Meta:Requests for CheckUser information/Archives/2007-07

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Warning! Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created in July 2007, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion or the archives index.


User:Zarbon returns again... and now from Merseyside! @ en Wikiquote

q:User:Zarbon returns again... and now from Merseyside! returning sockpuppet and indef blocked. However given that this is part of a series and looking at the pleasant message left for me I'd like this checked. Drini may even want to do it! Thanks --Herby talk thyme 12:24, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Further pleasant comments on my talk page suggest that q:User:Zarbon returning again... from Ainsdale!!! will require checking too - thanks --Herby talk thyme 12:29, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Plus a stack more - check block/creation logs for "Zarbon *" - thanks --Herby talk thyme 12:41, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

On it. Effeietsanders 12:50, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done - sorry, can't find anything usefull. Effeietsanders 13:05, 14 July 2007 (UTC)


Please check it:n:Utente:CONIOLO and the IP . Thanks --valepert 13:39, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

WHY? drini [es:] [commons:] 13:03, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
it.wikinews is subjected to many vandalisms acts from a well known vandal during the last weeks. We think this user is the same person vandalizing all italian projects. See this log and this page to understand. --Tooby 13:29, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done. is one of the two IPs CONIOLO has used recently.--Shanel 17:44, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Выкинем пидарасов из Википедии! @ enwiki and ruwiki

Please checkuser the (indefinitely blocked for "too long a username") en:wikipedia:User:Выкинем пидарасов из Википедии! with the provocative Russian username which reads as "fags, go away from Wikipedia!". This user vandalised my English user page: [1], and the style in which he did this, closely resembles some known ru.wikipedia vandals and users. So I ask for info, if there is any connection to any user in ru.wikipedia or not. It also may be an open proxy, but generally our known ru.wikipedia homophobes are less worrying about being caught in en.wikipedia (see for example the case of Nikolay Kolpakov, which was caught on checkuser), and less frequently use open proxies on en.wikipedia than on ru.wikipedia, so the probability to find something - exists :-) Rombik 17:26, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done enwiki{Выкинем пидарасов из Википедии! (blocked)} shares an IP address and software profile with ruwiki{Сожжение Гомобеккера (blocked), Андрюшка Аналыхофф (blocked — Kalan 06:40, 12 July 2007 (UTC)), and}. Note that this does not prove a direct link; it is possible they are simply editing from the same school or workplace computer network.
The IP address does not seem to be an open proxy. There are a number of other users using different addresses on the same range, including some that appear to be legitimate users; please list specific names you suspect are related for further details. —{admin} Pathoschild 22:28:52, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Note, this is technically a cross wiki request, someone reading fast (under the original header, which I changed) might have rejected it since enwiki has a local CU process... WP:RFCU... ++Lar: t/c 13:30, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Sockpuppets @ viwiki

Please check the following users:

They are suspected of sockpuppetry. These users have each been blocked on different occasions, some of them frequently. They have been blocked mostly for personal attacks against other users and otherwise disrupting discussions going on at various article talk pages.

This list was compiled using information from three administrators at the Vietnamese Wikipedia: Vương Ngân Hà (via private e-mail), Apple (e-mail), and Thaisk (at the admin noticeboard). I've asked them to supplement this request with more specific information.

 – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 06:38, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

is there an impotant reason for the ckeck (like a vote)? They've been blocked and identified as sockpuppets, so what else is needed? drini [es:] [commons:] 04:30, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
It's been almost a month. Are we getting the supplemental info? drini [es:] [commons:] 15:48, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
For the moment: X mark.svg Not done Effeietsanders 21:27, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Sockpuppet @ nowiki

Please check:

There are reports that these two accounts belong to one person. Hando 20:27, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

As a bureaucrat at I will very strongly protest against use of checkuser against any user which has not done anything wrong, and I will if necessary complain against such use. Jeblad 18:02, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Nod. Can you explain the reason for asking these accounts to be checked ? Did one do something inappropriate ? Anthere 23:34, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
We won't know that until we have the results of CheckUser, will we. There are however strong indications of sockpuppetry, and in order to restore confidence in the adminship at nowiki, we need a definite answer. Jeblad is biased in this matter and in any case cannot be allowed to dictate who shall be subject to CheckUser or not. The only way for nowiki to move forward is to have an unequivocal answer as to whether the adminship is breaking the rules or not. 05:10, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
There are no complaints at no.wp. If a checkuser should be run against an ordinary user and an admin without any discussion at the involved community it would be highly unusual. If Hando has any complaint he or she should first go to the involved community and open a discussion there, with complaints about what they have done, and why Hando believe a checkuser is the proper action. As a sidenote, there are no policy at no.wp against multiple user accounts, the only thing to my knowledge are you are not allowed to vote from multiple accounts and and you should not hold admin rights for more than one account. The user «C» has rejected any proposals to run for adminship. As I see it, this is a blatant attempt of outing an user at no.wp without any real reason. Jeblad 13:35, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

As Jeblad very well knows, there is widespread dismay among nowiki users about how the adminship is operating. Noorse is part of the adminship, and appears to be breaking the very rules she is supposed to enforce. CheckUser is not about "outing" users, rather it is about revealing sockpuppetry and rulebreaking. The CheckUser service protects the privacy of users and is not used in a punitive way.

Rulebreaking is especially serious when it is committed by administrators. Instead of trying to block a CheckUser to protect his friend, Jeblad should support it to make it clear once and for all whether "C" is a sockpuppet, and thus play a part in moving the nowiki community forward. By protesting against this routine procedure, Jeblad is instead adding to the community's disgruntlement and acknowledging that there is truth to the allegations of sockpuppetry by his friend.

Now, I repeat the request for an unbias steward to run a CheckUser - in accordance with the standard privacy policy - on the following suspected sockpuppeteer/sockpuppet:

Thanks for your help. 17:19, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Please state clearly:
    • On what the suspicions are based, there has to be a serious suspicion, and I have not yet seen good reason for that.
    • Why the sockpuppetry was illegal, i.e. where they participated in the same discussion, voted both, pretended that there was more support then there actually is etc.
Then we can truely consider the request. Thanks, Effeietsanders 18:19, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
The suspicions are based on contrib history, wording and language, and issue involvement.
Both "Noorse" and the alleged sockpuppet "C" have participated in the same discussions, the latest probably being no:Wikipedia:Tinget#Valg av administratorer?, a highly controversial debate regarding the adminship.
Regards, 20:23, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
That discussion has nothing to do with sockpuppetry at all, and is not what I will call "a highly controversial debate regarding the adminship". The debate resolves around one user which posts a note whereby he claims admins at no.wp is "incompetent". After the user starts attacking various admins «C» asks him to stop. 16:56, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

The user Noorse has now been elected to the board of Wikimedia Norway. It is therefore now more vital than ever that we get a definite answer as to whether these two accounts are related. Sockpuppetry is even more serious now that the user fills an official position on the board of a local chapter With reference to the above-mentioned grounds and other information, I ask that you please carry out the CU and report whether the two accounts are related. 05:33, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

This is outrageous! I'm a user at no.wikipedia too, and I agree with Jeblad. Noorse has done nothing wrong, and she has not done anything that would make her a sock puppeteer suspect. Please don't carry out this CU, we both know what the outcome is going to be. — H92 (t · c · no) 09:16, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
After a quick look in the logs and contribs, it looks like User:Hando was created only for this purpose. This checkuser request is the only contribution this user has made, a few minutes after (s)he registered. We've had a period of time where there has been several sock-accounts insulting and making personal attacks against administrators, and other active users, on the Norwegian Wikipedia, it looks like this CU-request is the same, an attempt of outing an administrator and an active user at the Norwegisn Wikipedia. Let me also quote something; Anthere asks the requester: "Can you explain the reason for asking these accounts to be checked ? Did one do something inappropriate ?" and an IP-address answers "We won't know that until we have the results of CheckUser, will we.". It's clear that there won't be any checkuser without a proper reason. — H92 (t · c · no) 10:41, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
There's no point in trying to hold back the CheckUser. There won't be any way of restoring confidence in the adminship at nowiki until we have CU confirmation of sockpuppetry. As mentioned above, CU is not used to "out" users, it is used to reveal sockpuppetry. The privacy of users is protected. 13:29, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I'm not, and apperenlty other stewards aren't either, convnced of the need of this CU-request. So: X mark.svg Not done Effeietsanders 21:30, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I request a second opinion as Effeiets is Dutch and probably a friend of Noorse. As to the evidence and need of this CU, I refer to the information stated above concerning contrib history, wording and language, and issue involvement; and participation in controversial discussions using the two accounts. 11:11, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

You have already three opinions. Jeblad 11:33, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
Come on... "Effeietsanders is Dutch so probably a friend of Noorse?" What's next: asking for a checkuser who lives - at least - in an other continent? Your insinuations are plain ridiculous... Dolledre 11:39, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
The user "Hando" demanding CheckUser writes that: "there is widespread dismay among nowiki users about how the adminship is operating". This is not of my knowledge and I have been participating in Norwegian Wikipedia for over 2 years. There is no such widespread dismay reflected at the main discussion page "Tinget", and the user account "Hando" is unknown to me. Ulflarsen 22:08, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Yiddish vote (crosswiki, Meta and yiwiki)

