Steward requests/Checkuser

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
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 {{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

Requests[edit]

All CUer @zh.wikipedia[edit]

@Cwek: that's an ombudsman commission business you should contact ASAP. --Vituzzu (talk) 22:11, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
The ombudsman commission is aware of this incident and is looking into it. This shouldn't preclude further actions by CU in this matter if there is a clear and compelling reason to do so, however. Craig Franklin (talk) 02:26, 24 September 2017 (UTC).

Agadirhaha@commons[edit]

Deferred Deferred to c:COM:RFCU. Hello. Commons has their own CheckUsers, you should request them on their request page. Regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:03, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
Is this still the case when Phabricator uses www.mediawiki.org for OAuth login? Dispenser (talk) 11:49, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
I cannot really answer that question because I do not know if OAuth logins leave CU trace. I think they don't, but I'll ping @Tgr (WMF) and BDavis (WMF) for clarification. In any case, I think Phabricator administrators can access IP data about users so if there's sockpuppetry problems over there maybe @AKlapper (WMF) and MModell (WMF) will be able to assist. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 09:53, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
Indeed they don't (although the user had to login to MediaWiki at some point, that you could look up). We can add something to the system logs if you think that would be important, feel free to open a phab task about it. Creating MediaWiki log records would be too much effort compared to how rarely it would be useful, IMO. (Also probably not something CUs should have access to, as OAuth authentication can be used for third-party logon and whatnot.) --Tgr (WMF) (talk) 20:26, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
Phab administrators can access IP data of users. If anything is wanted, please elaborate. In the case of Agadirhaha, I can see several IPs but no other users who used these exact IPs (might be WP0 anyway). Based on behavior in Phab I pesonally believe that mw:User:Vaporitoo, mw:User:Monadamat_almajanyat, mw:User:Said_raz, mw:User:Samurai_rider, mw:User:About_spindab, mw:User:Adriano_gagazoo, mw:User:Vampire_dracula, mw:User:Darcula, mw:User:Wikishopia, mw:User:Milanooooooooo, mw:User:Disponsable, mw:User:Skillboy_ghost are sock puppet accounts. --AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 10:25, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
I'll have a look at those on mediawiki. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:33, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
There are not conclusive results at mediawiki. They might be sockpuppets based on what they do, but so far the only connection I see is continental procedence, which is not much. The ranges are also crowded to do a safe IP range block. If someone else with more experience does want to have a look, feel free. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:27, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
@MarcoAurelio: Can you confirm any of Aklapper's previously seen /16 ranges? Dispenser (talk) 13:49, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
I've filed a phabricator task. Cleaning up phabricator requires console commands which is why a /8, /11s, and /12s are blackholed, but they still somehow got through two filters. Dispenser (talk) 13:04, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Emanuel argento@it.wiktionary[edit]

 Confirmed in my it.wiki's checkuser capacities. --Vituzzu (talk) 20:03, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia Zero abusers fishing[edit]

After today's account locking, I noticed Amadeu Gonçalves TAXI doesn't have an account on MediaWiki.org likely to Morocco 1 month ban there.

Is it possible to setup an abuser filter to tag accounts created here (Meta) as a WP0 user (or Moroccan IP or a proxy we blocked on Commons like Azure)? Is it possible to have an idea of where those accounts are created?

Dispenser (talk) 14:29, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

This account is not from Morocco. Ruslik (talk) 20:13, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
Ok, looked closer at User:Nemo bis block and see it was mid-June to mid-July so it couldn't have possibly been that. Relisting request at Meta:Requests for CheckUser information#Requests for Meta-Wiki only Dispenser (talk) 17:38, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Dispenser (talk) 17:38, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Hateegatestudio@th.wikipedia[edit]

Hateegatestudio, ThaiMOvieMedia, TPCNotePatipon are unreacheable by checkuser, EvilJohnTv, Herezuma, Tee Patipon, PATIPON191230, Patipon Rattanaphan, Yoshimusic.2017, DonutBigHead, Herenut123, PatiponManutd, DonutLegend, Dramatvoffcial, PatiponDramatv, Patipon99, Thaksin99, Patipon.2017, KiroszLol are  Confirmed --Vituzzu (talk) 22:09, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Sci-fi-@en.wikiversity[edit]

