Jump to content

Steward requests/Checkuser: Difference between revisions

Edit links
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Browse history interactively
← Older editNewer edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 33: Line 33:
== Cross-wiki (en and sk) ==
== Cross-wiki (en and sk) ==
On en-wiki, user -jkb- has filed an arbitration request against [[:en:User:Zacheus]] alleging, among other things, that on the Slovak wikipedia, this user, whose account there is [[:sv:User:V. Z.]], threatened to expose his real life identity. I would like to confirm whether en user Zacheus is the same editor as sk user V. Z. There does not seem to be much dispute about this, but it is possible that someone else is trying to discredit V. Z. or attack jkb from a false flag. (This is the continuation of a long-running dispute involving other accusations of imposter accounts and so forth.) Thanks. [[User:Thatcher131|Thatcher131]] 13:18, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
On en-wiki, user -jkb- has filed an arbitration request against [[:en:User:Zacheus]] alleging, among other things, that on the Slovak wikipedia, this user, whose account there is [[:sv:User:V. Z.]], threatened to expose his real life identity. I would like to confirm whether en user Zacheus is the same editor as sk user V. Z. There does not seem to be much dispute about this, but it is possible that someone else is trying to discredit V. Z. or attack jkb from a false flag. (This is the continuation of a long-running dispute involving other accusations of imposter accounts and so forth.) Thanks. [[User:Thatcher131|Thatcher131]] 13:18, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
:'''Confirmed''', identical beyond all doubts. [[User:MaxSem|Max<font size="+1">''S''</font>em]] 13:32, 13 June 2007 (UTC)



== en Wikiquote ==
== en Wikiquote ==

Revision as of 13:32, 13 June 2007

Shortcut:
RfCU
If there are no users with CheckUser rights on your project, and you wish for information on an editor or an IP address, please make a public request on this page, or contact a steward privately via email or IRC #wikimedia-stewards.

Stewards: All requests should be archived when fulfilled.

To request CheckUser access, use your local process, then see Requests for permissions#CheckUser access. This is the place to request CheckUser information. Note that temporary CheckUser access is not permitted.

Current requests

Please, when adding new requests, be sure to specify the wiki on which you want the check to be performed. Note also that many projects have a local checkuser procedures. Accordingly, checkuser information on these wikis should be requested locally. Thanks.

Wikipedia: ar • cs • de • en • fr • it • ja • ru • sv

Wikibooks: en

Commons: all languages

Meta: request here under heading Meta, below


Cross-wiki (en and sk)

On en-wiki, user -jkb- has filed an arbitration request against en:User:Zacheus alleging, among other things, that on the Slovak wikipedia, this user, whose account there is sv:User:V. Z., threatened to expose his real life identity. I would like to confirm whether en user Zacheus is the same editor as sk user V. Z. There does not seem to be much dispute about this, but it is possible that someone else is trying to discredit V. Z. or attack jkb from a false flag. (This is the continuation of a long-running dispute involving other accusations of imposter accounts and so forth.) Thanks. Thatcher131 13:18, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed, identical beyond all doubts. MaxSem 13:32, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

en Wikiquote

Given the similarities to the user below on the Meta request can I ask for a check on this user on Wikiquote. This seems unlikely to be a coincidence - thanks --Herby talk thyme 09:54, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also please those: user 2 and user 3, if appropriate. Those user names follow a same convention. --Aphaia 14:46, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Done completely unrelated IPs, both open proxies, blocked. drini [es:] [commons:] 22:20, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Persian Wikipedia

fa:User:Taeedxy was accused for having a sockpuppet account on persian wikipedia ANB. Even he had voted the same on some AfD with that suspicious account. For proving that he is innocence, Taeedxy asked me to request for his checkuser information here. Please check these two users on persian wikipedia. fa:User:Taeedxy and fa:User:Pls. Thanks in advance. Hessam 19:06, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fa:User:Rooh23 . I'm not an administrator . Above request is wrong beacaue:

  1. Hessam said : fa:User:Taeedxy was accused for having a sockpuppet . It's not true . The case that Hessam named accused really is an example . In that edit fa:User:Hoseyn_1 asked a question from fa:User:Taeedxy : if you and fa:User:Navid.k and fa:User:Pls have edits from same computer , what is your explanation? . A simple question not accusation . In the case there are 2 users are under question with fa:User:Taeedxy . But fa:User:Taeedxy select fa:User:Pls and asked from Hessam for check user . Then what about fa:User:Navid.k ?
  2. fa:User:Taeedxy allowed Hessam for check user but Hessam never asked from fa:User:Pls .