There has been a vote on meta about yi sysopelection. I see the vote on Requests for permissions/Yiddish Wikipedia as not a vote, but at least it is a poll. People have heavy suspicions that there is sockpuppetry here. I support those feelings, based on my experience earlier in yiwiki (see [2], and hereby request a checkuser for the voters against, which are suspected to be sockpuppets (at least partially) from Yidel, user:יודל. I further request a full checkuser of all voters, as I have severe worries. Very likely more relevant information to identify sockpuppets can be obtained from the corresponding accounts (as far as existing) on yiwiki. Please see if better information can be found that way. Also note the votes on [3]. I would also want to request CU here for, for the votes after the header רוני פאר סיסאפ. This is with the same reasons as stated above. Please see whether people voted twice, which is considered illegal. Please block accounts that have voted twice on meta, as well (on meta), and copy a report if there is any on the voting page of the yiddish Wikipedia. Thanks a lot in advance. I realize that it must be a hell of a job. I will not perform the CU myself, as I consider myself too much involved. Effeietsanders 21:22, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

also i would like to check for open proxy's if involved thanks--יודל 13:09, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
I am requesting to be contacted by email or IRC before you make public the results --Jeo100 14:05, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
No. This isnt normal procedure if u voted twice u know already don't play games here.--יודל 21:15, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
I think we may not uphold that election. It was not advertised on yi, and several users who had never edited yi: voted. So it's not a "yiddish community" consensus. drini [es:] [commons:] 21:16, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Nod, I think all agree on that. I think this can only be seen as a straw poll. But none the less this would be abuse of sockpuppets if you "vote' twice. Hence my request. I realize I must sound a bit cryptic, but to me this is all partly just as confusing as for you guys. I have announced a new vote on yiwiki btw to make sure the community vote is clear, fair etc. Effeietsanders 21:39, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
I can perform that check here (but not on yi), but not at this very second, about to get on an airplane. If it still needs doing when I get a chance I will. Effeitesanders, please, mail me with more info if there is any info that should not be made public... thanks! ++Lar: t/c 23:23, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
There's no point on doing it now, isn't it? Let's wait for the real thing. drini [es:] [commons:] 23:24, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
What do you mean "let's wait for the real thing"?? Thanks. Perhaps we should discuss further on the checkuser mailing list? ++Lar: t/c 03:52, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
I mean the new elections, done properly within yi:, with a clear set of rules. It's a bad precedent to allow people to come at meta, setup votes here, where people from other projects vote, where we have problems verifying accoutns belonging or duplicated from the local project, and after it, gain adminship here and get local sysophood, specially on wikis with a live community. drini [es:] [commons:] 10:32, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Recovered from archive -- The request has not yet been fulfilled? I guess there was a mistake. Please make a thorough check for the votes, although the vote on meta was not a valid vote, people tried probably to abuse sockpuppets, and afaik that is not allowed. please consider also checking for open proxies and rangechecking. Thanks, Effeietsanders 10:30, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm sure it's understood without me asking that, but just to be sure, when doing the CU, please make sure to that against the already struckout voters as well. Thank you.--Shmaltz 17:39, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
I beg all stewards to stay away from further requests of Effeiet Sanders he has clearly showing very aggressive bias on one side here. by pushing this votes on a community he does not speak its language, while our local sysop dror has explicitly declared the votes illegitimate, he has made his own rules that a user who has no contributions to the main name space is considered in his eyes a user and even if he voted as a sock puppet in the past he will except his vote here if he voted now only once. this is unprecedented rules that are in affect designed by him to push us those votes. Please do not make any check user now because this is helping to hijack our project. and a check user should only be maid if it is in the interest of the project not against it--יודל 19:34, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
max sem has put this back from the archives althoghou most users have declared not to make a checkuser. please consider checkuser responsibility's are meant only to strike out sockpupets, we made allready once a checkuser and the sockpupets where not striked out and reverted by user effeitsanders with disregard to the tool so please refrain here from using it again. thanks--יודל 20:24, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Stewards won't upholad an election done outside the local project. Elections must be done within each community for several reasons. Therefore, the meta elections is pointless and there's no need to checkuser. Archiving would be a good idea. drini [es:] [commons:] 21:11, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I kindly disagree here with you, because it will still be a straw poll, and voting twice in such a poll is as well misleading and thus not allowed. Besides the fact that one of the two polls I mentioned is not on metawiki but on yiwiki, and was set up as a poll, of which the results were unusuable because of all the people striking eachother and interpreting rules differently. But if you are confident of your decision, I'll accept that, and so be it. Effeietsanders 09:38, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
I disagree with efiet sanders he has reverted votes of sockpupets and vandals who were declared so by the last check user efiet sanders has requested. if he disrespects the results by pathoschild and max sam and reverts edits that those guilty sockpuptes use, why is he asking this time to make check user again? just to let the sockpuptes of yesterday and block sockpupoets of today. he is evidently to pushy for this please ignore him. checkuser must not be used by manipulation but strictly for identifying vandals or block sockpuptes not to further anybody s agenda--יודל 18:00, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Another vote

And another vote on yiwiki has been finished. This was now a real vote, and the results are awaiting confirmation by CU. Please also take the older polls in consideration when checking for CU. Please read the 'voting rules' in English above about the striking of votes. please strike both votes if you find that someone voted twice. Please also check the votes that have already been stroked. This is the vote: [4] . Thanks for your time. If wanted, I am willing to assist with the CU, but I will not do the CU myself, as I am too deep into this matter. Effeietsanders 08:08, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

This vote is also not real. it was manipulated by EffeietSanders himself he made up the rules that privies sockpupets and open vandals who were blocked by pathoschild and other stewards may vote, and users with zero contribution to the main namespce are eligible while he striked out legitmete users with well over hundredth edits in the main namespace only because they are not a month active against his own policy. Efeit has blocked users who disagree with him. He has declared himself above our community. This is not a way to make a sysop and silence consensus from most users who don't want this candidate as there leader who has declared he will block against everything and everybody against wikimedia policy. This guy was allready sysop and the ofice has took away his power because he abused it day and night. I beg all stewreds and checkusers to use great caution here and to understand that our project is too small to let it be governed by itself. Please do not help in any way Effeit here to manipulate and force his own election with his own rules. Thanks--יודל 10:50, 10 July 2007 (UTC)


Yes check.svg Done So far, the 10 accounts that voted look different, now I'll compare with the ones stricken out

  1. --שמאלץ רעדן / בליץבריוו 23:55, 17 יוני 2007 (UTC)
  2. --אלץ-ווייסער 02:11, 18 יוני 2007 (UTC)
  3. ----יודישער שרייבער 17:42, 18 יוני 2007 (UTC)
  4. -- --י. לעבאוויטש 14:06, 19 יוני 2007 (UTC)
  5. --יעקלראציגער 13:23, 20 יוני 2007 (UTC)
  6. --פוילישער 16:43, 24 יוני 2007 (UTC)
  7. --יואל.מ 16:54, 28 יוני 2007 (UTC)  (user:joel.m ? )
  8. --קאצקער 19:50, 28 יוני 2007 (UTC)
  1. --יודל 14:21, 17 יוני 2007 (UTC)
  2. --Amsgila123 23:40, 19 יוני 2007 (UTC)

Nothing obvious on the stricken ones either. (there are hundreds of ips involved in this, however). So, should we process the results of the election as well? drini [es:] [commons:] 13:03, 11 July 2007 (UTC) drini [es:] [commons:] 12:32, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

the results are clear most ips are sockpupets from phones and ip changers, names that warnt used in months were suddenly awakened to vote and blocked users and privies sockpuptes should not be counted. but thats my opinion. Please if somebody can talk to Danny to ask him what to do he was involved from day one as the founder steward burocart and sysop of this project, and was elected sysop again last month. consensus is clear here this candiate is a dangeres felow the ofice was allready forced to desysop him, whoever does again this move to make him sysop will have to deal with his further abuse of the rest of the community. because all the striked out votes are a clear majourety here. so the circumstences are very very blured and murky. good luck--יודל 13:35, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Since all stricken out used the same edit pattern and this user is known to use an ISP with dynamic IP’s, can you verify this? If there are form the same ISP. It’s not fair that 1 user with a dynamic IP should manipulate a wiki with “100” different “socketpuppet‘s” is there a way to verify this?--Jeo100 18:02, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
I say the vote is valid. Precisely becuase nobody could create accoutns and vote to rig the electon. Only stablished users (with more than 1 month and more than 100 edits) could vote, and they are all different. But that's a personal opinion. I only did the checkuser job, and it seems to me, there were no sockpuppets on the valid votes. drini [es:] [commons:] 18:51, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Whats really sure is that one user was idetefied by pathoschild as using a huge ip range. and he said explicitly on pathoschilds talk page in meta that he writes from a network with 20 ips. So compared with the fact that users who werent active more then months, we cannot hope the checkuser tool to fish them out. what we know for sude is that efiet has reverted some votes here that were identified on privies checks to be sockpupets so he is clearly puting his opinion on the community he doesn't speak its language. My personal opinion is to ask Danny or Harel or Dror the existing elected sysops of the community what to do with these votes. If it is a consensus against this candidate or for him.--יודל 21:58, 11 July 2007 (UTC)


please check the following users . They seems to be sockpuppet accounts of ml:user:praveenp

All the four users were voted in this page.--Jasz 01:09, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Accounts have been inactive for too long, so checkuser can't provide any information. drini [es:] [commons:] 05:29, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you--Jasz 09:59, 14 July 2007 (UTC)


This user goes around wikipedia all day, changing articles that relate to Hugo Chavez and Venezuela in general. The changes are from what I have seen 100% pro-Chavez. In one instance about an election article, there were two main candidates, in the article there were three and honestly it was debatable if he was a main candidate. When this candidate fell out of the race he did not endorse any candidate but, the party he had formed supported the opposition candidate to Hugo Chavez. When I included this beside his name, the candidate was completely moved to the list of "other candidates" by a user that had weeks and weeks of supportingly to change it beforehand. Conveniently enough the list of main candidates is at the top of the article and the list of other candidates is at the bottom. This is but one instance of the bias that I have seen and I suspect him to be an astroturf sockpuppet working in Venezuela for the Chavez government in some way. This would not be utterly surprising to me or anyone else that knows how the Chavista government operates and this is not the first instance where wikipedia has had to deal with the issue of major pro-Chavez bias in some articles. The 13th 4postle 14:05, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Requests for checkuser on the English Wikipedia, to which I presume you refer, should be made at en:Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser. This page is intended where a wiki does not have any local checkusers. Adambro 14:16, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

User: is npov and others @ meta

I've been in touch with Larry on aspects of this but in case I've missed anything & so that the community can see this I request the following checks. The IP has a long history of disruption across wikis including abuse, spam, vandal accounts as well as continually appealing blocks. is npov (talk contribs deleted contribs logs block user block log CentralAuth AllContribs checkuser) encyclopedia (talk contribs deleted contribs logs block user block log CentralAuth AllContribs checkuser)

And while there maybe

CheckUser (talk contribs deleted contribs logs block user block log CentralAuth AllContribs checkuser)

The IP mentioned continually pleads that it not an open proxy - it would be interesting to find out if another one is involved with this IP. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 17:19, 31 July 2007 (UTC)


This IP has indeed been a source of vexation on many many wikis. Try this search on google and you'll see pages of information. I cannot determine if it's open proxy or not, but many many other admins and CUs suspect it is. That's good enough for me. I feel that User:.anaconda's 1 year block should stand I think. This IP is also the source of a nest of users who all seem to be up to no good. All of the following are related to each other and this IP.

