Steward requests/Checkuser/2010-04

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 April 2010, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion.

Лист рівнодення@ukwiki

The following discussion is closed.
Hello Leonst. Could you please explaing (with supporting evidence) why do you suspect those users are the same person? Please note that Fishing CheckUser is not for fishing. Thanks for your understanding. Best regards, — Dferg (talk) 17:02, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
No, he can't. This Leonst is a well-known thin troll persistently trying to use his consensuslessly gained sysop tools in order to perform pressure towards those who he disagree with. Do us a favour, ignore this provocation. Thanks. --Blackstar19 15:18, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
Concerning uk:Користувач:Лист рівнодення and uk:Користувач:Bulka UA, they have quite similar edit patterns (e.g. this edit by Bulka UA and this by Лист рівнодення), both are participating in edit wars with similar comments (Лист рівнодення, Bulka UA), common interests (Лист рівнодення's first edit was in the first article created by Bulka UA)
Please also check uk:User:Blackstar19 who submitted the comment above. His edit above is his very first edit (!), so it's quite likely that this is not a newbie but some account for trolling (possibly by uk:User:Clyde700 who wrote something similar before. Best regards — NickK 19:48, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
  • NickK (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser) is a well-known thin troll persistently trying to use his consensuslessly gained sysop tools in order to perform pressure towards those who he disagree with. Do us a favour, ignore this provocation. Thanks.--Prima klasy4na 20:39, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Two pairs of edits out of thousands overall don't prove anything. I'll afford to reveal you a weird mystery: everyone's very first edit was in an article created by someone else. Apart from this stuff, I don't mind being checked at any time. Good luck, guys. --Blackstar19 22:07, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Explanations were aded [1], [2]. Can somebody respond to the request, please?--Leonst 22:05, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

 Confirmed that w:uk:user:Bulka UA and w:uk:user:Лист рівнодення have had the same IPs. Others look Unrelated Unrelated, so Blackstar19, you are hereby cleared.--Jusjih 01:30, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Levent@tr.project

The following discussion is closed.
  • please provide difflinks to the abuse and to communityconsensus on removing his adminbit. very best, oscar 11:37, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
[3] Checkusers' comments can be seen at the bottom of the page. --Gökhan 11:54, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
[4]. They confessed to sharing account and Levent (sysop) suggested that he did not know there was a rule against sharing his password. Thank you.--Gökhan 09:13, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Beste Oscar,

The sockpuppet onderzoek en over het controleren van IP kijk bij de controleer gebruikers van Tr.wikipedia de link staat hier beneden;
(1)

Groetjes,--CnkALTDSmesaj/message 10:02, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

I think there is no need to proceed this request , since the trwiki has 4 CUs , and they all shared their thoughts --Mardetanha talk 10:36, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Ook zijn hun mij aan het verdedigen en de beheerder van tr.wikipedia is gerelateerd met het zelfde IP adres als in onze vele werken op Wikipedia. Het is niet mogelijk, want ik woon in Istanbul (de populairste stad van Turkije), de beheerder woont in een andere stad genaamd Izmir. Tussen Izmir en Istanbul zit een grote afstand. Ik ben nog nooit in Izmir geweest tot deze tijd (zelfs voor wikipedia). Dit is geen eerlijk onderzoek. Alsjeblieft regel het. Groetjes.--CnkALTDSmesaj/message 14:03, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Deferred Deferred to trwiki CUs  — mikelifeguard@meta:~$  00:24, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Ccrazymann@sh.wikipedia

The following request is closed.
  • Links: [5] [6] [7] --MisterWiki 23:35, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
    Additionally, this user got blocked at hif.wiki because of this very same reason, the spamming of his pictures. --MisterWiki 23:44, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Ip doesn't have recent contributions. es:Drini 01:52, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
OK, I just saw that these pictures were spammed crosswiki, but is it related or not? --MisterWiki 01:54, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
As Drini notes, IP does not have recent contributions so we can not check. If the user/IP behaves in a disruptive way, just block on behaviour or request an admin to do so. This request is not done. — Dferg (talk) 11:38, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Hyllevare@nowiki

