just saw that 218.208.8.75 (possibly a sock of Baginda 480) left a message, asking him to upload a photo, so I'm leaning to believe that they are two different people (unless they have strong acting skills). @Krd: Is it possible to check if there is logged-out edits of Baginda 480, per edits over 2402:1980:0:0:0:0:0:0/32 and 218.208.0.0/16. Also, I'm not an autopatroller so I cannot tag their userpage. --A1Cafel (talk) 09:30, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is possible to check, but not possible to disclose. Krd 12:40, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kaisen12

[edit]

Status: resolved • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 18:08, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results

[edit]

Reason: All appear to belong to an IP address in the 2001:8A0:6xxx... range. I believe these are sock/meatpuppets based on IP reverts removing deletion tags to the following files from 3 different accounts created very recently:

The main account has already have multiple images of the same footballer deleted for copyvio/missing information, while Endro12 has uploaded likely screenshots with minimal info, and Endro12 has uploaded a Getty Images photo claiming it as their own work. The IP addresses are removing tags without starting a discussion or providing useful source info. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 18:08, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, please excuse me for not completely assuming good faith, but this deletion discussion involving 2 of the 3 users mentioned above feels very meat-puppet-y to me. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 21:46, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think is Likely that the following users are releated:
There may be more. None blocked or deleted so far, please comment on their behaviour.
The proposed master Barbaraskw (talk • contribs • Luxo's • SUL • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log ) appears Unlikely to be related. --Krd 16:13, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Krd They removing valid speedy deletion tags from images while logged out (see edits linked above) and Kaisen12 comments on deletion discussion pretending to be a third party: see Commons:Deletion requests/File:KA2024.jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/Files Uploaded by User:Tonispin. In general, all of the linked accounts have a pattern of uploading obvious screenshots of web images/videos of Portuguese/Portugal-based footballers claiming ownership.
I realized after the fact that Barbarskw appears to edit Sweden-related articles (though they themselves appear to be part of a long-term sockpuppet tree) and the other accounts appear to be from Portugal. Their paths crossed paths because of edits to File:Viktor Gyökeres.jpg and File:Viktor Gyökeres 2024.jpg, a Swedish footballer based in Portugal. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 17:09, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All blocked. --Krd 04:59, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Krd Is it possible to block this user's IPs as well? It looks like they're editing as anonymous users to remove deletion tags from Splity1820's uploads, File:DiogoCostaPorto24.jpg and File:DiogoCosta24.jpg.
I think it's the same set of IPs that are blocked on en-wiki. Thank you. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 17:47, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And one more account:
The user uploaded File:GeovanyQuenda.jpg and then used one of the IP addresses above to insert it into en-Wiki. Fits the pattern of claiming screenshots/web photos of Portuguese footballers as their own work. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 19:17, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed --Krd 03:44, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment the IP range w:Special:Contributions/2001:8a0:67d4:1e01:197e:5e12:831e:16b6/64 was blocked on en.wp based on WP:DUCK behavior. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:32, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mentioned range now blocked. --Krd 03:44, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tiago Diaz Meneses

[edit]

Status: resolved • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 11:00, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results

[edit]

Reason: Reuploading copyright violation File:Vladimiro Montesinos en Lima.jpg using Flickr washing license here. Yann (talk) 11:00, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

After the file was initially uploaded by user Tiago Diaz Meneses, an IP added this link as a source with a date after the upload date on Commons. (Possible first attempt at washing license). --Ovruni (talk) 11:15, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I tend to decline this per #1 and #2. Is there anything to add? --Krd 16:14, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do you mean that they are obvious socks? Yann (talk) 16:45, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, I'd say we usually don't run a CU on two accounts with one or two uploads each, as it's fair enough to warn and/or block them. As said, if I'm missing anything, please advise. Krd 17:00, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
One account reuploading a copyright violation in using Flickr license washing seems serious enough to me to have a CU. It is quite likely that the second is a sock of the first, but as the names are different, this can't be proved without a CU. If these are different users, a simple warning is sufficient, but if they are the same user, one should be blocked indef., and the other should get a serious warning. Yann (talk) 18:02, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Although I don't feel strongly about it, I tend to agree with Krd. I think we should warn both accounts that using two accounts to edit the same file is a serious breach of Commons rules and that if that is the case here, they must not do it again. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:09, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jim, Sorry, but I don't get it. Either these accounts are related or they are not. There is no middle ground. If it is a coincidence that they uploaded the same copyright violation, and they are not related, a simple warning is sufficient as they only have one deleted file each. However, if they are related, it is clearly an abuse of multiple accounts in addition to Flickr license washing, so the sock should be blocked indefinitely, and the first account should get at least a serious warning, if not a block. Yann (talk) 20:31, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We are supposed to be reluctant to invade editor's privacy with CU -- I'm reluctant when its a newbie. I think we must take into account the fact that the two accounts have a total of four edits. Newbies sometimes (often?) make mistakes and a stern warning seems to me a better solution than invading privacy. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:16, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, as you like. I blocked the second account for (almost certainly) socking, and warned the first one. Just my 2c., but obvious Flickr license washing is way over the limit for assuming good faith. Yann (talk) 20:26, 18 November 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=959898221"