Steward requests/Checkuser/2010-09

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search



    •  Confirmed At least one of the two IPs listed is うちはイタチ. Which one is irrelevant and unlisted for now for the user's protection, but if both are being used together with うちはイタチ to editwar, that would be a violation. -- Avi 07:35, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
      • Thank you very much for your quick response. Altt311 07:49, 5 September 2010 (UTC)


-- Avi 15:53, 5 September 2010 (UTC)




Unrelated Unrelated from a technical standpoint:

--dferg ☎ talk 14:17, 7 September 2010 (UTC)


Is checkuser really needed here? If they're repeatedly inserting copyvios violating the policies I would block on behaviour. What do other stewards think? --dferg ☎ talk 20:27, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
  • X mark.svg Not done Agreed with Dferg. This is not a case of block evasion, 3RR, or votestacking, where it is important to know if violators are related. Just block the uploaders. If you find more than a handful and you suspect that there may be an IP behind it that needs blocking, by all means, come back. -- Avi 05:02, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your attention and sorry for any inconvenient. I will bring this case to the village pump of zh.wikipedia for further discussion. --CDIP No.150 repair meter 10:17, 8 September 2010 (UTC)


Not done by stewards since the Ukranian Wikipedia has now local CheckUsers. Please contact one of them for CheckUser requests. Thank you, --dferg ☎ talk 15:30, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Atila Kagan and Arabian Gulf@fa.wikipedia


Many users at pt.wikiquote and pt.wiktionary


Vandal accounts from yesterday were created using an open proxy that is now globally blocked. You may want to change the block settings for to disallow account creations (you can even switch off the "anon. only" flags) since only vandals have used this IP open proxy range.

Another thing. If possible, please do not rename those accounts until we have globally blocked the account because that only increases the ammount of work we have to do later for the investigations - indef. block them locally and report them to a steward. You can report new vandal accounts like those ones at Steward requests/Global#Requests for global (un)lock and (un)hidding or vandalism reports so that we can globally block him. In the event one of those usernames contains grossly insulting and/or offensive material, personal information or it is a clear attack to other users you can request the same thing via email to the stewards OTRS queue: stewards(at)wikimedia(dot)org or in IRC at #wikimedia-stewardsconnect - the suppression of global accounts is now possible.

Should you have further questions or need further help, do not hesistate to contact us again.

--dferg ☎ talk 07:18, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi dferg!
I have now re-blocked that open proxy according to your suggestions.
Re: renaming accounts: sorry about that, I thought renaming immediately was the right thing to do. I'll refrain from doing that in future occurrences.
Thanks for everything!
--ValJor 09:15, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
He's back:
  1. [username removed]
  2. [username removed]
I haven't renamed those yet. Please check them out and block the IP or open proxy he's using. Thanks.
ValJor 22:37, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done - open proxy blocked globally for a year. Accounts have been globally blocked & suppressed so that only stewards can see them (so do not worry about them anymore). Regards, --dferg ☎ talk 22:47, 9 September 2010 (UTC) PS: You may want to block open proxy range with the same settings as above.
New attack today:
  • [5]
  • [username removed]
Please keep this request open, don't archive it. It seems I'll be coming here daily for a while... Thanks.
ValJor 18:54, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi ValJor. Thanks for your report. This got handled minutes after your post here. The vandal accounts have been (b)locked as appropiate. Regards, --dferg ☎ talk 19:41, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Atila Kagan and


Declined Declined since we are not allowed to make direct associations to IP <-> User due to Foundation's Privacy Policy and CheckUser policy. If the IP is being disruptive, block it on behaviour. Thanks for your understanding. Other stewards are welcome to review this request. --dferg ☎ talk 06:50, 11 September 2010 (UTC)


-- Avi 04:16, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

thanks-Mys_721tx(talk) 11:56, 12 September 2010 (UTC)


-- Avi 15:36, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Have a ZhWiki admin contact me for the IP ranges that needs to be blocked. -- Avi 15:39, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Please block the IP ranges from which sock accounts zh:User:Alfred0823, zh:User:林光榮, zh:User:德國峱支 and zh:User:朱學淵 have made disruptive edits on zh wiki since 10 September, 2010. Many thanks.Cp111 16:08, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
IP blocked IP blocked Ranges hardblocked for 6 months. -- Avi 16:35, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Atila Kagan and گلستانی@fa.wikipedia

  • Unlikely Unlikely from a technical standpoint. --dferg ☎ talk 21:37, 15 September 2010 (UTC)


Comment Comment For me it doesn't seems to be a valid reason , Fishing CheckUser is not for fishing Mardetanha talk 13:39, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Nor for me. In fact I find contradictions in the rationale (i.e.: "I don't think they're sockpuppeting" - they why this request?). Additionally: opposing in a vote is not a valid reason to run a check unless you have strong suspicions of votestacking. Best regards, --dferg ☎ talk 15:02, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Requesting for CU because Hoyojo is blocked with "sockpuppeting" reason. But in a vote, they have opposite vote. Are they sockpuppet?-Waihorace 12:52, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Please CU User:Twhk2011,He not me.--Hoyojo 16:20, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
    • I think this relates to #Wikipost@zh.wikipedia, where I found strong evidence for them to be sockpuppets of each other. If they are opposing each other, I suspect good-hand/bad-hand, but I may have made an error. Can another steward or three check my results, please? -- Avi 19:04, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
      • If you think that might be related to the above case I can have a look if you want. --dferg ☎ talk 13:51, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

According to the current discussions in zh.wikipedia (1 and 2), there are currently some suspected sockpuppets which are controlled by users who have been indefinitely blocked due to repeated vandalism.