The log of results of what I did to investigate this is available for analysis by other CU's on request. ++Lar: t/c 21:19, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Well worth the effort & thanks (I confess I nearly listed a couple of the others but guessed they would come out of it anyway!) --Herby talk thyme 08:50, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

User: @ Meta

Ah well - no time to get bored is there. Another IP (Special:Contributions/ with quite a history has decided to declare Cornbridge (talk contribs deleted contribs logs block user block log CentralAuth AllContribs checkuser) a sock puppet of w:User:Cplot. --Herby talk thyme 19:09, 31 July 2007 (UTC)


This case as presented, if it were to be checked, would require a steward to do it as we at present do not have a CU that holds the power on en:wp and on meta. However in my considered judgement (and since I just established that Cornbridge is something else, which makes it easy enough) I'd tend to decline this check request... cplot certainly has shedfuls of socks, as any CU who searches the log will find, but that's just a red herring in my view... because this IP user is related to an already blocked user:

As to whether that transitively leads back to cplot, who cares, really WP:DENY, I say. ? ++Lar: t/c 21:36, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Again thanks but with the note that - given en wp as being the area of interest of many puppets - a CU with rights here and en wp would have their uses at times --Herby talk thyme 08:53, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Emrrans @ meta

Per: [5] which reports on a claim of puppetry by the user Emmrans here: [6]

++Lar: t/c 18:24, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

  • A user claims sockpuppetry of himself here and requests for blocking two of his accounts. Please check if the mentioned accounts are really of the same person. Thank you. --Thogo (talk) 18:21, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

No relation found between Emmrans and Aeonimitz. Contributions of Lokey3310 are too old to check. Possible relation based on contribs (same pages edited) but I just don't think so based on gut feel. I characterise this assertion by Emmrans as spurious or malicious. Grant his boon (of being blocked) and leave the other users be. ++Lar: t/c 18:39, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I would like to fight for justice for him, w:ms:Pengguna:Emrrans. I'm also an editor in this Malay Wikipedia, in fact, an ADMINISTRATOR there!! I'm a Malaysian, and so for Emrrans. I would like to explain why no relation is found between Emrrans and w:ms:Pengguna:Aeonimitz. It's because we Malaysian do not have fixed IP. We keep using different IPs provided by our ISP each time we connect to the internet. So there is no surprise that you see they do not have the same IP. He confessed over there too (Aeonimitz, first and Lokey3310, second). Now he's making a request for adminship, so please, KEEP HIM A CLEAN NAME!! Please, I beg you people, UNBLOCK HIM!! --Edmundkh 09:35, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Shall other Malaysians especially Malay Wikipedia admins like User:Aurora be my witness! --Edmundkh 09:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but your argument is very difficult for me to understand. I don't understand why it is "keeping his name clean" to admit this claim. I think it even the opposite. If it is true, it is hardly acceptable. Also meta:user:Aeonimitz claimed he was an active sysop on Malaysian Wikipedia [[7]], the request for adminship in very different names sounds pointless and confusable. --Aphaia 11:57, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Regarding "keeping his name clean", look, now he is demanding to be an administrator again there (was once one last year, resigned a few months later). Now he is back with that old name and is now making another RfA. So, think, if the newcomers see him doing his RfA, then see him being blocked indefinitely here, what do they think!?

OK, let me tell you the whole story now (as far as I know). Last year, when he was an admin as w:ms:User:Emrrans in the Malay Wikipedia, he caused some troubles and problems over there. But I am not clear what happened, as I haven't register over there yet (I registered there in March of this year). I only know that he made religious attack on another user (maybe also an admin at that time, but now resigned too). Then he was shame and regretful for what he had done, which was seen as misusing his adminship. He resigned as admin, then he asked to become an ambassador for a second chance. But later he resigned, I don't know why. So, he created a sockpuppet, w:ms:User:Aeonimitz. From there he started a new chapter of life.

He contributed under that account and finally, he became an admin under this name in June of this year. He was such a good pretender, because he, being a Malaysian, claimed himself from Brunei when he was using this new name. But being an admin under this new name, he caused problem again! He simply blocked a user who said something that caused his anger, and later he perform religious attack against me after I've done something wrong that made him angry. Finally, he resigned after being an admin for 10 days.

Then he's back under Emrrans. He is regertful for what he had done, and wish that we give him another chance. Now, he has 2 supports (including me), 3 opposes and 1 neutral. I wish you people help to give him another chance, please.

And no matter how, even though I don't want him to be an admin again, I'd still post this appeal for him, because you people may not know about the internet in Malaysia, so I've to teach you people something here. I repeat, WE MALAYSIANS DO NOT HAVE FIXED IP ADDRESS, so that's why you see Emrrans and Aeonimitz having different IPs. And I hope the reason you decline is because he misuse his power in the Malay Wikipedia, and NOT JUST SIMPLY BECAUSE YOU DO NOT SEE ANY RELATION BETWEEN THESE NAMES. I don't want to see another Malaysian user being wronged here.

Another thing, we prefer to call the language "Malay" or "Bahasa Melayu" instead of "Malaysian" or "Bahasa Malaysia". It's also spoken in Brunei and Singapore. And Indonesian is also conseidered as a Malay language. --Edmund the King of the Woods! 10:35, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your explanation. I got it as the following:
User Aeonimitz pretended his identification and applied for foundation wiki access. He haven't however confessed us his disguise.
I think it enough disruptive and due to this disruption we have no reason to welcome this guy regardless what kind of username he obtains. Also, I smell here flag-hunting. But it is my personal opinion, of course. --Aphaia 11:07, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Whatever he had done under Aeonimitz is all history. Now I'm only asking his real identity, Emrrans, to be unblocked, as I feel that he is being wronged. --Edmund the King of the Woods! 11:50, 28 July 2007 (UTC)


We want to verify if an:usuario:Qiyo is a sockpuppet of an:usuario:Chabi. He is noticed of block so we think he has created a puppet in order to avoid a possible block. Thanks --Willtron 14:09, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done It's confirmed that Qiyo is a sockpuppet of Chabi. Suerte. drini [es:] [commons:] 20:06, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

IP has been the source of various spambot and vandalbot accounts on other wikis, confirmed on CU logs. en:v:User:GCSEMatt is apparently an account, the userpage has some "hints" (linkspamming to one of those radio stations has been an issue elsewhere, I'm told). IP owner is following a pattern of excuses on wv, having done so to other en.wb checkusers and admins. Requesting check to see if the IP is hosting other vandal accounts. --SB_Johnny|talk|books 09:00, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

The user mentioned above just went vandal ("Do Briefs Stink?" stuff). Please check the user's IP and block if there have been other vandals using it. Account's IP is currently autoblocked.--SB_Johnny|talk|books 11:39, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done drini [es:] [commons:] 15:53, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Challiyan @ mlwiki

Please check the following users in malayalam wikipedia. They seems to be sockpuppet accounts of ml:user:challiyan

All the four users were voted in this page.

regards --Vssun 22:48, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Challiyan and Shinysajan have the same user agent string (although Challiyan used Opera too) and were on one IP on overlapping time spans. They also shared other IPs, but they used them between 2-3 weeks apart. There was one IP that Challiyan, Shinysajan, and Devanshi all shared on overlapping times. Challiyan and Shinysajan had the same user agent string. Devanshi's was almost the same, except for using MSIE 7.0 and having additional information in his user agent string.
Devanshi and Mangoskin shared an IP, Devanshi using it 18 minutes after Mangoskin. They also had the same user agent string, the same one I mentioned above.
All the IPs these three users shared appear to be dynamic, but I don't know how dynamic.
On an unrelated note, a sysop should probably delete this image, uploaded by Challiyan under a false license. It is fair use, not creative commons.--Shanel 04:46, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
License has been fixed--Vssun 05:35, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Please check one more user name ml:user:Aruna against the above four accounts

with thanks and regards --Vssun 05:35, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

if there was an overlapping of times does that mean those are socks or people using different accounts from proxy servers. deos that in any way mean that challiyan has created all the above accounts. to me it feels like they are all using proxy servers if it the times are overlapping.. ml:user:challiyan

