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.
Reason(s): bg:User:Mpb eu had now been indefinitely banned due to harnessing, editing thought proxies and manipulating votes. After he was banned a couple of more accounts with similar edit pattern have popped-up after the previous request, again trying to vote in deletion requests even thought the policy states that new users cannot vote. Because these might be meatpuppets rather than Mpb_eu himself can you please check if there is any relation between the accounts?--The Wiki Boy (talk) 09:41, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
Doing... Will see what we can find. --Jyothis (talk) 22:55, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
@Jyothis: Hello? I don't think you're handling this, right? —MarcoAurelio 13:47, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
Sorry about that - got caught up at work :( - I did half way and that was inconclusive. Let me re-start. --Jyothis (talk) 00:15, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
Still going through this. done with one part and doing the other. --Jyothis (talk) 14:43, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Jyothis, thanks for not giving up on this case. I suspect that some of those may be meatpuppets (e.g. Тамаш Йеньо Секереш, which is the name of a different person, though still very closely related with the sockmaster), which makes an additional mess as the sockmaster is already likely using lots of proxies and might even know even better how to clear his tracks. On a side note, we're very close to electing local CUs, so we may finally ease a little bit the burden on you, guys (from conversations with other stewards I see that the socks get more and more knowledgeable and thus difficult to identify purely on technical grounds, especially without knowing much of the context). — Luchesar • T/C 15:08, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Yea I get that, but the issue is that it is pretty hard from a purely technical stand point and so far the checks has been inconclusive. I am trying to correlate as much as I can, but don't keep too much hope :) --Jyothis (talk) 00:46, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
Much appreciated, Jyothis! Take your time. — Luchesar • T/C 00:51, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
We have have an absolute spambot bonanza of xwiki (attempted) spam for promotional codes and vouchers (visible inSpecial:AbuseLog). I have taken moves to blacklist the majority of the urls and I have COIBot monitoring others that are secondary. Have we undertaken some CU to identify the ranges and put some blocks in place? If not, can we please run a series of checks to better curb this in a proactive manner. Thanks. — billinghurstsDrewth 09:24, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
What wiki are talking about? Ruslik (talk) 20:20, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
Reason(s): I believe they are the same users who are behind the persecution to users various (AlvaroMolina (talk ·contribs), Vituzzu (talk ·contribs) and others) in Wikinews Portuguese, with offenses and vandalisms in other wikis (on and off), which can be proven in contributions, it is likely that the user is from Wikinews Spanish, see block and delete historic recents. ANGwiki (talk) 21:13, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Confirmed but they are all locked anyway. Ruslik (talk) 19:35, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Discussion: See user talk page and ta.wiki has similar local policy as en.wiki has
Reason(s): First user is blocked due to personal attack and COI that resulted 2nd user's edit as per 1st user's COI. Please do check if these user has link with other IDs and IPs. Thanks. AntanO 02:06, 25 October 2016 (UTC)