The suspected users are follows:

And the suspected sockpuppets are follows:

As the behavior check may not be reliable due to some reason, we need more technical assistance in identifying the relationships of the suspected accounts. Hence, please help to check the relationship of these accounts. Thank you.--Altt311 14:14, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

In addition, one suspected sockpuppet vowes that he has other sockpuppets, so please also check if any other confirmed sockpuppets. Thank you very much!--Altt311 14:24, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

OK, I saw a ground now:

  •  Confirmed that Hoyojo = Twhk2011 = Wikipost.

--dferg ☎ talk 14:38, 14 September 2010 (UTC)


Please, advise me if there is a comment or something else, otherwise I won't know if there is a comment or the request is done. Thank you! --→ Airon Ĉ 13:43, 15 September 2010 (UTC)



  • Corvo Federico
  • Corvo Pietro Pio
  • Orbomichele

Unrelated Unrelated

  • Corvo55
  • Corvo Michele

--Shizhao 12:27, 20 September 2010 (UTC)


X mark.svg Not done. Demande refusée. L'outil de CheckUser ne doit pas être utilisé pour « aller à la pêche » s'il n'y a pas de soupçons spécifiques ou de vandalisme à grande échelle.
Cela dit, à titre personnel, je ne saurais que trop conseiller à la communauté de Wiktionary en français de ne pas entrer dans le jeu d'ArséniureDeGallium, qui a depuis longtemps démontré qu'il ne cherche qu'à amener autant de trouble que possible, ce que sa candidature actuelle indique explicitement (« ma principale motivation pour créer cette page de candidature est de prouproucatéper les admins de wp. »). guillom 20:57, 17 September 2010 (UTC)


Player-23 15:09, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

  • Oppose - zh:User:Player-23 has been well known in for his "anti-Christianity" editing style. From the above request for checkuser, zh:User:Player-23 may be too hostile to other users who oppose his edits in Christianity-related articles, and think that they must be "sock puppets of the same user". In fact, I had disagreed the request by zh:User:Yym1997 to block zh:User:Player23 (the previous username of Player-23) in [8] (2009 achieve of the zh-wp equivalence of "Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism").--Mewaqua 15:25, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
    • Not a good reason. If you were clean, why you so afraid that check? The editing dispute is another issue.Player-23 15:31, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
      • Your only argument for checkuser is "they revert my edits, they oppose me in editing dispute(s), so they must be sock puppets!". Why didn't you request a checkuser in 2009 on me when I opposed the block requests (more than once) in zh-wp against you raised by other users? --Mewaqua 15:47, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
        • Calm down. I say again, if you were clean there is not a big deal to checking you. It was a lot of user revert my edits, but your behaviour is similar to Yym1997. Player-23 16:09, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
      • 1. Checkuser is not for fishing users who disagree with you. 2. Returning to your "reasons" for checkuser, where did I and the other 4 users harass you? Where did I and the other 4 users multi-vote? I don't think my comments made regarding your inappropriate edits on the zh:基督教 (Christianity) article in zh-wp is harassment. (See also the recent discussions in zh:Talk:基督教 (Talk:Christianity, in Chinese).) --Mewaqua 16:20, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
Comment Comment And as information, this is not a place for discussion. Please clear your differences on your talk pages but not here. --WizardOfOz talk 16:29, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
PS: A Steward who is willing, will decide if there is a reason to perform a check or not and than it will be done or declined. --WizardOfOz talk 16:31, 22 September 2010 (UTC) --WizardOfOz talk 16:31, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
X mark.svg Not done Please get a Sysop or crat to request to re-open this, if this is really a problem affecting the project. Fishing CheckUser is not for fishing and please settle your problems on local wiki. Thanks. --Jyothis 20:24, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
Comment Comment From above discussion it is not need a Sysop or crat to request this. I hope that you can reconsider my request, thank you very much.--Player-23 05:36, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
Please provide sufficient evidence to support your complaints about me before requesting a checkuser fishing on users who disagree with your disruptive edits on Christianity-related articles in zh-wp. --Mewaqua 14:24, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
I have rechecked this request , I have to echo what Jyothis said . Mardetanha talk 14:30, 23 September 2010 (UTC)


rajeevmass Stale; other Unrelated Unrelated from a technical standpoint --Shizhao 12:46, 25 September 2010 (UTC)


Status:    Done

Hi, I am SYSOP from MS Wiki. Please block IP address for * ClearingHouse (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser). Suspected to be mass vandal as previous attack. Previous suspected sockpuppet used are Shah560, Lidl10, Datamonitor, MyExcellency ... a lot more. Yosri 23:41, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Previous sockpuppet as follow (in no particular order):-

Yes check.svg Done.

ClearingHouse is Inconclusive Inconclusive, other all Stale. Plese see Steward_requests/Checkuser/2010-07#Retailer.40ms.wikipedia, Steward_requests/Checkuser/2010-05#Vandal_in_MSWIKI, Steward_requests/Checkuser/2010-06#MS_Wikipedia, Steward_requests/Checkuser/2010-02#ms_Wiki--Shizhao 13:33, 26 September 2010 (UTC)