CheckUser policy: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 17:24, 28 October 2005

This is a proposal by Datrio (and modified quite a bit by user:Anthere), based on the discussions at CheckUser. If it'll get approved by the Foundation and the community in the near future, it will become a policy. (see the talk page for why it should NOT become a policy, or some horrible things will happen)

CheckUser status

CheckUser is a special interface for users with the checkuser permission. An editor with CheckUser status on a project can in particular check if a user isn't a sockpuppet of another user on this project (not on all projects). By using it, users are able to:

Determine from which IPs has a user edited the Wikimedia project
Determine the edits on the Wikimedia project of a specific IP (even when logged in)

This data is only stored for one week, so edits made prior to that will not be shown via CheckUser. A log is kept of who has made which queries with the tool. This log is available to those with the checkuser permission:

5 sep 2005 17:29 UserX got IPs for UserY
5 sep 2005 17:29 UserX got edits for 127.0.0.1

See Help:CheckUser for the user manual.

Access

Only few editors and Stewards are allowed to have the CheckUser status. Editors will only have CheckUser status locally.

On a project with an arbitration committee
Only editors approved by arbitrators may have CheckUser status. They should be at least two so that they can mutually control their activity, or use of the status will have to be controlled by a steward.

On a project with no arbitration committee
Two options are possible :

The community must approve at least two CheckUsers per consensus. Activity will be checked mutually. A user may get CheckUser status only If he agrees to have the CheckUser status. The user requesting check user status must request it within his local community and advertise this request properly (village pump, mailing list when available...). The editor must be aware of the privacy policy. After gaining consensus (70%-80%) in his local community, with at least 25-30 editors approval, the user should list himself under Requests for permissions/CheckUser (to be written). He should list his nickname and link to the page with the community's decision.

If an unsufficient number of voters do not allow to vote for two checkusers on a project, there will be no checkuser on that project. Editors will have to ask a Steward to check if UserX is a sockpuppet of UserY. To do so, simply add your request to Requests for permissions#CheckUser (to be written) listing these users and explaining why you ask for such a check (with links). You also need a community consensus (like above). The Steward will answer you if these two users are from the same IP, same proxy, same network, same country, or are they completly unrelated (see discussion for what the steward should more precisely say to the editor).

Removal of access

Any checkUser inactive for more than a year will be removed his access.

In case of abusive use of the tool, the steward or the editor with CheckUser privilege will be immediately removed the access. This will in particular happen if checks are done routinely on editors without a serious motive to do so (links and proofs of bad behavior should be provided).

Current users with access

Stewards (overall)
User:Tim Starling (overall)
User:David Gerard (en)
User:taw (pl)

Cette liste n'est clairement pas à jour. Anthere 23:29, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 Only few editors and Stewards are allowed to have the CheckUser status. Editors will only have CheckUser status locally.
-On a project with an arbitration committee, only arbitrators may have CheckUser status. They should be approved by the local arbcom. They should be at least two so that they can mutually control their activity, or use of the status will have to be controlled by a steward.
+'''On a project with an arbitration committee'''<br>
+Only editors approved by arbitrators may have CheckUser status. They should be at least two so that they can mutually control their activity, or use of the status will have to be controlled by a steward.
-On a project with no arbitration committee, the community must approve one or two CheckUsers per consensus. Activity will be checked mutually or by a steward.
+'''On a project with no arbitration committee'''<br>
+Two options are possible :
+The community must approve at least two CheckUsers per consensus. Activity will be checked mutually.
-A user may get CheckUser status only If he agrees to have the CheckUser status. The user requesting check user status must request it within his local community and advertise this request properly (village pump, mailing list when available...). The editor must be aware of the [[privacy policy]]. After gaining consensus (70%-80%) in his local community, the user should list himself under Requests for permissions/CheckUser (to be written). He should list his nickname and link to the page with the community's decision.
+A user may get CheckUser status only If he agrees to have the CheckUser status. The user requesting check user status must request it within his local community and advertise this request properly (village pump, mailing list when available...). The editor must be aware of the [[privacy policy]]. After gaining consensus (70%-80%) in his local community, with at least 25-30 editors approval, the user should list himself under Requests for permissions/CheckUser (to be written). He should list his nickname and link to the page with the community's decision.
+If an unsufficient number of voters do not allow to vote for two checkusers on a project, there will be no checkuser on that project. Editors will have to ask a Steward to check if UserX is a sockpuppet of UserY. To do so, simply add your request to [[Requests for permissions#CheckUser]] (''to be written'') listing these users and explaining why you ask for such a check (with links). You also need a community consensus (like above). The Steward will answer you if these two users are from the same IP, same proxy, same network, same country, or are they completly unrelated (''see discussion for what the steward should more precisely say to the editor'').
+==Removal of access==
-The status will be given for one year if the editor was approved by at least 30 people. If less than 30 people aproved the editor status, two options are possible.
+Any checkUser inactive for more than a year will be removed his access.
-If at least 5 people approved him (with at least 70% support), the status will be given for 15 days, this time being likely to be sufficient to fix a sockpuppet issue.  A steward will have to check whether the user of the tool was done appropriately.
+In case of abusive use of the tool, the steward or the editor with CheckUser privilege will be immediately removed the access. This will in particular happen if checks are done routinely on editors without a serious motive to do so (links and proofs of bad behavior should be provided).
-If no one is supported by at least 5 editors and at least 70% support, there's also a possibility of asking a Steward to check if UserX is a sockpuppet of UserY. To do so, simply add your request to [[Requests for permissions#CheckUser]] (''to be written'') listing these users and explaining why you ask for such a check (with links). You also need a community consensus (like above). The Steward will answer you if these two users are from the same IP, same proxy, same network, same country, or are they completly unrelated.
-Finally, there is a possibility that a check like this should be done ASAP - in such cases, a steward can act on his own, but he has to notify the community of such action and inform them of the results. If he won't, his CheckUser/Steward priviledges might be taken away.
-Every user is (privately) notified by a steward or by the user doing the check when CheckUser is run on him.
-In case of abusive use of the tool, the steward or the editor with CheckUser privilege will be immediately removed the access. This will in particular happen if checks are done routinely on editors without a serious motive to do so (links and proofs of bad behavior should be provided), or if the person fails to notify the user checked without a good reason.
 == Current users with access ==