Your questions don't make sense. Either you are not aware of what proxy servers are or you are merely creating a smokescreen. The checkuser has been able to establish that all the given users shared an IP with Challiyan at some time or other, which means that all the accounts are related. The checkuser who are not familiar with the dynamic nature of Indian IPs would like somebody more technically proficient to look at the case. The checkuser has not given any room to doubt the presence of proxy servers. Overlapping can happen if you use two accounts contemporaneously on two browsers. Actually, it is clear that you use more than browser. The IP Challiyan uses is that of Asianet ISP (an ISP in India). The IPs of this ISP change with each connection, apparently. The contributions of the said user under IP edits establish this clearly. 13:23, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
I am not very technically proficient, so I tend to refrain from interpreting the results of a checkuser. If you'd like I'll get another steward to take this request.--Shanel 05:24, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Kindly do the same --Vssun 06:00, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Apperently Yes check.svg Done, interpretation wanted. Effeietsanders 21:26, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Challiyan and Shiny sajan has same IP (Asianet) but Devanshy has a different IP (Reliance) It makes sense. but alle of them have used one or the other accounts. sensible? ml:user:challiyan


The user had posted sensitive personal information of other users (who had disguised their identity), including personal photos on commons and cell phone number on fa.wikipedia. S/he was verbally very abusive too. The user is now permanently blocked. Since s/he was quite familiar with wikipedia right from the beginning, s/he was most likely a sockpuppet. We need him/her checked against other contributors on Persian wikipedia. Thanks.Behaafarid 09:32, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

ps: has impersonated the banned user. Behaafarid 03:41, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Done. Bilijacks, Frida kahloo2003, H.pp, Koori, Jkl, Marya24, and Nilo0o have the same software profiles and operated from the same Internet service provider octet within the last month, and are probably related. Arash good and Talamkhani have slightly different software profiles, and might be related.
Note that these checkuser results should only be used to strengthen other evidence, not as absolute proof. It is possible that these are distinct users operating from a standard environment like a school. —{admin} Pathoschild 06:12:32, 09 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for assistance. Zahiri 06:27, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
My thanks as well! 22:58, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Roberta F.@sh.wikt

  • Impersonation of administrator of Croatian Wikipedia (wikipedia:hr:User:Roberta F.; user on sh.wikt asked for admin rights, but I personally know Roberta and I checked that via email). While sh.wikt is not an active project (will become in the next month or two; I am the only user/bureaucrat there), impersonation is a serious offense and admins from relevant projects (Serbian, Croatian, Serbo-Croatian and maybe Bosnian, too) should know who did impersonation (if it is possible). --Millosh 20:26, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Speaking of which, it seems that the alleged impersonator (wikipedia:sh:User:Roberta F.) tried the same stunt on sh Wikipedia. Later it appeared as new user (wikipedia:sh:User:Roberta Flod). --OC Ripper 11:24, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
I am in contact with Roberta (I'll call her to come here) and she told me about the problem with She is User:Roberta Flod, but User:Roberta F. is not her account. --Millosh 15:21, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Can you please also check who created the user Roberta F on the Polish wikipedia [8] , as I have been targeted by an imposter impersonating me. References were made about my account on the Croatian Wikipedia, together with some derogatory references about another admin on the Croatian Wikipedia. --Roberta F. 11:47, 10 August 2007 (UTC)


  • Both impostor accounts are almost certainly registered by the same person.
  • No other accounts on pl: match his/her characteristics.
  • Because of this user's characteristics, I'm unable to tell for sure if it's someone on hrwiki or shwiktionary, there are just too many unrelated matches. Further suspicions will be sent to checkuser-l for local checkusers to consider. MaxSem 14:49, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
    • After some coopertion with Croatian checkusers it has been determined that it's User:Haker from hr: and wikt:sh:. MaxSem 15:23, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Vandalbot and Wikipedia on Wheels @ fowiktionary

Hello, please perform checkuser on those 2 users to find out the IP address used so it can be blocked, many thanks in advance, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 18:58, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello? --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 11:33, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done: dynamic IPs, no range block is appropriate. MaxSem 11:48, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Lizix and Fantasy Gal @ simplewiki

We suspect these users to be sockpuppets of one of two banned users. Please check whether these accounts were generated from the IP (or similar IP in this range - formerly used by Kimberly Ashton, banned for abusing sockpuppets). Also please check whether they match the IP of the banned user 'JustJacklen' from EN (it'll be in the CheckUser logs I hope, from when it was last done - user also recently created sockpuppets on Simple). They seem to fit the profiles of both of these users. Thanks, Archer7 16:50, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Lilly Davidson, Lizix, Denise, Zoey, Mariyah, Shaericell, Jessicagirl, Lindsay1980, Choosnink, JustJacklen,, Fantasy Gal, Kathleen, Carrie,, Amandine, Hollywood and KitKatKelly are all the same --Cspurrier 23:14, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Keepspiano @ ruwiki

ru:User:Keepspiano reason for this request is: [9] The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk • contribs) 11:29, 19 Jul 2007 (UTC)

Please translate that rationale. drini [es:] [commons:] 23:32, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

translateion: -- 05:53, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I ask to check up repeatedly the check-users not wiki in Russian. There are suspicions that check made check-users wiki in Russian false. I know some participants mentioned in check made check-users wiki in Russian, one of them I.

The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk • contribs) 08:28, 20 Jul 2007 (UTC)

Enough trolling, Itemsoccur. This will not help you to get unbanned. MaxSem 14:06, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Account creation log @alswiki

The responsible IP for the account creations @alswiki at 2.37 am (today) is needed. Account creation log, see also User rename log. Reason: insulting nicknames. It should be a well-known troll which had CUs @dewiki for similar reasons. The IP is needed to make a provider complaint (there has been one successfully a few weeks ago). I strongly assume the troll uses Cablecom as ISP. If you can't / won't trust me, please handle the information to de:Benutzer:Bdk which has CU-rights @dewiki (here, alswiki is affected). He can also give further information. Thank you --Umschattiger 10:02, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

This is obviously the same long-time Swiss troll as in this case (see there for the known IP range; Pathoschild and some other stewards also know more about this case).
Umschattiger is a trusted user and admin on als.wikipedia. Since these severe and repeated personal attacks (a pretty rare real name is used) are an extreme sort of vandalism, and as specific IPs and the general IP range of the troll are already widely known (also through anon edits by the attacker himself), I would support – according to the policy – to handle over the results directly to Umschattiger but only privately by e-mail in this case (note: specific IPs and points in time are needed for a provider complaint).
I'm available on #wikimedia-checkuser if there are any questions. --:Bdk: 10:33, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Hmm, anybody out there? --:Bdk: 22:10, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
Is it a Steward you need? If so, and it is urgent, you may want to ask on the Steward's channel, or try emailing a steward directly? Just a suggestion. ++Lar: t/c 04:21, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
This was already done, on IRC and per mail, more than once and not only by me. Yes, als.wikipdia has no local Checkusers, therefore some Steward is needed … and yes, it's (more or less) urgent (see above). --:Bdk: 01:28, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done, the IP used for all is Jon Harald Søby 21:05, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Modemac @ enwikisource

s:User:Modemac wants to have s:User:Eep²'s work deleted. However his first edit after registering was redirecting his user page to w:User:Eep². His next edit changed it to w:User:Modemac, and I cannot help but become suspicious that these to accounts are the same person. Eep²'s first edit was also redirecting his user page to en.WP. Modemac knew that Eep² had contributions on en.WS despite not being even remotely active there. They both have the same habits with their first edit to a new wiki. They both have similar interests (looking at Modemacs userpage on en.WP). With the slip of "declaring" himself to be Eep², I think this is all really suspect. I can connect the Modemac accounts from en.WS to en.WP (where Eep² is banned), but that still leaves some options as to what the full story is without a checkuser on the en.WS accounts. So could you please look into these two accounts? Thanks--BirgitteSB 13:37, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Challiyan@Ml.Wikipedia again

ml:user:Challiyan used several sockpuppets on a vote and all of them was banned. soon he made another sockpuppet and abused admins and others. I think he has not stopped. ml:user::Aruna is it seems his sock. It is urgent for the proper woking of Malayalam Wikipedia that all information on his sockpuppets are released. he is abusing wikipedia.

suspected sockpuppets of Challiyan

(some he says his, they are not including here)

thanks for your service. Boban 16:32, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Devanshy is my sock. its been clearly mentioned in the user page of mine, now its been used by my betterhalf, Dr.Raji.

I stongly deny the convictions made by user Boban. If I abused any of the admin let them block me? moreover the user Boban is not an existing user in ml:wikipedia.(I suspect him to be another sock puppet someone who wants to disrupt the peceful atmosphere in ml:wiki). If I had ever abused wiki. I raise my voice to show the proof and ask any of the admins to ban me and my IP. At any point of time if I am prooved guilty, I don't deserve an excuse

Sorry for the inconveniences caused. ml:user:challiyan

No need to check this as the reason for checking these account is not clear from the request --Vssun 23:35, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

codice1000 and Insubre @ it.wikibooks

User Insubre uploaded the same copyrighted stuff, as user Codice1000 did few days ago (Codice1000 is currently bloccked because of that copyright violation)I request chekuser between them.--Wim b:wim b-talk 16:55, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Both the users shared the same IP address on itwikibooks between August 17th and 20th. No matches for Sinigagl@Commonswiki. --Paginazero - Ø 22:10, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Alefbet and آقایی @fawiki

Done. At the request of vahid on IRC, I confirm that Alefbet and آقایی are probably not the same person. Vahid was concerned about indications that these were used for multiple-account revert warring. —{admin} Pathoschild 12:16:34, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Zahiri 12:24, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Gabriella and Purplecloud @ simplewiki

Another two users strongly suspected as sockpuppets of "Kimberly Ashton", cross-wiki stalker/harasser, matches the profile perfectly. Please check for any socks from these accounts, and also please release the IP addresses so that we can sort out range blocks and possibly an abuse report. The previous IPs used have been from Comcast ( and, so I hope it'll justify information release if it resolves to this network/geographical area. Archer7 19:01, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Done. Gabriella and Purplecloud operate from and have identical software profiles. The following users also operate from the same IP address with identical profiles:
There is only one other user from the range (— on a different IP address, and they have a different software profile. —{admin} Pathoschild 14:02:29, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Possible sockpuppets at Talk:Spam blacklist

