Steward requests/Checkuser/2009-12

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Warning! Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created in December 2009, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion.


Checking user Uusijani

The following request is closed.

Could anybody check the user Uusijani? Seems that this is a vandalist who creates empty user pages in many Wikipedias and the only contents of those user pages is a long list of interwikis. See e.g. Upper Sorbian Wikipedia and Lower Sorbian Wikipedia. Thanks in advance. --Michawiki 23:01, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Er, just because they create their own userpage with interwikis doesn't mean they're vandalizing, many users do that (I just randomly encountered this, don't usually follow this page). -- Mentifisto 09:22, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure I see the rationale either. Are there actual problematic edits? Is there another user or users that is/are suspected of being a disruptive sock? ++Lar: t/c 00:58, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
Agreed with above. Declined Declined --FiliP ██ 21:57, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

MS Wiki

The following request is closed.

The same user have register new and continue to vandal. Request IP to block. Yosri

The following user have previously vandal under different user log/IP.

What are the suspected users/IPs ? ++Lar: t/c 01:00, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
See latest archive. ...Aurora... 06:12, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

 Confirmed that this block are related

 Confirmed that this block are related

Likely Likely that

I'm not seeing any new IP ranges to block, the last range block is still in place. Hope that helps. ++Lar: t/c 23:07, 5 December 2009 (UTC)


The following discussion is closed.

Several users have continuously damaged Pokemon-related articles. First vandal was on September 9th, 2009, and vandal is still in progress.

ko.wikipedians want to know who he/she is and from where he/she's doing the disturbance. If you can understand Korean, see this ko.wikipeia sockpuppet investigation page.

Suspected sockpuppets are those:

Administrators have blocked them, but then, new id appears and continues the vandalism on articles.

If you can, please let me know which ip(or ip range) they are sharing. Then our administrators can block it.

We got a clue ip which is (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser).

I think that you can start from here. adidas 15:19, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Fast checking please. --Kys951 15:21, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Please show (me if they are) similar accounts. --Kys951 07:51, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

  •  Confirmed: ㅇ나랮ㄷㄱㅂ, 매매매매매, 바다해, 씨발같은 한국어 위키피디언들, 아프리카, 알짬봇, 유치한만화 숙청협회, 차차아, 포켓몬스터는 유치한 게임과 만화, Ahhh, Alert, All Koreans fucking!, Blacksheep, Blackxcd, Case Closed is childish manga.^, Claimd, Click, CongDae, Crack, Created, Crime, Cxawer, Dccpp, Dealing, Deleted, Do you in, Dods, IWO, Idfine, Is your ass, Kential, Local, Man!, Mmootthh, Pokemon is very shit game., Rayesworied, Sprime, Station, Supercream, Were black, Werewaz, Wilkinson, Woasa, Wwoolff
  • They have used the following open proxies:,, I have globally blocked them. The main IP range is too large and busy to block, I think.

 — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 17:35, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

    • Thank you so much. Some of those sockpuppets are 'normal' users, so we are questioning them if they got a dual personality or it's just a misunderstanding. adidas 06:18, 9 December 2009 (UTC)


The following discussion is closed.

Request in my talk page

Olá Alex!

Como na última vez que precisei dos serviços de checkuser foi você que me atendeu, venho fazer o pedido aqui na sua página. Se isso for contra a etiqueta, pode me dizer que eu faço o pedido pelas vias normais.

Pois bem, há um mês e meio eu precisei dos serviços de checkuser para combater um vândalo insistente que assola o pt.wiktionary e agora preciso novamente de sua ajuda para cercear a mesma figurinha difícil. Ele criou várias contas ultimamente e tem feito apenas edições "corretas" com elas, mas a comunidade o baniu para sempre, portanto eu gostaria de bloquear essas novas aparições dele. O problema é que não tenho certeza quais são os fantoches dele atualmente. Alguns que eu suspeito são:

Outros que podem ser fantoches dele são:

Se você puder procurar por outros que tenham se inscrito nos últimos trinta dias, isso seria sensacional.

Obrigado por sua ajuda na luta contra essa pestilência.

--ValJor 18:26, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

 Confirmed Phillipe, Florbela and Marya dos Prazeres with Diabo e Santo. Likely Likely Lisboa. Others, Unrelated Unrelated. Alex Pereira falaê 10:42, 1 December 2009 (UTC)


The following discussion is closed.

fa:user:Behtis is recently banned for 60 days. A new user fa:user:Achtundachtzig seems to be too experienced for someone new to wikipedia and has some of Behtis editing patterns. Can you just check whether he is the sockpuppet of a banned user? As you know, if he is a sockpuppet, please only confirm it, if and only if the master account is currently banned. Mrostam 01:32, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Unlikely Unlikely they are related. They are from the same country but that's about it. It's possible that its a very clever sockmaster but I don't think so. If the edits are problematic in their own right, block on behavior. ++Lar: t/c 22:03, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

John Peters@dawiki

The following discussion is closed.

