Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Nqltiny

If you are creating a new request about this user, please add it to the top of the page, above this notice. Don't forget to add {{Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Nqltiny}} to the checkuser page here. Previous requests (shown below), and this box, will be automatically hidden on Requests for checkuser (but will still appear here).

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a Request for checkuser. Please do not modify it.

Nqltiny

Status: open • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 11:51, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

• Nqltiny (talk • contribs • Luxo's • SUL • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)

Suspected related users

• Virushou (talk • contribs • Luxo's • SUL • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)
• Vh71196 (talk • contribs • Luxo's • SUL • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)

Rationale

• Reason: Nqltiny has uploaded several images of sand volleyball players, all of them have been deleted as possible or confirmed copyvios. Last edit was 20 October. Virushou started uploading similar images 21 October, most of them have been deleted. The remaining images are copied from Flickr, where they seem to have been deleted shortly after uploading. The latest two uploads are of April Ross (4 November 2:57AM). Eight hours later, the new account Vh71196 uploaded another image of April Ross, now from Picasaweb. The image has now disappeared from Picasaweb. Both Virushou and Vh71196 has added images to articles on the Vietnamese Wikipedia (e.g. File:Bv_(56_of_69).JPG/File:Sharapova w2015.jpg. 4ing (talk) 11:51, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Additional comment: Check user has been run on English Wikipedia. The confirmed account Bryanmella is identical to the Fliskr user name. en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nqltiny/Archive - 4ing (talk) 11:55, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Accounts blocked and tagged. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:05, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

@Steinsplitter: Thanks for your prompt response. Could you please delete the uploads as Flickr washing as well? - 4ing (talk) 12:50, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Done. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:55, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Results

• Confirmed Nqltiny = Virushou = Bryanmella. Vh71196 is Possible leaning to likely. @Steinsplitter: Vh71196 was not checked on the en RfCU and indeed is not blocked there; why are you performing CU blocks before a CU has been run? Эlcobbola _talk 15:34, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

@Elcobbola: The block was made per COM:BP (* 9) because socking confirmed on enwiki. Reason for block is COM:LL (= Violation of COM:L) and socking. I haven't used {{Checkuserblock}} therefor this wasn't a CU block. I don't think blocking a sock does require cu permission - i have seen a lot of other admins doing so. I don't see any problem with my action. The edit pattern (both COM:LL is obvious) --Steinsplitter (talk) 15:50, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

@Steinsplitter: The reason for the block was "Abusing muntiple (sic) accounts" - that's what I meant by CU block; not the literal template, but a rationale that can only be based on CU evidence. Vh71196 was not a part of the en RfCU and had not been checked anywhere at the time you made the block. It's troubling you see no problem with that. Эlcobbola _talk 15:58, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

@Elcobbola: I seen a lot of non-cu admins using this block reason. There is no policy saying that admins can't use that. Special:DeletedContributions/Vh71196 is obvious case of COM:LL and likely a sock. Of course you can file a complain on COM:AN/U if you believe the block was made in violation of a existing commons policy or starting a discussion on COM:AN if you like to discuss if this block summary should only by used by CU's. Needless to say that all user having talk page access open, which means they can use {{Unblock}}, but i don't think we unblock flickrwasher. --Steinsplitter (talk) 16:02, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

@Elcobbola: w:WP:OTHERSTUFF. Either those admins have an RfCU somewhere or they're blocking inappropriately too. The LL argument is equally inappropriate; an indefinite block for two copyvios with no prior warning? Very troubling. Эlcobbola _talk 16:06, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

@Elcobbola: I unblocked the account - Please COM:AGF. --Steinsplitter (talk) 16:11, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

For the block reason i started a discussion here on AN. Thanks for your time and Best --Steinsplitter (talk) 16:16, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

@Steinsplitter: You appear not to have read COM:AGF. Saying you acted inappropriately =/= saying you acted maliciously. Эlcobbola _talk 16:23, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

@Elcobbola: Playing with words is not helpful. Sorry, Making a erros sometimes is human. I am not a robot. All your action on commons are 100% ok? --Steinsplitter (talk) 16:26, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

@Steinsplitter: What word play? Show me where I said you were not acting in good faith. Show me where I said I was perfect. You made a mistake; own it and move on. Эlcobbola _talk 16:29, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

@Elcobbola: Okay - then it was a misunderstanding (it looked to me like), i move on :-). Again thanks for your time. --Steinsplitter (talk) 16:35, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the Request for checkuser. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent requests related to this user should be made above, in a new section.