Steward requests/Checkuser

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
< Steward requests(Redirected from Srcu)
Jump to: navigation, 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 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 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}}: 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



Sorry but you copied my previous requests even without one minor change! I am a sysop in fawiki and as far as I know, the user has not been banned and this request is not legitimate based on the above facts. ● Mehran Debate 02:40, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Apologies for the copyright violation! But user:Seiavoshy was editting during the time user:Maahmaah was blocked. As for the original banned user, I am talking about the notorious user:Truth Seeker. who has abundance of socks--Kazemita1 (talk) 07:00, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
All right, that would be an acceptable reason, however I did not understand the relationship between Truthseeker and the accounts. ● Mehran Debate 07:28, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Closed Closed Please take discussion back to local wiki to determine the need and value of a checkuser.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:37, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

@billinghurst: The consensus in the above discussion was that the request is legitimate. Can you do the checkuser? Because right after this request, both of the users announced retirement Seiavoshy, Maahmaah; but because of the delay in the process, they started their activity again. Best, Taha (talk) 03:24, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
Unrelated Unrelated between the two accounts. I do see a relationship between Maahmaah and Basp1, though the latter account only edited for a month.

To note that if you are going to start using the "Truth Seeker" reasoning then we would be expecting to see editing in that style mentioned for the check, so we have some evidence that it is the user. I think that checks like this should be proposed with admins at faWP first.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:20, 30 July 2015 (UTC)


please also check Ebrahimi-amir that i think he is owner of this accounts.--Koroğlu (talk) 11:38, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

I already checked the first five users. From them I could not see a connection to Ebrahimi-amir. --MF-W 11:56, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
Closed Closed as per MF-W's noted check with results and commentary at Stewards' noticeboard.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:05, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

See also[edit]