The new user Gorm76 (created today) account seems to defend the expelled user John Peters aggresively. It is clear that Gorm76 is not at all new to the project (for example, he knows how long a certain user was administrator - unlikely for a brand new user). John Peters is known to have many sock puppets at many wikis (he's pretty open about this at Commons with Nick Anfinsen) and he had (or has) a few at enwiki. Unfortunately, dawiki has no CheckUsers anymore (since two days ago). Nillerdk 19:20, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

CU was done earlier today at the request of former CUs on dawiki, and was Unrelated Unrelated. Laaknor 19:24, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

名探偵コナンは非常に幼稚だ. @kowp

The following discussion is closed.

名探偵コナンは非常に幼稚だ. (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser)

Same as Dealing@kowp. kowp admins want to stop him/her, but we can't find her/his original ip. If you can, please let us know which ip he/she is using. ASAP, please. adidas 11:43, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

"名探偵コナンは非常に幼稚だ." means "Detective Conan(English title is Case closed, Meitantei Conan) is extremely immature." in Japanese. 15:23, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation. We suspect that 名探偵コナンは非常に幼稚だ has some sockpuppets which have same meaning in different languages. adidas 16:41, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Case Closed is childish manga. (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser) and Antpell (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser) are problem accounts, too. Endlessrailroad 15:19, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

 Confirmed 名探偵コナンは非常に幼稚だ. belongs to the same person as the Dealing set. They're using, which appears to be an open proxy, though I can't confirm that at present.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 01:21, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Българиец, Четника, Ариеца, Антиантифа @ bg.w

The following discussion is closed.

Can you please check for coincidence between these four accounts. They were registered, respectively, on 27 November (Ариеца) and 2 December (the rest). Apart of this, there is a semantic proximity of the nicknames (Антиантифа = "Anti-Antifa", Ариеца = the "Aryan", Българиец = mix between "Bulgarian" and "Aryan") and a consequent participation in a petition for less than 7 minutes altogether, which would compromise the outcome of the voting in case of sockpuppetry. Thank you in advance. Spiritia 01:56, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

So, is it possible to have a checkuser reply to this request, please? Spiritia 09:20, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

 Confirmed: БялРасист, Антиантифа, Ариеца, Targovishtenec bg, Четника, Българиец  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 01:13, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Thank you very much. Handled appropriately. Spiritia 20:00, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed.

Hi, I am sysop on Farsi (Persian) Wikipedia. I blocked User:Poursaeed for edit-warring, violation of 3rr, WP:BLP and copy right laws on this article. There are users that continue editing the article. All of them are not old account their edit patterns are very similar. Could you please run a CU for these users? All of them can be the sock of the first user to evade the sanction and evade 3rr. Actually the first three users had done edit warring even before I blocked User:Poursaeed. Could you please run CU ASAP because the article they are editing is about a recent event and there are hot debates over this article?--Behzad.Modares 19:14, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Unlikely Unlikely, based on technical evidence.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 01:08, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks.--Behzad.Modares 06:39, 13 December 2009 (UTC)


The following discussion is closed.

New account called sysop tools and soon after made the lock on a User who has been locked in your home wiki for use of socks. Thanks @lestaty discuţie 04:20, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

 Confirmed: Draht01, Behalten, Behalten Test  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 01:25, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks Mike -- @lestaty discuţie 01:33, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

*khi người ta trẻ*@vi.wikipedia

The following discussion is closed.

Please check them if they were a same user. *khi người ta trẻ* is requesting for being an administrator, and other sysops don't approved him, Quick and snowshow always defend him and vote for him. These account seem to be sock because they had same ways in talking, same typing error, for proofs by an Anonymity user see here, it is too long to post it here. BotImageUploader 01:49, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Two issues: 1) Please explain how this requires checkuser, per one of the reasons given at the top of the page, since we're only dealing with one potential sock, and 2) While the link is interesting, we have no stewards capable of reading Vietnamese to my knowledge. Is there a translation? Kylu 01:54, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Quick and snowshow opened account on 28 September 2009 [1], after two minutes he knew how to use welcome template for new user[2]. On October 1, he said that he left Wikipedia without a reason [3]

Same way in talking :