-- Avi 14:38, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

影武者@viwiki

Ctmt 03:34, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

  • We can run a check but it would not be appropriate to reveal the IP range at this time if we do. However, if the check comes back positive you could ask a steward to block the range, I reckon. -- Avi 01:41, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
I'm aware of the policy. I just thought that since he himself reveals his IP sometimes, there's no longer anything IP-related of him to protect. Anyway, I'll ask you guys for help whenever he's back then. Thanks, anyway. Ctmt 17:50, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
About 影武者 socks, can see zh:Wikipedia:当前的破坏/存档/持续出没的破坏者/User:影武者, ja:Wikipedia:進行中の荒らし行為/長期/影武者, en:Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Nipponese Dog Calvero, Vandalism_reports/Archive_1#影武者 (Kagemusha etc)--Shizhao 06:36, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks very much, indeed! Ctmt 17:45, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi, the guy is back, 丁武靜 丁勝義. I'd appreciated if a steward block the related IP range now. Thanks a lot. Ctmt 17:45, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

done --Melos 19:43, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Thekohser@enwikiversity

 Confirmed --es:Drini 20:11, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Nshervsampad@fawiki

Unrelated Unrelated --FiliP ██ 10:52, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Ju Rocha@eowiki

Completed Completed, results below:
Please note that some of the accounts are blocked, but I did not checked for how long.
If another steward wants to recheck my findings is welcome to do so. Thanks.
— Dferg (talk) 19:10, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Thank you so much! I blocked all of these accounts for 1 year at the eo.Wiki, but I don't think it matters much. These are just 1-time accounts anyway. Can you tell if they've been using that same IP address elsewhere? I can't imagine that the Esperanto wiki is the only victim of the spamming. Thanks again! -- Yekrats 10:48, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
I'm sorry but we can not release/disclose any technical evidence. Notwithstanding, we can not know if a user is using a IP address on all projects since CheckUser is a per-project interface. Best regards, — Dferg (talk) 21:05, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Feeling@kowiki

Completed Completed:

--Shizhao 13:43, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much. However, we, Korean Wikipedia users need to check THESE ACCOUNTS with CEO (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser) because they argued "전에 나는 김길태 문서를 만들기 위해서 ko:사용자:CEO라는 계정을 만들었는데, 100범과 Anece20이라는 유저가 내가 만든 CEO라는 계정과 다중계정이라고 의심받아 황당하게 차단당했다.(I made account "ko:사용자:CEO" to make article "김길태", but I was blocked because of the suspension of the sockpuppet of ko:사용자:100범 and ko:사용자:Anece20.; mention 1)" Although CEO (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser) was already blocked because of the sockpuppet of ko:사용자:Nichetas(Steward requests/Checkuser/2010-03#Nichetas@ko.wikipedia), the accounts maintain that they are ko:사용자:CEO. So, I think it is necessary to check these accounts with CEO (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser) and Nichetas (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser). Plus, after this request, these accounts made 노란벌 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser), 노란잠자리 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser), 노란파리 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser), and 노란모기 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser) and said that the head of these accounts is RedMosQ (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser), although RedMosQ (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser) is now doing Korean national duty, millitary service. So, if it is possible, please check IP and show us. 165.194.8.109 09:49, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 Confirmed, The result is the same as above:
Unrelated Unrelated:

--Shizhao 13:27, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

PS: According CU result, CEO and Nichetas from a different ISP and different useragent, I do't know why Steward requests/Checkuser/2010-03#Nichetas@ko.wikipedia would think that is a sockpuppet? --Shizhao 13:39, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
보안과장 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser) asked sysops to block RedFly (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser), and he mentioned several accounts, but it seems just community trouble and these two accounts are sockpuppets of these accounts(로이스터 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser), 카를로스 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser), 보안팀장 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser), 보수주의자 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser), 유진산 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser), 이근안 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser), 문귀동 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser), CEO (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser), 노란벌 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser), 노란잠자리 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser), 노란파리 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser), and 노란모기 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser)))
Let me show you the situation at first.
As you can see, although the problem accounts got blocked, the user is still making other sockpuppets and making confusion of Korean Wikipedia community. Of course, sysops blocked them as fast as they could, but new accounts are still creating. Therefore, it seems that this request will not be finished, until we can find an extreme measure. -- 61.74.198.238 23:17, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
All  Confirmed--Shizhao 13:58, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Persia2099, Ojanfar@fawiki

Status:    Done

Both of them show the same pattern of editing and both of them have been involved in edit-warring over same pages (for example [20] and [21]). Currently Ojanfar@fawiki is blocked (for two weeks) and exactly after his block, Persia2099 has edited [22] for the first time. Alefbe 10:18, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Unrelated Unrelated--Shizhao 13:16, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