Excue me if my English is terrible :-)

Thanks . --Rooh23 05:18, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The reason is this. Anyway I think checkuser information is not needed anymore :-) Hessam 19:46, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Norwegian Wikisource (no.wikisource)

Two user accounts were used for "on wheels" vandalism today: no:s:Bruker:Willy on Wheels, no:s:Bruker:Rodelero. It would be intresting to know if both are the same. Thank you, --Thogo (talk) 22:30, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't it obvious they're the same? drini [es:] [commons:] 13:25, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would imagine that they were after some insight or action into the source of the user accounts. So many are open proxies or trojaned machines? --Herby talk thyme 13:59, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, it is not obvious, because Rodelero started with other vandalism (without "on wheels"). He did only one "on wheels" page move and only after I started to move the WoW-vandalisms back. So it might be a copycat. And both of them vandalized parallel. So it would be interesting if WoW does "work" this way (I mean using two accounts parallel) or not. --Thogo (talk) 16:23, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Done Confirmed to be the same (and yes it was obvious, he tried to make it look different, but it was ovious it was the same). drini [es:] [commons:] 18:56, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And the information that should come out here is exactly why such checks should be made - Drini may wish to consult the block log on en Wikipedia --Herby talk thyme 18:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What information? They being the same? It could be assumed it was obvous. Enwiki blocklog is irrelevant —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Drini (talk • contribs) 21:08, 1 Jun 2007 (UTC)
  • reset

The IP is the issue. It has now been CU checked on 6 different wikis by 7 CUs in just a month. The IP is blocked on en Wikipedia indefinitely as a "sock farm". I would suggest it is a source of considerable disruption to Wikimedia projects --Herby talk thyme 11:57, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

en.wq

Please run a check on admin Poetlister, per the recent Wikipedia developments. Cbrown1023 talk 23:51, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since there is no urgent need, I expect, so would you stewards please wait for us to build the consensus? The user in concern has a good history on that project, and it is not clear the consensus says this CU is necessary, as far as I understand. while I personally don't oppose to perform in certain circumstances. There are another opinion on the community, like waiting for the opposite side opinion. Thank you for your consideration, --Aphaia 00:15, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Aphaia, hopefully, if it is the Poetlister we all know and love, it will smash the accusations I have set against her (and were on the other wikis). If not, then we can just block the socks. Cbrown1023 talk 00:20, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Point taken, but technically there is no urgent need supposedly. Do you think however it is better to submit this request in more stable and communal basis just after one day? The data taken from check will be not so drastircally different, hopefully. --Aphaia 00:23, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Points taken, but since when does a CU request require community consensus? Please get on IRC so I can discuss this with you in real-time (and many other things). Cbrown1023 talk 00:24, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A steward has already confirmed the connection between the Wikiquote and Wikipedia identities, since it was used as even more corroborating evidence for the connection on Wikipedia. As the CheckUser looking at this on Wikipedia, I can talk to Wikiquote admins or any stewards doing further checks about the technical details, if desired. Of course, it is still up to the Wikiquote community to decide what to do with this information. Dmcdevit 00:30, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your offer, Dmcdevit, there are some concerns as long as I'm aware of: 1. If there is another account owned by Poetlister on English Wikiquote. 2. Since Cbrown1023 raised another issue the possible participation of Poetlister (enwq) to Wikimedia Review, this accusation without published proof is also in dispute (or seems so). I am not sure CU (who concerns our wikis and only) have this information, or do you have this kind of information too? 3. Who will hear that information offered from you: Although I put my trust on you, Dmsdevit, I'm hesitant to say for now "so please let me know". I have no good reason to ask you for information on the behalf of the community without consensus, I am only one of its 18 admins. As bureaucrat, I could boast to be trusted, but imo b'crats aren't voted for that purpose (as stewards aren't elected to rule the global arbcom). So still, I'd like you to wait for a while, and give us a time to deal it in order and on consensus. --Aphaia 00:49, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I understand if Wikiquote has no Arbitration Committee or any other clear place for me to contact, but I'm always wary of discussing technical details of saying publicly how we decided that there was sockpuppetry, both because we don't want to help anyone else evade detection, and because we don't want to reveal personal information. If a CheckUser is run, though, the steward can find me on IRC since it was a complex check. In any case, the point about WR, an attack site that has been used for the purpose of outing the identities of individuals before, has never been in question on Wikipedia, and the user has confirmed it in their own words. For this reason it is not a good idea for her to have access to sensitive deleted revisions. Dmcdevit 01:08, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
(indent changed) Thank you for your understanding, I understand it inappropriate to publish all gathered information through CU, and how the CUs and steward can check the log, not from my own experience though. And I agree with you generally it is not a good idea to give a devoted WR editor to grant sysop right on our projects. Just for your relief, as far as I know English Wikiquote hasn't suffered to be posted sensitive information, so at least currently being it sysop is not so harmful as on major Wikipedias. As for WR, you said "the user has confirmed it in their own words", so it might be not a secret; could you please a link where we can see it ourselves? --Aphaia 01:17, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The user is currently discussing it on the website [1]. I don't think Poetlister has made any secret of the fact. Dmcdevit 01:31, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wow! The invective from Wikipedia Review's "Poetlister" is sounds quite vicious and rather paranoid. I can see this is going to make it hard to support Poetlister even as an editor on WQ. Do we have evidence that this is the same person as our helpful Poetlister? Is it possible this is someone who merely registered as Poetlister, using the info readily available on her WP user page, to discredit her or opportunistically use her name to smear WP? (Sorry if I sound naive; it's just that this doesn't sound like our Poetlister.) ~ Jeff Q (talk) (also a WQ sysop) 02:18, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese Wikipedia