All are either single-purpose and/or brand-new accounts protesting the blacklisting of and hassling any editors or admins that were involved in its blacklisting:

Accounts that spammed these links on various Wikipedias:

En.wikipedia contributors (some of them confirmed sockpuppets):

The preceding unsigned comment was added by A. B. (talk • contribs) 21:50, 18 Aug 2007 (UTC)

Ideally, it would be good to have someone with checkuser rights on both meta and en.wikipedia handle this. --A. B. (talk) 01:45, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm not clear on exactly what is being requested to be checked here but I will look into it. I hold CU on en and meta. ++Lar: t/c 01:48, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm not sure exactly what needs to happen, either ... or if actual checkusering is required,. It certainly would help to have some sort of official determination/outside opinion to bring some clarity to the spam blacklist discussion. To the extent there is abuse (and I think much of it is abuse), it would also be good to have the accounts blocked. I think this matter should also be approached from a cross-wiki perspective. --A. B. (talk) 03:08, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
OK, well, I have started checking. There is a lot there to check. Some of these accounts are already blocked here. Some are already blocked on en. What I am seeing is not cut and dried and more analysis is required. My preliminary thinking is that there is more than one person involved but there is also sockery or they are working together, or some combination, and under w:WP:DUCK blocking SPA accounts that are being disruptive doesnt' need a definitive finding. I'll publish more as I determine more but it may not be right away. I would advise blocking based on your own judgement for now. Please update the list with who is blocked by you and who is not. I will share my results so far with en and meta CUs as appropriate, on request. ++Lar: t/c 03:28, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Lar, I'm not an admin on either project, so I can't block anyone. --A. B. (talk) 19:01, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I was speaking generally. :) Anyway, so far I have blocked the following accounts on en-wp which are all pretty clearly socks of Wiki En Wiki.

During the investigation I discovered the following users already blocked:

I am still working on meta. More soon. ++Lar: t/c 02:00, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! --A. B. (talk) 02:07, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Regarding the meta users... I reviewed the data I collected earlier and it is probable that the lot of them are the same person or a small group of people colluding, but I did not find definitive linkages among the IDs as I did on en. I'd ask that they be blocked based on disruptiveness and similarity of contributions and tagged as probable socks. (some are already) If no other meta admin addresses this, I'll address it myself fairly soon. ++Lar: t/c 15:27, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Ak Tabar 2006 @ meta

Ak Tabar 2006 (talk contribs deleted contribs logs block user block log CentralAuth AllContribs checkuser) - page move vandal. Given the pages targeted & naming there could be a history. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 07:05, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I'll get to this tonite if no one else does first... if it's urgent just block and ask questions later. Do you have any other suspected puppets in mind? (email me if you like)... ++Lar: t/c 16:04, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
I looked... didn't find anything more than a garden variety nasty littleminded vandal. Already blocked I see. Information sent to Herby for further analysis. ++Lar: t/c 01:12, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Ionas68224 @ simplewiki

User has caused problems over EN (including creating sockpuppets and sending abusive emails to admins). Yesterday, he created simple:User:David g. to "test our responses to vandalism" and has created a sockpuppet in the past (but admitted it later on). Another user has also noticed similarities between him and another banned sockpuppet from a while ago. Please check for any additional accounts we may have missed. Thanks, Archer7 09:57, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi, could someone take a look at this (and my other request below) please? We do need these results fairly soon. Thanks, Archer7 22:24, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done Match to David g., Example, Qwertyuioops!, and Коммунизма68К. --Cspurrier 23:09, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I only know about this CU because of Wikipedia Review. No kidding I am not Kimberly Ashton. Ionas68224 05:44, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

User indefblocked on meta due to trolling "jimbo is dead meat", "witness jimbo wales corruptions at WR", etc. drini [es:] [commons:] 01:23, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Excellent! :) Majorly (talk) 01:27, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


I would like to apply to check zhwiki user Seedermaster. I want to know if he has any other id on zhwiki or not. If yes, do those ids have admin power? This application is because some zhwiki admins think we possibly mis-blocked Seeder's other account.--theodoranian 03:58, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done, no some user--Shizhao 06:37, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Theodoranian,your rationale "because some zhwiki admins think we possibly mis-blocked Seeder's other account" is weak. How does it measure up to the checkuser policy? Please note: checkuser policy says :"It must be used only to prevent damage to any of Wikimedia projects.". Theodoranian, In what way did you suspect that checking seedermaster would help in this manner? Hillgentleman 11:20, 21 September 2007 (UTC) @ kw.wiktionary and ak.wikibooks

Please see the thread at checkuser-l for the context on this. We have a crosswiki vandal. Dmcdevit 07:52, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Support, and i would like to add meta request for this IP address, if possible. --Aphaia 08:51, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
I don't think we do have a crosswiki vandal. Not when you use the toolserver thing that shows all IP contributions - I used it on a number of IPs including this one. Not much negative stuff to me shows up in IP contribs, not much anyway. Looks as if this checkuser request is fishing. And the guy himself. For the record, I'm not on that IP, but that toolserver thing is good! well, it is!! Dmc devit, I think there's probably more goodfaith edits than not. --PrivateEyeP1 08:55, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
I suggest this request is not ignored --Herby talk thyme 10:03, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes check.svg DoneI've run some checks on meta, as I did before. As for PrivateEyeP1, whoever that is... meh. "More goodfaith edits than not" does not cut it with me, if there are enough disruptive edits... based on info circulated among CUs, there is no way this is a fishing request, and I'd tend to look askance at anyone who just pops up out of nowhere with no significant contributions that suggests it is. The IP has been blocked. Result sent to the usual suspects for further analysis. ++Lar: t/c 10:42, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

peremen and luftschloss @ ko.wikipedia

peremen block me in korean uncyclopedia no reason
my ip is not orbitaly`s ip but they block me and orbitaly, The luftschloss came out but and it approved to a orbitaly interception. It is like that and even from korean wikipedia suspicion it is receiving with multiplex accounts. The korean them voted to a same proposal even from sitename decision of the korean uncyclopedia.Kverti 05:59, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

This request should be ignored because this is based on unclear and private reason by the requester Kverti. He is on suspicion that he is identical to the blocked user ko:user:unipoly and now being warned many times by the manager of korean wikipedia. It was heard that he was blocked from Korean Uncyclopedia due to his unfair actions. It seems that he want to take back his permission of editing and now suspect the manager of Korean Uncyclopedia (= ko:user:peremen) if he has a sock puppet. The Uncyclopedia and wikipedia have no relationship each other I think. -- Tiens 04:00, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  • my ip is not orbitaly`s ipKverti 00:29, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
X mark.svg Not done -- The original request is unclear. The second request not enough motivated. Although questions do arize when I hear speaking of a 'manager' of korean wikipedia? Wikipedia's dont have 'managers', a Wikipedia is a community. In this community certain people are trusted, and they get some more abilities. That does not mean they are worth more then other long time community members! Effeietsanders 21:06, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Check user in ms

Would appreciate if somebody can check and block IP for the following user in ms Wiki. (If they belong to same user.)

Regards Yosri 00:29, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Out of curiosity at Requests for CheckUser information/Archives/2007/07#Emrrans @ meta, it was claimed that "we Malaysian do not have fixed IP. We keep using different IPs provided by our ISP each time we connect to the internet. So there is no surprise that you see they do not have the same IP." ... is it correct? Cheers, --Aphaia 04:42, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
A lot do have dynamic IP as they using dail-up. But nowdays, the number of people with lease line is increasing. That is why I asked only those with same IP number (same person/address) is block. Otherwise, not much can be done, unless you have any suggestion. Yosri 00:37, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your info, it makes a sense. --Aphaia 00:40, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done users belong to the list of usernames found with the request below. Effeietsanders 21:03, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Additional check user in ms

Would appreciate if somebody can check and block IP for the following user in ms Wiki. Believed belong to Indonesian IP.

Yosri 00:44, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

If it looks like a duck, if it walks like a duck, if it sounds like a duck, and it tastes like a duck, it is a duck. The similarities are so obvious, there is no checkuser needed here. Effeietsanders 20:55, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Would appreciate if somebody can check and block IP for the following user in ms Wiki. Please block is IP belong out of Malaysia.

Might be their real name, but still not acceptable. Yosri 00:38, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Would appreciate if somebody can check and block IP for the following user in ms Wiki. Please block is IP belong out of Malaysia.