I may be missing something but en.wiki SPI results were confirmed by a checkuser. If these accounts belonged to "Michael skater" I'd expect to see them tagged. --Vituzzu (talk) 22:00, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
The checkuser confirmed the socks listed in the second request were the same user, which is consistent with what I wrote above. "Michael skater" was not checked, as far as we know, in that later request, nor in the earlier one. He filed the earlier request. All the "Blastikus" accounts tagged were not tagged by checkuser from connection with the only non-stale Steigmann account, Psychicbias. What appears clear from my study is that Steigmann was not the set of socks reported in the second request. No new account was connected with Steigmann by checkuser, this was all based on assuming that an account that says "I am Steigmann" is necessarily Steigmann. Because there is a faction, that communicates off-wiki, attacking "pseudoscience" -- it's well known and fairly open -- it is possible that various persons took on various roles, but the possibility here is that Sci-Fi- editing Wikiversity, was also one or more of the fake Wikipedia Steigmann socks, or Michael skater. In addition, Michael skater claimed to have a wikiversity account that he did not want to reveal. That alone could be abusive sock puppetry, cross-wiki (all accounts are now global.) I am supporting a claim of impersonation, illegal and a clear violation of WMF policy. There is no claim here that Wikipedia checkuser results were incorrect, but checkusers did not assert that those socks were Psychicbias (recent!), only that they were connected, which is also what I've concluded.
I do not know if checkuser can help untangle the mess created, but it is possible that it can, and that is why I'm asking. One more piece of information which might help: Steigmann also acknowledged being 50.185.21.78 (talk contribs deleted contribs logs block user block log CentralAuth AllContribs checkuser)], which had a couple of self-reverted edits. --Abd (talk) 01:26, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
I had to ask if it was possible to reveal but well, also Michael skater was checked at time and nothing interesting was found, so the request will basically turn into a who is Sci-fi-? then fishing, which I don't use to do for non-blocked accounts. --Vituzzu (talk) 15:54, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
  • If I may, I'd like to add w:User:Mikemikev for geographic area/IP checks, see w:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mikemikev/Archive and this excerpt from Rationalwiki: "Note the above sock IP is the [...] internet sockpupeteer Mikemikev, who is also: RealBrandonPilcher, Brandon Pilchers, Krom Loser, Communist Scientist, EgalitarianJay, Ben Steigmann Blissentia, Antifa Scientist, John Fuerst and JohnFuerstwithhispantsdown (most on Human Varieties talk). On most those socks he is also impersonating people. [...] Antifascist (talk) 19:28, 21 October 2015 (UTC)". I hope this helps! --Marshallsumter (talk) 01:12, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
There is a discussion of this on Marshallsumter's Wikiversity talk page, I just found, but this is a complex mess; the request here is for some fairly simple steward cross-wiki checkuser work, and not for anything else. "Ben Steigmann Blissentia" is interesting; that was a RationalWiki account with only one edit in 2015. It may have been impersonation, not Steigmann. The Wikipedia account by the same name was just created to post in the mass Wikipedia impersonation of Steigmann. The faction possibly involved would have high interest in RationalWiki. --Abd (talk) 01:47, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
I checked on loginwiki, where Psychicbias and Myerslover are stale. The results are that: Ben Steigmann Blissentia, Blastikus the cat, Blastikus Cats, Spirit of Myers, Ben the Blissentia, Jamenta 2, Spirit of James 2, Gggtt Steigmann, Michael skater, Bigcheeses, Sci-fi-, Gavarn1982, AlienMan99, Braude194 and Atheistic guy are Likely Likely the same user. Ruslik (talk) 20:18, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Correction. Braude1945 per Ruslik. --Abd (talk) 14:42, 23 September 2017‎
Yes check.svg Done, if I can say so. Thanks! Sci-Fi and Michael skater nails it. This was impersonation and cross-wiki disruption of a vicious kind. As well, Gggtt was probably innocent. I'll notify the relevant administrators and look at the others. --Abd (talk) 20:42, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Ben Steigmann is a known anti-semite/racist, he has been banned all over the web. The above accounts are not 'impersonations' - they are Ben. Ben has admitted to owning myerslover and psychicbias to abd but why not the others. Check the SPI archive on wiki for blastikus, there is a screenshot from Ben Steigmann's facebook. Ben has admitted to being Gggtt and linked to his edits on the Oswald Spengler article he edited on his Facebook account. He is thus a proven liar owning up to two socks only. Also note abd is not a neutral observer he is Ben Steigmann's personal friend off-site. This user appears to be unware about Ben's online racism and disruption on wikipedia. As for the above accounts how do you know they are not associated with Ben. Why would someone be posting the exact same material as Ben did on myerslover and psychicbias? Makes no sense. These accounts are likely all Ben. He has lied to abd, and now he wants to be unbanned. This is not acceptable. The guy is a proven sock-puppeteer banned from Wikipedia. Also note abd is banned from Wikipedia. This is far from an impartial investigation. LadyDragoner (talk) 19:39, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
  • I know IP addresses cannot be disclosed but I believe the above accounts would trace to California. This is where Ben has edited from in the past, unless he was using a vpn.

