Make sure you have a good reason for the check. It will only be accepted to counter vandalism or disruption to Wikimedia wikis. Valid reasons include needing a block of the underlying IP or IP range, disruptive sockpuppetry, vote-stacking, and similar disruption where the technical evidence from running a check would prevent or reduce further disruption.
Be specific in your reasons. Ambiguous or insufficient reasons will cause delays. Explain the disruption and why you believe the accounts are related, ideally using diff links or other evidence.
Make sure there are no local checkusers or policies.
All Confirmed as well as Camilla498, Camilla598, Trykksvak, Mynas-19, Finneguri, BLÆGG, Tyrredal-4 and Tyrredal-5 and many others. I do not understand while you have not re-blocked Hovde, which is obviously the socketmaster. Ruslik (talk) 17:04, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
It is definitely not obvious from the edit patterns. - 4ing (talk) 18:27, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
@Ruslik0: The previous CU showed that "All accounts are using a mess of IPs, especially mobile ranges which are shared with many active and obviously good-faith users." Therefore, I have a problam understanding how you can point on Hovde as a sockmaster. - 4ing (talk) 07:51, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
The accounts above use different IPs from the same ranges but Hovde is nearly always present on the same IPs. Hovde also users exactly the same two devices to edit. Ruslik (talk) 08:19, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
I've followed up on this per Ruslik's request. I agree that Hovde could be part of the same group; the user agents match in many cases, and Hovde is present on all of the abused ranges. However, there are also some obviously good-faith users who share multiple of the ranges, so it's really up to you to determine based on behavioural evidence. Sorry I can't give a more concrete answer. Ajraddatz (talk) 21:09, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
Reason(s): Disruptive edit warring that may be block evasion. ChanelQueens reportedly quacks like the other two ducks, who are indefinitely blocked and are also known for puppetry at en:w. (Complainant in the above linked discussion is not exactly in good standing either.) ~ Ningauble (talk) 19:04, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
Discussion: Per local policy, alternate accounts must be declared.
Reason(s): It seems like the MacManTech account was created after Tonye received my warning on his local talk page. The two are engaging in similar promotional/undisclosed COI editing (all related to New York City-related topics), including items on the same (non-notable) organization - d:Special:Undelete/Q20724875 and d:Special:Undelete/Q24084974 (sorry, local admins and stewards only). If these two are the same, then they are in violation of our alternate accounts policy due to the apparent attempt to subvert the warning I had left on Tonye's talk page. --Jasper Deng (talk) 05:39, 28 May 2016 (UTC)