  • Both Quick and snowshow 5 and *khi người ta trẻ* [4][5] always use "t" in talking.
    • Said "Ok" at end of message with meaningless, Quick and snowshow [6], [7], [8], [9] and *khi người ta trẻ* [10], [11] (he used dot without a space then Ok)
    • Use f instead of ph Quick and snowshow [12] and *khi người ta trẻ* [13], [14], [15]
  • At the time *khi người ta trẻ* request himself for administrator, after one day Quick and snowshow is the first people to vote him (this is the main reason I want to check him) [16].
  • Quick and snowshow always defend *khi người ta trẻ*. special at Lê Hiếu [17].
  • Both *khi người ta trẻ* and Quick and snowshow had same interesting in geographic and filming, special in Thanh Hóa related article.
    • Quick and snowshow and *khi người ta trẻ* always online and offline at the same time. [18], [19]
  • Both user had same typing error when did not preserve a space after a semi-colon, special in talking. *khi người ta trẻ* [20], [21] and Quick [22], [23]
Good research.  It looks like a duck to me: that is, both users have similarities enough that checkuser sounds to be pointless. Are there local policies in place that prohibit these behaviors (other than vote-stacking)? Kylu 02:39, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
OK, do you mean that you confirm *khi người ta trẻ* and Quick and snowshow are same people without Checkuser ? Vietnamese Wikipedia does allow one people can have more than one account, but does not allow one people use multiply account in vote-stacking (see vi:Wikipedia:Tài khoản con rối), we need to know that if Quick and snowshow and *khi người ta trẻ* was same people, the requestment for adminship will be disrupted, like en:user:law in English wikipedia. BotImageUploader 03:53, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
If the evidence given by the anonymous user is correct, it'd certainly persuade me that I wouldn't need to bother with a checkuser. If the people on your project decide that they don't want to give this person admin rights because of the similarity, that's certainly their right. Kylu 04:07, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
 Confirmed User edits from one account, then the other, then back again on the same IP address, on the same day, with no other users on that project using that IP address. The user "Chicken baby" is the same person, it seems. Data submitted to checkuser list in the event of dispute. Kylu 04:19, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
Thank you Kylu. BotImageUploader 04:45, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
Please wait! The checkuser can only believe, if this is the result of many on the same IP for two accounts (But Kylu not say the same this is happening in many days). Chicken baby still the case, Kylu use the word "appears as" ( "it seems"), if only "seems" not enough arguments provided link. --minhhuy*= 03:46, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
The checkuser data is on record for checkusers and stewards to review. Feel free to request a second opinion. The "it seems" only applies to Chicken baby, however. Kylu 04:34, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
OK OK --minhhuy*= 13:13, 21 December 2009 (UTC)


The following discussion is closed.

I suspect those two accounts are the same person because:

  1. w:zh:user:Akimotokenta made grammar mistakes to the article w:zh:何思謙(see [24]). I reverted that but later w:zh:user:Sdee brought back the grammar-mistake version and wrote the summary as "user:Akimotokenta 編輯合理,無需回退。" (Translation: "user:Akimotokenta's version is reasonable, so no need to revert.")(see [25]). Next I reverted that again.
  2. Akimotokenta added speedy deletion template to the article w:zh:吳國昌(see [26]), but it is clear that the article does not match zh.wikipedia's Criteria For Speedy Deletion, so w:zh:user:An Macanese reverted that. However, Sdee later added back the speedy deletion template and wrote the summary as "該用戶提出不嘗不是道理..."(Translation: "That user(Akimotokenta)'s request is not unreasonable...")(see [27]). Finally I reverted that again.
  3. In "Did you know?" nomination of zh.wikipedia, Akimotokenta voted a "support" to Sdee's nomination. (see [28], Akimotokenta voted {{支持}}(which means "support") to the nomination "澳門歷史城區哪座建築物曾是明朝時宣讀政府命令的場所?(擴建條目;澳門政權移交10週年系列條目)—TINHO 2009年11月7日 (六) 09:37 (UTC) ", in which "TINHO" is the signature of Sdee here)

For the above reasons, I suspect that user:Sdee, by utilizing user:Akimotokenta, made vandals to the articles and is supporting himself in his nomination. Please check ASAP as the nomination will end tomorrow, thanks very much. --CDIP No.150 repair meter 09:05, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

  •  Confirmed Sdee == Akimotokenta  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 17:38, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Re-opened pending another steward double-checking my results.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 14:58, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
I double-checked, and I also come to the same result of  Confirmed. --თოგო (D) 17:14, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Totally disagree with the judgement with the reason that this is toally unfair and unreasonable. (Please see apendenix 1 and apendenix 2 in the user talk pages as my reasons for objection and refer to the declearation letter by user:akimotokenta.) --AG0ST1NH0 18:50, 11 November 2009 (UTC)


The following discussion is closed.

these 3 users pretended as different people in sysop election in korean Wikipedia. [29] I already requested for checkusing in June, but there was no real evidence that these 3 accounts are same person, but now users can see this action is a vandalism. So, sysop in Korean Wikipedia already blocked them, but maybe the person who made these account can be appeared again. Your help will be really appreciated. Thank you. -- Shyoon1 20:31, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

 Confirmed these three usernames to have the same IP.--Jusjih 03:31, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
does this person have more accounts other than this? -- 04:17, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for checkusing, but can you tell us if there are more sockpuppets of 고추장? adidas 11:45, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed.

Hi, the above two users behave very similar and support each other very fanatically. It seems that these two are sockpuppets of each other. Please check them out. Thanks in advance...--Feuer1000 01:46, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done. --Erwin 18:33, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Unrelated Unrelated for the accounts named in the request.
  •  Confirmed: Feuer1000, Homayoon Hosseinian, Persischer Ritter, Florian Geyer, XZYKK, Komeil4Death, KWPI, True Aryan, Sheytoon, Hosseinnadjm, Achtundachtzig, FGeyer, Veteran Soldier, A1b2c3d4123, Giga2009  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 15:37, 22 December 2009 (UTC)