Please help me to check zh:User:Koi, zh:User:Nuee, 210.200.105.217, 203.79.252.195, 203.79.252.193, to clarify the owner is zh:User:Nuee or not because they caused edit war at articles about Vietnam with sockpuppets of zh:User:影武者.

And also check owner of zh:User:Ruralkeeps, zh:User:GY King, zh:User:Benjamin Lin, zh:User:Samson Lin is zh:User:影武者 or not, because their editing habit is similar, thanks.

More information, please see zh:WP:VIP. BrockF5 16:06, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. see zh:Wikipedia:互助客栈/方针#CheckUser--Shizhao 06:25, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Korean Wikipedia - 2

There are suspicious accounts that is regarded as a blocked user's sock puppets in Korean Wikipedia again. Please check the underlying IP addresses of them.

-- JongGuk 08:37, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Korean Wikipedia 3

There are several suspicious accounts, plz check this users. ko:사용자:221.140.226.125 knows much even though he edited nothing. And ko:사용자:Aaa removed page. His way of talking is analogous to 멀뚱이's.

More information : [2] ,[3],ko:위키백과:사랑방/2007년 4월#처음와서 놀랐는데 왜이렇게 콘텐츠가 없나요 -- Allen 04:53, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Malay Wikipedia

Vandalism-only accounts (with bad usernames) created on the Malay Wikipedia. We are looking to see if they were created by the same IP address, and if so, please block that IP with account creation disabled.Master2841 08:38, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism-only accounts (with bad usernames) created on the Malay Wikipedia. We are looking to see if they were created by the same IP address, and if so, please block that IP with account creation disabled, together with above request. Yosri 04:51, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done , each group comes from a single ip. Both IPs were blocked. drini [es:] [commons:] 03:32, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Meta

I'd appreciate it if someone would CU User:The Fourth Horseman. Given the contribution it would seem to be a cross wiki vandal with a known pattern. A check would help control attacks on this and other wikis. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 08:40, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Likely that this user is related to the Kazoo series. Contact me directly if you need more details. ++Lar: t/c 10:58, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, sorted and folk advised, quite a history there --Herby talk thyme 11:31, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Persian Wikipedia (2)

This account: fa:User:Spring2000 has been recently created and prominently used to attack other user of Farsi Wikipedia (fa:User:گردآفرید and fa:User:سندباد), and has been blocked for 24 hours due to misconduct and personal attacks. As the attacked accounts have been involved in edit wars perviously, specially with fa:User:Sepehrnoush, and regarding that the account user is very well oriented about wiki styles, this is possible that the account is a sockpuppet or meatpuppet. However, I do not have any evidence proving that Spring2000 is a sockpuppet for Sepehrnoush. I would like to request checkuser information for Spring2000 against active users of Farsi wikipedia. Your prompt answer is appreciated. Huji 09:18, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dhivehi Wikipedia

One of our users, namely Khazaanaa on Dhivehi Wiki posts on my user talk page, saying that he remembers registering himself on the same wiki previously. He assumes that on 22nd September 2006 he registered himself as Holhuashi. What he would like to know is whether a Check User could clarify the IP address this User Holhuashi has registered. If it is possible i would like to ask some one to check it.

Thanking You!!

--Glacious 10:25, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not done Is not possible to retrieve CU info from a date long in the past. drini [es:] [commons:] 20:32, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See also

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steward_requests/Checkuser&oldid=600694"