愛你千萬次@zhwiki

The users are Likely Likely sockpuppets, and also the following users are likely:
  • Wally
  • Fulue
  • 蚊子爱么么
  • Ifenghuang
I could probably say they are confirmed, but the high use of proxies from China mixes a lot of other users into the CU-results, and there may be errors. Laaknor 16:19, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
What exactly are likely sockpuppets? If not fully confirmed, please assume good faith, which is what I do. Have the result been sent to CheckUser-l yet?--Jusjih 01:03, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
But apparently someone already jumped the gun and blocked all the listed accounts as sockpuppets. OhanaUnitedTalk page 02:54, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Just an update, Fulue is unblocked as another admin recognized it as an error.[23] Others are still remained blocked. OhanaUnitedTalk page 02:56, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
I post some evidences provide by User:Laaknor on unblock-zh@wikimedia.org. Admins of Chinese Wikipedia can join it and read these evidences. --PhiLiP 10:38, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
I believe the users are the same, due to a very specific useragent (should be confirmed by editing-pattern before blocks!), but since there are a lot of other users coming from the same IPs, I can't say "this is 100% foolproof as evidence, and you should block these users". Laaknor 10:41, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Sergepiemont@pms.wikipedia

 Confirmed, best regards ---- @lestaty discuţie 22:36, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Thank you, --Dragonòt 08:46, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Calak and Persia2099@fa.wikipedia

These two users show the same pattern of edits and Calak has been blocked indefinitely in Persian Wikipedia (since his block, Persia2099 has become more active in Persian Wikipedia, participating in the same edit-warring which was done previously by Calak, for example [24]). It should be noted that Persia2099 and another of his sockpuppets (Bahramm_2) had been blocked indefinitely in English Wikiedia. Alefbe 16:16, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Unrelated Unrelated--Shizhao 13:58, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

只有真实@zhwiki

  •  Confirmed: 只有真实, 可爱激情
  • Unrelated Unrelated: Softall

--Jyothis 16:10, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks.--Zhxy 519 16:30, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Cristián Berríos

--Diego Grez let's talk 03:08, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Was processed by Drini AFAIK. --Dferg 10:51, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

many users@zh.wikipedia

I am littlegreenman from Wikipedia Chinese, could 64.120.179.26 explain why put me in this check user request? You want to insult another Wikipedia Chinese users? I think steward request should not be abused as political weapon. Littlegreenman 17:56, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
It is not acceptable that someone only focus the "For" vote. But no "Against" one. Zeuscho 13:51, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

more:

--64.120.179.26 16:39, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

  • Fishing CheckUser is not for fishing There are other more probable reasons than sockpuppetry as to the return of many older users, most likely off-wiki canvassing. ZhWiki may wish to disqualify this conversation due to the irregularities involved, including possible canvassing, etc., but I do not think there is sufficient evidence at this point for running a check. If specific evidence arises indicating that there are at least two accounts which may be sock/meat puppets of each other, please re-file the check request with those accounts. Other socks, if they exist, should be seen in the resulting check. -- Avi 19:33, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
    • Only a matter of sidetrack on the issue on canvassing, I wish to understand the exact nature drawn between canvassing and irregularities (to could disqualify a conversation), and why canvassing should be classified into off-wiki (but not necessarily be stealth canvassing under en:WP:CANVAS) and in-wiki. In my understanding, no internet communities that are promoting free culture are standalone by itself. The are Skype, MSN, twitter and a lot of canvassing means that there is literally no way to monitor. I can't understand it could be made right to disqualify a conversation because of any off-site activities (not to mention the fact that in-site canvassing is very common in wiki-zh). --Kittyhawk2 13:43, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
    • According to talk page discussion history, off-wiki canvassing and stealth canvassing do exist in this vote. But as Avi said, it is the matter of how to prove these canvassing are related to the irregularities or not. Also, it seems that off-wiki canvassing is far more reasonable to explain the reason rather than sockpuppetry, so actually CU results do not have much value.--219.77.245.220 15:47, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

jawikinews:user:反愛知

Yes check.svg Done. 反愛知 and شيوعية are likely the same person. Of the three IP addresses obtained for 反愛知, all were also used by شيوعية, either minutes afterward or at overlapping time periods. They also share the same user agent. --Shanel 17:37, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your quick response :) --Aphaia 17:41, 26 April 2010 (UTC)


ms:user:Bacabuku

Status:    Done

MS Wiki is being vandal by ms:user:Bacabuku. Please block the IP or provide IP to be blocked. Hardcode vandal. Refer my earlier contribution (All relate to his earlier vandals.) Yosri 05:32, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done --Jyothis 06:14, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick response. Yosri 10:25, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Chzhdndb123@kowiki

  •  Confirmed No overtly apparent sleepers. -- Avi 16:43, 29 April 2010 (UTC)