Steward requests/Checkuser

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
< Steward requests(Redirected from SRCU)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Requests and proposals Steward requests (Checkuser) latest archive
Checkuser icons
These indicators are used by CheckUsers and stewards for easier skimming of their notes, actions and comments.
{{Confirmed}}:  Confirmed {{MoreInfo}}: MoreInfo Additional information needed
{{Likely}}: Likely Likely {{Deferred}}: Deferred Deferred to

{{Possible}}: Possible Possible {{Completed}}: Completed Completed
{{Unlikely}}: Unlikely Unlikely {{TakeNote}}: Note Note:
{{Unrelated}}: Unrelated Unrelated {{Doing}}: Symbol wait.svg Doing...
{{Inconclusive}}: Inconclusive Inconclusive {{StaleIP}}: Stale
{{Declined}}: Declined Declined {{Fishing}}: Fishing CheckUser is not for fishing
{{Pixiedust}}: Pixiedust CheckUser is not magic pixie dust {{8ball}}: 8ball The CheckUser Magic 8-Ball says
{{Duck}}:  It looks like a duck to me {{Crystalball}}: Crystalball CheckUser is not a crystal ball

This page is for requesting CheckUser information on a wiki with no local CheckUsers (see also requesting checkuser access). Make sure to follow the following instructions, or your request may not be processed in a timely manner.

Before making a request:

  1. Make sure you have a good reason for the check. It will only be accepted to counter vandalism or disruption to Wikimedia wikis. Valid reasons include needing a block of the underlying IP or IP range, disruptive sockpuppetry, vote-stacking, and similar disruption where the technical evidence from running a check would prevent or reduce further disruption.
  2. Be specific in your reasons. Ambiguous or insufficient reasons will cause delays. Explain the disruption and why you believe the accounts are related, ideally using diff links or other evidence.
  3. Make sure there are no local checkusers or policies.
  4. Please ensure that the check hasn't already been done:

How to make a request

How to make a request:

  • Place your request at the bottom of the section, using the template below (see also {{srcu}} help).
    === Username@xx.project ===
    {{CU request
     |status          = <!--don't change this line-->
     |language code   = 
     |project shortcut= 
     |user name1      = 
     |user name2      = 
     |user name3      = 
    <!-- Max 10 users -->
     |discussion      = [[Example]]<!-- local confirmation link / local policy link -->
     |reason          = Reasons here. ~~~~

    For example:

    === Example@en.wikipedia ===
    {{CU request
     |status          = <!--don't change this line-->
     |language code   = en
     |project shortcut= w
     |user name1      = Example
     |user name2      = Foo
     |user name3      = Bar
    <!-- Max 10 users -->
     |discussion      = [[:w:en:Example]]<!-- local confirmation link / local policy link -->
     |reason          = Reasons here. ~~~~
  • Specify the wiki(s) you want to perform the check on.
Cross-wiki requests
Meta-Wiki requests



Sidenote by 1233: This was endorsed by other users but I am the one who translate it.--1233 | Questions?| This message is left by him at 09:41, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
thanks for translation 1233--Cohaf (talk) 19:27, 11 September 2018 (UTC)


  • no proper local discussion was done for this case yet, request to be placed on hold. --Cohaf (talk) 19:28, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Meta CU is used to only confirm a connection once behavioral evidence has been established, not to be used to see if there is technical evidence that connects these accounts, which is often not so reliable on its own. If there aren't any administrators taking action, perhaps behavioral wise it's not that similar in the first place. Alex Shih (talk) 09:47, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
    • exactly my point conveyed at zhwiki, I temporarily placed this on hold pending further discussion--Cohaf (talk) 11:10, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
For the references, I expect at least more than two or three days of discussion on non-urgent case, and (usually) do check if the discussion is mature enough. — regards, Revi 14:39, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
@-revi and Alex Shih:update: accounts duck blocked, but local sysop request a sleeper check. I don't have the rationale for the check yet.--Cohaf (talk) 12:50, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Taeyeon fan@zh.wikipedia[edit]

  • per discussion, the users seems to be WP:SPA. A WP:MEAT / WP:DUCK can be possible in this case, and a CU may not be conclusive due to the low edit count, however, it might be useful as behavioral seems to be a match but the users denied connection with each other. Thanks.--Cohaf (talk) 07:07, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
Symbol wait.svg Doing... — regards, Revi 14:57, 22 September 2018 (UTC)


  • Taeyeon fan, Cosmos4261573 is stale (It was stale at the time it was submitted to SRCU).
  • 一米八的米八 and Chloecc111 are Inconclusive Inconclusive.
  • 卜兑兑 are  Confirmed with 第一次追星的珍珠糖. However, there's not enough data sample, so make your decision with behavioral data.

— regards, Revi 15:16, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Alex Olaru@ro.wikipedia[edit]

Symbol wait.svg Doing... — regards, Revi 15:19, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
Both are confirmed. No other socks visible. — regards, Revi 15:32, 22 September 2018 (UTC)


@-revi: Still you are waiting to review my SR request. Web SourceContent (Management System) 15:40, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
The they are the same user, which was evident without any checks. Ruslik (talk) 20:23, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Simon 1996@zh.wikipedia[edit]

  • comment:behaviour not that similar should be the correct translation.--Cohaf (talk) 07:15, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Well like I said on the local discussion page, there is probably no merit to check. Both using machine translations and having the habit of removing other editor's comments on their talk page are not legitimate reasons when literally everything else is different. Alex Shih (talk) 08:17, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
    • Alex ShihThis check is well discussed and many users had the same opinion that is to check, I guess it will be best to go by consensus. Just to add, it is not removing comments but alteration of comments in a certain way that connects both. The translation above is not that accurate per say. I am sorry I didn't knew this was submitted that I would had presented the case better, but anyways the key locus of behavioural similarities are as follows: threats after being banned over email, poor machine translations, alteration of talk page messages, participation in contests in Chinese Wikipedia. I am sorry I can't type a better statement as I am currently on mobile for this entire month. --Cohaf (talk) 11:04, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Renew2018 (Jessechi) @zh.wikipedia 2[edit]

See also[edit]