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 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



Use of the CU tool to prove "innocence" is highly discouraged and hardly even performed. —MarcoAurelio 18:36, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
@MarcoAurelio: no problem, we hare resolved :) Thanks --Sciking (talk) 13:10, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Okay. —MarcoAurelio 10:03, 26 April 2016 (UTC)


Results are Inconclusive Inconclusive and show no overlapping IP. Besides, technical information obtained is not exactly consistent with standard updating of software over time. Anyway, behavioral evidence is key in determining either sock or meat puppetry. RadiX 13:03, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Power Flower Shower@pl.wiktionary[edit]

Hi, apologies for the slowness in actioning your request. I'll take a look at this later today if nobody else gets to it by then. Ajraddatz (talk) 14:38, 28 April 2016 (UTC)


All  Confirmed, same person as that last request. no:Spesial:Bidrag/CamillaPå is the only unblocked account of this pattern that I can see in the results. All accounts are using a mess of IPs, especially mobile ranges which are shared with many active and obviously good-faith users. I could provide a list of all accounts with my own judgements of likely or unlikely for you to sort through, if you'd like to see which ones match the pattern. Ajraddatz (talk) 14:34, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your quick response. I think we'll leave it with that for now, the main outcome of the CU is the connection to the previous case (which again is connected to the Mynas case). - 4ing (talk) 07:02, 29 April 2016 (UTC)


This is not the place for asking for permission. And I can't see that you meet the criteria, so even if the request was places at Steward requests/Permissions it would probably be closed as "Not done". -- Tegel (Talk) 09:04, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

See also[edit]