Yosri 00:16, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done I'm on it. Effeietsanders 20:55, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Found several insulting usernames on this IP, which is most likely originating from outside the maleysia region. All usernames are already blocked. Effeietsanders 21:02, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

User:Pen4o on BG Wikipedia

Please check bg:User:Pen4o. He has the same behavouristic pattern of bg:user:ИнжИнера, who despite the infinite community ban, engaged in mass sockpuppetry and violation of the "No Open Proxies" policy, as seen from Requests for CheckUser information/Archives/2007/01#Banned user @ bgwiki. Thank you. --Spiritia, sysop on Bulgarian Wikipedia, 16:46, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done Account ИнжИнера is too old, so checuser is no longer able to provide any information. drini [es:] [commons:] 20:14, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
What about the most recent of his proven reincarnations: for instance bg:User:Berzelius, bg:User:Spiritius or bg:user:Магистъра? Are they rather old too? --Spiritia, sysop on Bulgarian Wikipedia, 11:35, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes, they're too old too. Effeietsanders 20:50, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Jimmy Wales @ pt.wikipedia

Someone has created this user account only to comment at the Village pump from the Portuguese Wikipedia in something related to this flamewar. If possible, please ban the sockpuppeter. currently pt.wikipedia don't have checkusers 555 16:54, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Someone created an account using Jimbo's name, used it as an illegal sockpuppet to reinforce a POV on a discussion and this checkuser request is left simmering for three days. I know we are all volunteers here, but I see the user rights log on Meta being changed very often recently for minor tasks, while sockpuppetry investigation is left behind. Is anyone interested in this or should I just simply ask 555 to withdraw his request? PatríciaR 18:26, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Yes, we are volunteers indeed. Thank you for your understanding. And you are totally right that the userrights log is changing, which means we are actually doing stuff too yes :) Anyway, I'll be on this one too. Effeietsanders 21:24, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
PS: If it walks like a duck, looks like a duck, sounds like a duck and tastes like a duck... it is a duck :) Effeietsanders 21:26, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done I can't tell from the Cu whether it was Jimmy or not. (he generally uses the username user:Jimbo Wales btw) The IP is also used by another user: pt:user:OS2Warp. If this was not Jimbo himself, it is very likely that this person was impersonating Jimbo (or maybe trying to make a joke, that should be judged by native speakers). I will not ban the person myself, that is up to the community. Effeietsanders 21:34, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your help and I'm very sorry for my harsh words, I was out of line. PatríciaR 21:51, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Pablo Escobar @ de.wiktionary and others

Please check

  • Pablo Escobar @ de.wiktionary
  • Anonym (Pablo Escobar) @ de.wiktionary
  • Gonzalo Rodríguez Gacha @ de.wiktionary
  • Kobold @ de.wiktionary
  • Der Kobold @ de.wiktionary
  • Quiero Bareta @ de.wiktionary
  • Nosferatu @ de.wiktionary

who is a permanent blocked user and verify if

  • OpenSourceFreak @ de.wiktionary

are the same users (there might be much more). If there is a static IP that can be blocked please provide it so he can be stopped from recreating accounts. Thanks --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 13:58, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

This is a daily annoyance, would be nice if there were some help from You, thanks --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 09:07, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done -- on it Effeietsanders 21:17, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
It is likely that at least several of these accounts are created by the same user. They share IP's, but a few different addresses, which seem unrelated at first sight. All users using these IP's are 'gesperrt'. Effeietsanders 21:23, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Sorry for the confusion, the first users listed here are "gesperrt" because it is the same user. The question was if OpenSourceFreak was the same user too and second which seem not to be possible, to block the IP used for those accounts, thanks however, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 21:37, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

IonasRand @ simple.wikipedia

simple:User:IonasRand was an account created by a blocked user, simple:User:Ionas68224. On an email to the blocking administrator, which is pasted by the blocked user on simple:User:IonasRand user page, he claims he has created this sockpuppet account using open proxy. I thought it would be worthful to find the IP used to create that account, see if it is an Open Proxy really, and let it get blocked on Wikipedias, according to the "No Open Proxy" rules. Huji 10:01, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

As the wiki has its local CUs now, this request can be archived. Huji 21:29, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
X mark.svg Not done apperently due to local CU's. Effeietsanders 21:15, 2 October 2007 (UTC) @ uk.wikipedia

Please check,,, & Alex K. Possible block evasion.--Ahonc 17:08, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done for now -- (sorry for the late reply) -- Not clear enough rationale. Effeietsanders 21:14, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

WhiteShadow and 2v9i@zh wiki

I would like to apply to check zhwiki user WhiteShadow and 2v9i, since both of them started editing wikipedia with many minor edits, after fulfilling the requirement of voting in Chinese Wikipedia, they nearly stopped editing in articles, and mainly active in discussion in Village Pump and other talk pages, with irony and bad attitude, thus I want to know the fact, are they the puppets of others? Thanks!--Itsmine 12:58, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. WhiteShadow and 2v9i acess wikipedia via tor. WhiteShadow use 46 IP; 2v9i use 51 IP, WhiteShadow and 2v9i some 17 IP. But WhiteShadow and 2v9i use same Explorer, OS and lang. 与这两个用户的IP和使用系统(Explorer, OS and lang)相同的用户还有Chenbingo,小美女,Vaayaaway,JackyDon,Seraphix,与WhiteShadow and 2v9i其中一个用户IP和使用系统(Explorer, OS and lang)相同的用户有魁星点斗,Wdct,Nksq,丘比特,Gwingwong,MaRSmTaI,Seedermaster,Blanow,Tobcigam。but Seedermaster only use one IP--Shizhao 16:12, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
  • For the record: User Itsmine, a good sense of w:irony is a profound virtue; combined with w:humour it is a killer. Hillgentleman 10:54, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Chaplin@zhwiki has already declared that 丘比特 and 小美女 are his sockpuppets.Hillgentleman 11:00, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
  • One question: How can you know that there is only one user here? Do Whiteshadow and 2v9i share ip?Hillgentleman 22:38, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

IP User: and user:Hitteam@zh wiki

user:Hitteam已经被zh wiki管理员RalfX 认定为在条目进行破坏性编辑,IP User: 两天之内随即在条目出现,编辑行为类似,故申请CheckUser。thanks。-- 08:18, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

  • Wait. Please provide the diff's to support your statement that "编辑行为类似" ("with similar editing behaviours"). Hillgentleman 22:05, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
    • 编辑行为类似: 二者(IP User and User:Hitteam)都是在大幅度删除原有条目内容(即破坏行为,包括把原有参考文献去掉,变成无参考来源的内容等)-- 05:48, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
      • Please provide the diff's to support your statement. Hillgentleman 15:29, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done, Hitteam and same IP block. but Hitteam no use, but Hitteam and use same Explorer, OS and lang.--Shizhao 05:44, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Shizhao, this check is not very appropriate - as I can see it, no concrete justification was provided (or perhaps you got it privately?). One should not take someone's word for it. Hillgentleman 05:59, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Recently there have been several requests by the Chinese wikipedia community, each of which lacks concrete justification. Please stop. Hillgentleman 05:59, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
"二者(IP User and User:Hitteam)都是在大幅度删除原有条目内容", 這個理由應該足夠了。而且似乎也沒有規定說必須要有如何充分的理由--Shizhao 06:03, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
The proposer should at least provide the links. Please. :) Hillgentleman 06:05, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

IP User:, user:Eachbuilt user:cobrachen@zh wiki

IP User:以及user:Eachbuilt兩個類似傀儡帳號同時在管理員的罷免頁活動,而cobrachen被費勒姆懷疑涉嫌使用傀儡影響人事投票,故申請CheckUser 確認三者的關係。Thanks.--Jasonzhuocn....台灣社群 14:16, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done no rationale or argument provided. drini [es:] [commons:] 14:27, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Jasonzhuo, please provide the relevant links to support your suspicion of sock-puppetry. Hillgentleman 15:31, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done. sorry, can't find anything usefull.--Shizhao 06:00, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Shizhao, your action is not very appropriate, for drini has already notdone it for the lack of rationale. Hillgentleman 06:02, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
At least it cleared my name from potential threating. Thanks.--Cobrachen 22:07, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Recently there have been several requests by the Chinese wikipedia community, each of which lacks concrete justification. Please stop.Hillgentleman 06:04, 27 September 2007 (UTC)


I'd like to request a checkuser on the account Paulistadesaopaulo @ pt.wikipedia. This account is a highly suspected sockpuppet created with the purpose to push a POV in polls and discussions related to this RfC. From the user's contributions, you may see that this recently created account was used to edit a sensitive article (, which has bee the subject of various disputes due to the reliability of given informations and sources. His user page was created with "SP", probably a joke with both "São Paulo" and "sockpuppet".

You may see from his contribution list that most of his edits are on user talk pages, especially on user Incognitus' one, about this specific article, which included general agressive behaviour (such as in [10], [11], [12]). He was warned a couple of times, but apparently has not given up on his harassing behaviour, since he just asked a blocked user how is it to be in hell (the blocked user is a part in the conflict about the "Think Finance" article). He has been given a final warning for this edit.

In a recent discussion on the local village pump that focused on this "Think Finance" article and possible sockpuppetry related to it, and after a comment on how problematic sockpuppets were, the user commented further asking if anyone had called him.

He created four article deletion requests ([13], [14], [15], [16]) with the sole intention to disrupt (no votes in favor of deletion).

My main concern is that he may have voted on a AfD poll (again related with the above mentioned blocked user and the above mentioned RfC) where his master account might also have voted, reinforcing the idea that this is a clear illegal sockpuppet.

Currently, pt.wikipedia has no local checkusers and it's going to take at least a couple of months before we have any, thus my request here on Meta.

