Steward requests/Checkuser

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
< Steward requests(Redirected from Srcu)
Jump to: navigation, search
Requests and proposals Steward requests (Checkuser) latest archive
Checkuser icons
These indicators are used by CheckUsers and stewards for easier skimming of their notes, actions and comments.
{{Confirmed}}: 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}}: Symbol wait.svg Doing...
{{Inconclusive}}: Inconclusive Inconclusive {{StaleIP}}: Stale Stale
{{Declined}}: 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}}: 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 or policies.
  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



We generally do not associate specific IP addresses with registered accounts. Ruslik (talk) 19:32, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
These two IP addresses are proxies, one in Czech Republic, the other in USA. --Петър Петров (talk) 19:54, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
@Петър Петров: If the IP addresses are problematic then block them. The chances of a user who is abusing editing through them is slim, so about the only chance of a confirmation is through a slip-up. Do you really wish for us to continue?  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:01, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
The IP addresses were blocked immediately back then. There were no recent incidents with that user. I will request help again if need arises. Consider this request withdrawn. Thanks. --Петър Петров (talk) 20:51, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Closed as X mark.svg Not done. -- M\A 09:36, 19 April 2015 (UTC)


@Billinghurst: This is obviously related to #Pastho Wikipedia above. In light of your recent findings and discussion ongoing at SN you may wish to decide on this one. -- M\A 09:38, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Unrelated Unrelated  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:24, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Also not sure that I am comfortable with your choice of words. A different point of view is being exhibited, and you classify it as vandalism. More people have points of view and it is these people at fault.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:24, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[edit]

Duck It looks like a duck to me you don't need CU to deal with problematic editors.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:01, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

See also[edit]