Gggtt is Ben. On wikiversiy Ben publicly advertised his Facebook page, if you look on 16 August he admitted to owning Gggtt and editing the Oswald Spengler article, he did this by linking to his edit on the article. The evidence is here: [1] [2]. Ths demonstrates that Ben is a Liar. He had confessed to two sock-puppets "psychicbias" and "myserslovers" to abd but not Gggtt. I have every reason to believe all the socks were Ben and this is a tactic he is using to get back on Wikipedia. Also note Ben is a self-confessed racist and has links to white supremacy blogs on the Internet. I find it funny how some users here are treating him as a 'victim'. He has been banned from Wikipedia for sock-puppeting. Why would someone impersonate him around the same time he was editing on myerslover or psychicbias and replicate the exact same edits of him on new accounts? Makes no sense. I have reason to believe most of the above accounts are him. It should also be double-checked if Michael Skater was linked to the above accounts, that may be an error. ~

  • In conclusion I am really disappointed that because Ben Steigmann tells his friend abd he was 'impersonated', users here will automatically believe it. Steigmann is a racist, proven liar and confirmed sockpuppeteer. There really should be more skepticism here. I have stated this before but abd is associated with Ben off-site. This is not a very balanced investigation. LadyDragoner (talk)

Ben Steigmann@en.wikiversity[edit]

Unlikely Unlikely I do not see any evidence that Ben Steigmann is related to other two accounts. Ruslik (talk) 15:50, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Steigmann has admitted to using vpns. Unlikely tecnical evidence will connect all his accounts. He has admitted to owning myerslover and psychicbias and elewhere gggtt on his facebook. If he lied about those and evaded his block why would someone else create accounts and post exactly the same material he did? This whole thing is a joke. He just wants to get unbanned. And he is blaming a personal enemy of his mikemikev for 'impersonating him'. LadyDragoner (talk) 19:45, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

LadyDragoner@en.wikiversity[edit]

  • Support request. Mikekmikev should not be included because that account is completely stale. Ben Steigmann already admitted he was Psychicbias and Myerslover. However, we already have the identified sock family initially ascribed to Sci-fi- as the Wikiversity-active account. Based on the obvious duck test, here and on wikiversity, and further investigation to identify the older puppet master accounts on Wikipedia, LadyDragoner is probably Anglo Pyramidologist/Mikemikev/Michael skater/Sci-fi-, or affiliated with this user. LadyDragoner is the only new request here -- and is arguing disruptively on Wikiversity, and here as well, above. --Abd (talk) 02:54, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

"LadyDragoner is Anglo Pyramidologist/Mikemikev/Michael skater/Sci-fi-" only according to you Abd. You have 0 technical evidence linking me to Mikemikev or Michael Skater or any other account. You just keep throwing out random usernames and claiming I own them. You are completely wrong. I have never edited Wikipedia. I would appreciate if you would stop making wild allegations about me with no evidence. Your comments are libellous. The real sock-puppet is your racist friend Ben Steigmann. LadyDragoner (talk) 07:55, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

  • It may be the case that these two are not User:Sci-fi-. --Marshallsumter (talk) 22:11, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
Yes. It may also be that prior identification of this particular sock army with Mikemikev was based, as well, on old impersonations. There is evidence, come of which I've presented, connecting the older users. Evidence is not "proof." Wikipedia sock puppet identifications were sometimes naive, assuming that an account claiming to be a blocked user would actually be the user, and disentangling this mess can be difficult, once we know that impersonation is active -- as it was in the Ben Steigmann case -- nothing is completely reliable unless clearly confirmed. Checkuser can show connections, that's fact. The duck test can be unreliable, but is nevertheless useful. Right now, though, there is a concerted attack on Wikiversity by SPAs, clearly pursuing the same strong agenda though accounts that register, strike targets, and then more accounts appear. Thus I am adding two more accounts to the list at the top, and removing Mikemikev as not relevant at this time. I'm also removing the Steigmann socks as no longer relevant, leaving only current targets for checkuser, plus the already identified Sci-Fi. My belief is that Marshallsumter will support this. --Abd (talk) 22:42, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
  • No problem! I originally included Mikemikev and Stiegmann socks as controls since all are stale and I expect no involvement. Thanks! --Marshallsumter (talk) 23:44, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Added three SPAs, same intense interest, appeared today. One effectively claimed to be a meat puppet and a sock of an un-named Wikipedia user, who could directly edit, not being blocked on Wikiversity, even if blocked on Wikipedia. These are clearly disruptive users on Wikiversity (and some here as well), and if they are socking on other wikis, with other accounts, discovering that could be useful. The earlier report uncovered the sock family editing Commons, as twp users with copyvio, and that was useful there.[3] --Abd (talk) 15:10, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

See also[edit]