Thank you for your help, and I'll be available to provide further rationale if needed. PatríciaR 14:12, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes check.svg DoneVinnyviegas, Crazyaboutlost, and Paulistadesaopaulo share an ip --Cspurrier 15:56, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Thank you very much! PatríciaR 15:59, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Wow. That's ugly! FML 03:23, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Seedermaster@zhwiki and Hawyih@zhwiki

英文不好,請見諒。我請求將兩用戶作CheckUser ,看看兩用戶是否同一人,謝謝。--Iflwlou 05:03, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Please check that two user in zh@wiki, they maybe same guy. (English not good, sorry!)-- 10:06, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

你們給我的電郵,我已收到。但我用中文繁體,你們用的中文簡體造成亂碼,本人看不到內容,謝求再送多一次繁體電郵,謝謝。PS.樓上是本人,忘了登入。--Iflwlou 07:07, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

請問申請CheckUser是不是須要一些條件,為什麼等了這麼久仍沒有回應﹖--Iflwlou 16:24, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I am sorry, I can't judge on this request, i think it would be best to try to approach shizhou, if he is active currently. Effeietsanders 20:46, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
X mark.svg Not done. 缺乏理由--Shizhao 08:51, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Dingismi, Sidheeq and Bluemangoa2z @ ml.wikipedia

I'm a sysop in Malayalam wikipedia. Some people in ml wikipedia believe that the three users (Dingismi, Bluemangoa2z and Sidheeq) are socks. They cause some stir here and there, and I would like to get this checked. Please help. Thanks. --Jyothis 05:59, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

  • Yes check.svg DoneDingismi and Sidheeq are the same user, Bluemangoa2z probably not. drini [es:] [commons:] 08:44, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!.--Jyothis 13:24, 10 November 2007 (UTC)


Checkuser request pursuant to RfA on Yiddish Wikipedia. --Redaktor 12:45, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Please explain what you want to know, and whether you suspect abuse or have community consensus for routine checking of new administrators. —{admin} Pathoschild 23:16:37, 04 November 2007 (UTC)
Community expects new administrators to be checked first. No abuse suspected. Thanks. --Redaktor 09:15, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Done, no other accounts in their IP address ranges. For future requests, please link to a policy or discussion or the user's consent supporting routine checks. :) —{admin} Pathoschild 16:22:47, 08 November 2007 (UTC)

dima io@ru.wikipedia

I don't know where I can request this information so I ask here. I need to know was my account checked since August, 22 2007. I was checked [17] at August, 21 and no puppets was found. But I suppose that checkusers or even stewards might check me since than with no proper reason. If I am correct I will contact ombudsman commission. But I don't want bother them if it's just my paranoia. So please, look to the log and give me the answer. I just need to know was there any checks on me or no. Thank you.--Dima io 22:52, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I cannot find any checks on your account at all, in August or otherwise. —{admin} Pathoschild 23:23:44, 04 November 2007 (UTC)

Cyrus7 @ ru.wikipedia

I was permanently blocked in Russian Wikipedia due to results of this checkusing. As you can see, I was stated to be a sockpuppet of some anonimous vandal with the IP However, I would like to prove I was framed because I share one dynamic IP with that vandal and, which is also possible, there are some errors in my proxy server's work (that vandal has even broken up my account and done some vandalism from it: [18], [19], [20]). So I hope you'll check me and prove my innocense. Best regards, --Cyrus7 13:02, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

If you admit the vandal has broken and used your ip from work server, checkuser will say you're the same. Checkuser can't prove 100% innocense either. drini [es:] [commons:] 13:05, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes, but, as I suppose, the Meta-check may reveal some details and clues needed to learn the truth. --Cyrus7 14:28, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
X mark.svg Not done -- According to this page ruwiki has local checkuser people, so stewards don't have to checkuser there. (I don't see why there should be a CU on meta either) Effeietsanders 21:12, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
The reason is finding out any facts nesessary for proving that I was framed. The Russian CUs have decided that our (my and that vandal's) edits were made from one computer. So one of them, DR, has adviced me to try this variant. --Cyrus7 09:52, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Stewards get the same information from checkuser that local checkusers do; no added information will come up. The Russian Wikipedia has enough checkusers for second opinions. —{admin} Pathoschild 23:46:44, 04 November 2007 (UTC)

sepehrnoush@fa.wikipedia against

A user has personally attacked one of the Persian wikipedians on the victim's page on The attacker is an IP but has signed as sepehrnoush, who is a user on The history of tension between the victim and the user to be checked goes a long way. Furthermore the attack was re-reverted by a friend of the user to be checked: w:he:user:senemmar and w:fa:user:senemmar.diff. We want to see that if that sepehrnoush can be related to sepehrnoush@fa. It is probably a good idea to check w:fa:user:senemmar and w:he:user:senemmar, although as I recall the former has confirmed that he is indeed the latter. Behaafarid 06:11, 26 August 2007 (UTC) ps. Do you think the case is severe enough to cross check the IP with other members of fa.wikipedia. It may well be somebody trying to inflame the feud. Behaafarid 10:47, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

The anonymous user operates from a service provider on a different continent and with a different software profile than sepehrnoush@fawiki and senemmar@fawiki. Several users on fawiki operate from the same IP address, but software profiles are generic and inconclusive; however, no established editors on fawiki operate from that range. —{admin} Pathoschild 00:56:49, 05 November 2007 (UTC)


I'm fa:user:Alefbet in Persian Wikipedia. Today, I saw that this user (fa:user:Jimeldalt) who is recently created, has linked its userpage to my userpage, pretending that it's my sockpuppet [21]. I'm not very active in Persian Wikipedia and my edits were mainly toward balancing the different viewpoints, specially countering the anti-Jewish and anti-Bahai bias in Persian Wikipedia. In its first edits, this user has written inflammatory pro-Israel comments [22]. I want to see if it's a sockpuppet of older users and admins (specially fa:user:zahiri and fa:user:حسام who frequently block Jewish and Bahai editors e.g. fa:user:سندباد, fa:user:Navid.k and fa:user:Taeedxy). It's worth noting that there has already been an incident of sockpupetry by one of the admins (fa:user:zahiri), i.e. fa:user:fbyk [23] who was involved in Bahai-related articles (supporting the anti-Bahai viewpoint). Alefbe 13:48, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Jimeldalt is most likely not حسام (differing software profiles and hosts), but everything else is inconclusive. There are many editors in the same IP address range, and Jimeldalt's software profile is too generic to compare accurately. —{admin} Pathoschild 02:12:28, 05 November 2007 (UTC)

New Age@ptwiki - Contemporaneidade@ptwiki - Sonhos Colonialistas@ptwiki

I'd like to request a checkuser on the accounts:

  • New Age@ptwiki
  • Contemporaneidade@ptwiki
  • Sonhos Colonialistas@ptwiki

On this AfD, the User:New Age has signed as User:Contemporaneidade (to keep the article). Later, the User:Contemporaneidade votes in the same AfD (to keep)

The User:New age edits the User:Contemporaneidade user's page (blanks a template related to suspected socketpuppeting [User:Sonhos Colonialistas])). User:Sonhos Colonialistas was blocked (May 30, 2007) because of xenophobic behaviour and for for being suspected sockpuppet of User:Contemporaneidade and another one (User:Pan-europeu)

Some editing patterns:

All 3 user voted keep, on the AfD i've mentioned above.

Thanks. Lijealso 22:34, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Done. The three users listed above are very likely matches, operating from the same Internet service provider with identical software profiles. This may indicate several accounts belonging to the same person, or multiple people on standardized computers like those in a school computer lab. Several other users are possible matches, including at least one established editor; please list any suspicious activity from other editors not listed for verification. Remember that checkuser data is not definitive, but only confirms investigation of the users' behaviour. —{admin} Pathoschild 21:21:53, 08 November 2007 (UTC)

Kalon@zhwiki , Mrkal@zhwiki , IP User: , Mrkal@commons

I'd like to request a CheckUser on the above accounts whether they are the same or not for the following reason:

On 4th September, zh:User:Kalon merged many articles but without any discussions. After that administrator zh:User:石 blocked zh:User:Kalon for his "Attack" (unreasonable merging, 1 day). Some hours later, new user zh:User:Mrkal was created, and continued to merge the articles. Then I reverted all those edits.
Earlier at Commons, commons:user:Mrkal uploaded some images and filled the Author part as "Me(Mrkal/Kalon)" (Example: commons:Image:Noname000226.JPG).
On 3rd September, I had an argument with zh:User:Kalon at zh:Talk:愛瞞日報. At that time, zh:User:Kalon said,"此報非澳門官方認可刊物"(In English, "the newspaper is not approved by the Macao government"). After zh:User:Kalon was blocked, zh:User:Mrkal joined the argument and said, "我指出此報是非官方認可刊物..." (In English, "I mentioned that 'the newspaper is not approved by the government'... ") , but actually the sentence "the newspaper is not approved by the government" was only said by zh:User:Kalon at earlier time. It's quite strange to see zh:User:Mrkal saying "I mentioned".
On 8th September, zh:User:Mrkal added something unsuitable in an article zh:連勝馬路. After that zh:User:Shizhao reverted zh:User:Mrkal's edition. One week later, zh:User:Mrkal did the same thing again. On the following two days, I reverted his edition and left a summary "只列知名度較高的街道" (In English, "Only list the main streets"), but User: reverted it to zh:User:Mrkal's edition again at the same day with a summary "何以介定知名街道"(In English, "How to judge which is a main street"). So I modified the format of the article, then the edit war stopped.
On 12th October, when I have been nominated in "Requests for adminship", zh:User:Mrkal voted an "oppose" to me and claimed, "卻遭一大班串通人支持..."(In English, "a group of users who had already colluded voted 'support'...") . Then zh:User:Mrkal reverted zh:連勝馬路 again to his edition, and merged zh:媽閣總站 to zh:媽閣 under no discussions. I immediately reverted them.

I'm worrying about that zh:User:Mrkal may continue to do such above the things and make personal attacks to the others. Thanks and sorry for my bad English. --Cdip150 (repair) 18:00, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Why do you need the checkuser? Have the two accounts taken part together in a discussion or in a poll? And it seems that commons:Image:Noname000226.JPG is sufficient evidence for that the two accounts are held by the same person. Has either Kalon or Mrkal denied so?Hillgentleman 19:37, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to help if I can... What is the Commons connnection other than circumstantial? Is there an actual need for a check of the user on Commons? If a zh CU sends me the results of their checks, or tells me what they want checked, I can perform one on commons and let them know what I find out correlationwise... otherwise, I'm confused. Thanks. ++Lar: t/c 05:17, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Lars, What Cdip150 said, are
  1. that the two users Mrkal and Kalon have been behaving distruptively in similar ways,
  2. that Mrkal and Kalon have not admitted that they are the same person, and
  3. that there is the following picture taken in Macao, commons:Image:Noname000226.JPG uploaded by Mrkal, with the description "author: Me(Mrkal/Kalon)".
Since Macao has a small population and not that many wikimedians, there is strong evidence that the accounts Mrkal and Kalon are held by the same person. IMHO, the evidence that Cdip150 has provided is sufficient, even without CU. :-) Hillgentleman 07:18, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
Again, both two accounts has committed Vandalism, and I need the picture as evidence but it still needs to prove that commons:User:Mrkal is held by zh:User:Mrkal. If not, the evidence may not be sufficient enough.--Cdip150 (repair) 10:13, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
ps. Note that the place "Macao" which described above is in China, not in Brazil. --Cdip150 (repair) 10:13, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done. Kalon@zhwiki , Mrkal@zhwiki and Mrkal@commons is same one user. IP User: can't find anything usefull.--Shizhao 06:00, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Reza kalani and Reza kalanii @ fa.wikipedia

fa:User:Reza kalanii started vandalising pages on Fa WP a few minutes ago. (contribs). He replaced several pages with his signature. As none of the sysops of that Wikipedia project where available (I phoned two of them even, and no go), Yann gave me temporary sysop access to block the account. Regarding the comments made by that account, and the past history of fa:User:Reza kalani, it is likely that they are the same person; there is also a chance that someone is impersonating fa:User:Reza kalani for some reason. I ask the accounts to be checked against eachother and the results to be reported here, please. Huji 09:10, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I thought it would be useful to be brought to your notice. An anonymous user on had made some edits on Wikipedia, before this vandalism occured, and had used signatures of other registered users of Wikipedia. It is possible that this same person has created the fa:User:Reza kalanii account, and is worthful to be checked against. Huji 09:17, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Done. Reza kalanii operated from one of Reza kalani's ranges, but so do many other users. There is otherwise no apparent connection between the two accounts. —{admin} Pathoschild 18:48:06, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

毛周朱 and 公敵 @ zh.wikipedia

I'd like to request a checkuser on the accounts:

since their behaviors are similar to zh:User:影武者 who used lots of sock puppets.--Eky 11:55, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done, RE: via skype--Shizhao 06:31, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia MS

I would like to request IP block for user Beuhsault2004 who have been moving and replacing pages in MS Wikipedia with anti-Malaysia pages. I believe the IP is from Indonesia. Urgent please as current IP block only effective 12 hours (block by user ID.) Has been making comment such as That Malaysian ia bastard? (BAHWA ORANG MALINGSIAS ITU BANGSAT?') Yosri 09:42, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I would like to request urgent IP block for user JANGANBAJAKLAGUINDONESIALAGI who have been moving and replacing pages in MS Wikipedia with anti-Malaysia pages, similar to above user. See [Vandal 1], [Vandal history.] Yosri 11:20, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Not done. Please block the vandals; checkuser is not necessary unless there are enough accounts doing it to warrant a range block. —{admin} Pathoschild 19:07:30, 10 November 2007 (UTC)


from zh:Wikipedia:互助客棧/方針#我懷疑Stargate756使用傀儡,並向其他用戶作出人身攻擊, Please help to check these account:

from zh page, the user think these users are sockpuppet of Stargate756--Alex S.H. Lin 13:10, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

In what ways would it serve to protect wikipedia? Did the suspects take part in the same edit-war or discussion? The edits that you cited are legitimate, and their comments contain truth. Hillgentleman 05:18, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Besides the complaint listed in zhwiki, some of these suspects also involved in voting.--百楽兎.png百楽兎 00:51, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Done. The accounts operate from the same IP address ranges with identical software profiles and update histories. These accounts are most likely either used by the same person, or by several people on computers in a standard environment like a school computer room. —{admin} Pathoschild 19:51:03, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Bianchi Bihan @ br wikipedia

Could you check this users and say if they are one and the same person:

I am pretty sure it is the case, but I need a proof. It has already been proved on the french wikipedia that those users were one and the same person: Bianchi-Bihan; Kergidu, Shelley Konk, Gianni Strogell, Matisto. See here for example:

All those users are blocked on the french wikipedia. Some of them are blocked on the breton wikipedia as well (Bernez Bernioù, Tangi Gwegen, Shelley Konk, Kergidu and Bianchi-Bihan).

This request is quite urgent, since it is a problem of massive sock puppetry. I am sysop on the breton wikipedia and have to deal with all the problems brought by this user. If it is the same user on the french and the breton wikipedia (and I know it is) the person is using at least two ip (and probably more): his personal one and his profesional one (at the University of Rennes 2 - UHB).

Benoni 14:22, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Check in progress --Walter 23:38, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done Check done. Sending report by email to Benoni --Walter 00:29, 3 November 2007 (UTC)


I'd like to request a checkuser on the accounts:

When 人文科学理性者 starts take part in one discussion, the user 双龙会 will support 人文科学理性者's point and disturb the discussion like this:


双龙会 2007年11月2日 (五) 13:47 (UTC).

This is 双龙会's contributions record.PhiLiP zhwiki 14:15, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

My translation into English:
Very good. The Christians who idolise/worship the White Jesus are too cruel, Jesus' birthday pretends to be Christmas and even want to make Christmas its own, also want to give one vote. Furthermore, while the title of the election hasn't been confirmed, the bastards have simply voted together, it's too ridiculous. What does your Westerner's Jesus birthday called have to do with we people of China? No one bothers if you people close your doors and call it the birthday of the no.1 god in the world, as long as you don't tell like this to non-Christians. The (Chinese) Communist Party who idolised (Karl) Marx and Lenin the Westerners criticezed Lin Biao and Confucius (during the Cultural Revolution), treated (Christ? Christmas? There must be one word missing) as rubbish, ruined the Christianity, now it's time to biuld up the society, have to bring up Confucius, so for these few years the incident of the Christians bringing up Jesus to pretend as a holy person has been beaten by the people of China who has started to be aware, so there is surely hopeless to make (Christmas) its own.

双龙会 2007年11月2日 (五) 13:47 (UTC).

I've tried my best to translate the passage. I hope that there is someone else who can make a better translation than mine. Chinese is actually hard for me to translate into English and Malay. Thank you. --Edmund the King of the Woods! 09:23, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
The translation above is very inaccurate. "Bastards" is the translator's own word. And the concept of "聖" in the Chinese culuture is the key point, which the translator totally missed. Hillgentleman 23:52, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Sorry for that. The language is hard for me to translate... --Edmund the King of the Woods! 11:58, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Now I'd like to improve my own translation here:
Very good. The Christians who idolise/worship Jesus the White Man are too cruel, Jesus' birthday pretends to be The Holy Birthday/Birthday of a Holy Person and even want to monopolize the day, yet they also want to vote. Furthermore, while the title of the election hasn't been confirmed, people have simply voted together, it's too ridiculous. What does you Westerner's Jesus birthday called have to do with we people of China? No one bothers if you people close your doors and call it the birthday of the no.1 god in the world, as long as you don't tell the nonsense to the non-Christians in this way. The (Chinese) Communist Party who idolised (Karl) Marx and Lenin the Westerners criticezed Lin Biao and Confucius (during the Cultural Revolution), treated (Christ? Christmas? There must be one word missing) as rubbish, ruined the Christianity, now it's time to biuld up the society, have to bring up Confucius, so for these few years the incident of the Christians bringing up Jesus to pretend as a holy person has been beaten by the people of China who has started to be aware, so there is surely hopeless to monopolize (The day).

双龙会 2007年11月2日 (五) 13:47 (UTC).

Actually while making the first translation, I haven't read the election page yet. Now I've read. It's here. It is regarding the Chinese term for "Christmas Day" - whether to use "圣诞节" or "耶诞节". "圣诞节" literally means "Holy Birthday" or "Birthday of a holy person", while "耶诞节" means "Jesus' Birthday", where "耶" is the shortform for "耶稣", which is Jesus. Probably the user thinks that by calling Christmas as "Holy Birthday" is a kind of bias, discriminating Confucius whom the user thinks is the holy person of the Chinese. --Edmund the King of the Woods! 16:23, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Done. There is a likely match, with the two users operating from identical IP address ranges with identical software profiles. This may mean the two accounts are used by the same person, or by multiple users in a standard environment like a school computer room. —{admin} Pathoschild 00:06:15, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

ajerra@it.wikibooks, caucciù@it.wikipedia & LpL@wikipedia-it

I would to check those 3 users:

I think they are sockpuppet of w:it:User:Leopardo planante Leopardo, who si a problematic user on lot of wikimedia projects: let's have a look at page w:it:Wikipedia:Utenti problematici/Leopardo planante Leopardo. --Ramac 14:50, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Note: a local check showed that Caucciù@itwiki is a sockpuppet of that vandal (blocked), check the checkuser log if needed. --.anaconda 15:20, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
A similar check has been requested for it.wikiquote. --M/ 21:49, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Done. itwikibooks{Ajerra}, itwikinews{}, itwiki{Caucciù}, and itwikiquote{Ed Edd & Eddy Style, Ed Edd & Eddy, Timmy Turner} are exact matches. Although itwikinews{} is the only listed that is outside the normal IP address ranges, the software profiles match. This may mean the accounts are all operated by the same user, or by several users in a standard environment like a school computer lab. —{admin} Pathoschild 22:18:07, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Grondin request for fr-wn

We need request checkuser for the following account :

I think they are sockpuppet of n:fr:User:LionelMacBruSoft which is a problematic contributor on french wikinews. --Bertrand GRONDIN – Talk 20:08, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. Souvenir and Super virtuel are likely sockpuppets; they used the same IP within minutes of each other, and have the same user agent string (it doesn't look like a common string either). LionelMacBruSoft doesn't appear to have any connection to them, however. He has a dynamic IP and a completely different user agent string from the other two.--Shanel 20:19, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
thank's --Bertrand GRONDIN – Talk 20:20, 11 November 2007 (UTC)