| General help |
|
|
| Report abuse |
|
|
| Request assistance |
|
|
| Noticeboards |
|
|
- WP:RFCU redirects here. You may be looking for Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct (WP:RFC/U), CheckUser policy (Wikipedia:CheckUser), or Wikipedia:Changing username (WP:CHU).
|
Read this first
This is the place to request sockpuppet checks and other investigations requiring access to the Checkuser privilege. Checkuser is a last resort for difficult cases. Whenever possible, use other methods first. Possible alternatives are listed below.
Acceptable requests
| Code |
Situation |
Solution, requirements |
| A |
Blatant attack or vandalism accounts, need IP block |
Submit new section at #Requests for IP check, below |
| B |
Evading blocks, bans and remedies issued by arbitration committee |
Submit case subpage, including link to closed arb case |
| C |
Ongoing, serious pattern vandalism with many incidents |
Submit case subpage, including diffs |
| D |
Vote fraud, closed vote, fraud affects outcome |
Submit case subpage, including link to closed vote |
| E |
3RR violation using sockpuppets |
Submit case subpage, including diffs of violation |
| F |
Evading blocks, bans and remedies issued by community |
Submit case subpage, including link to evidence of remedy |
| G |
Does not fit above, but you believe check needed |
Submit case subpage, briefly summarize and justify |
Unacceptable requests
| Situation |
Solution |
| Obvious, disruptive sock puppet |
Block, no checkuser needed |
| Disruptive "throwaway" account used only for a few edits |
Block, no checkuser needed |
| Checkuser on yourself to "prove your innocence" |
Such requests are rarely accepted, please do not ask |
| Related to ongoing arbitration case |
Request checkuser on the arbitration case pages |
| Vote fraud, ongoing vote |
Wait until vote closes before listing, or post at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets |
| Vote fraud, closed vote, did not affect outcome |
List at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents or Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets |
| Other disruption of articles |
List at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents or Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets |
| Open proxy, IP address already known |
List at Wikipedia:WikiProject on open proxies |
| You want access to the checkuser tool yourself |
Contact the arbitration committee, but such access is granted rarely or by invitation only |
General procedure
- If submitting a new case subpage, use the inputbox below; if adding to an existing case subpage, see WP:RFCU/P#Repeat requests.
- Choose one code letter that best fits your request. Provide evidence such as diff links as required or requested. Note that some code letters inherently require specific evidence.
- When listing suspected accounts or IP addresses, use the {{checkuser}} or {{checkip}} templates. Please do not use this template in a section header.
- Sign your request.
Specific procedure
After submitting a request
- Responses will be brief in order to comply with Wikipedia's privacy policy.
- Due to technical factors, results are not always clear.
- Check back regularly to see the outcome of your request.
- Checkusers and clerks do not generally issue blocks. You may need to do this yourself or submit a request at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
- Case subpages are typically archived several days after a checkuser responds.
Privacy violation?
|
|
File a Checkuser Request
|
Cases are created on subpages of Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case.
If you require help or advice, ask at Wikipedia talk:Requests for checkuser.
If a case subpage already exists, edit the existing page instead, either adding to the currently open section (if the case is not yet archived) or adding a new section to the top (if the case has been archived). When editing an existing case, be sure to list it here or add Category:Checkuser requests to be listed to the subpage.
If creating a new case subpage, add the name of the main account (or "puppetmaster", not the sockpuppet!) in the box below. Leave out the "User:" prefix. Do not remove the text in the box, add the name to the end only (that is, append the name to the existing text). Then press "Request a checkuser" and you will be taken to a page where you can fill out the request.
- Example: if you want to request a checkuser on User:John Doe, enter the text:
Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/John Doe
|
| Indicators |
| Request completed: |
 Confirmed |
 Likely |
 Possible |
 Unlikely |
 Unrelated |
 Inconclusive |
 IP blocked |
 Stale |
 Completed |
| Request declined: |
 Declined |
 Checkuser is not for fishing |
 Rejected |
 Checkuser is not a crystal ball |
 Unnecessary |
 Checkuser is not magic pixie dust |
| Information: |
 Deferred to |
 Additional information needed |
 Note: |
 In progress |
| Clerk actions: |
 Clerk note: |
 Clerk assistance required: |
 Delisted |
 Relisted |
Outstanding requests
History of the article. Thirdbeach (talk) 20:43, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
// All of the listed users in the first case (bottom)
Recent IPs/Aliases revealed on enwiki (after September 5/08)
- Supporting evidence: The IPs have the exact same editing patterns, they are all under the same ISP (LACNIC) and that has been confirmed by WHOIS. On Template:Holy Roman Emperors, the user was undeniably edit warring by use of more sock puppets, this being after the case was handled several times by more than one admin. Obviously, at this point, the user is aware that abuse of sockpuppet accounts are prohibited under certain uses (as seen on this string of edits by each contributer). These include using them to evade blocks, bans, and user accountability—and especially to make personal attacks or reverts, or vandalism. The most noticeable err against that would be the simple fact that he has evaded blocks 3 times before the first checkuser request, this would be the fifth if you include it as a seperate evasion from the one made by User:Troy is a parasite.
- Also, there were countless edits in other projects, as you can see in the case below. So, in regards to the cross-wiki sock puppetry, as explained here, the user was actually blocked once in Italian Wikipedia and was noticeably disruptive in a few of the main articles in which this person edited. Considering how widespread this is, I would highly suggest that cases should be opened in the major problem areas like Portugese wiki, Latin wiki and Italian wiki. Lastly, if there is any information that should be carefully given, feel free to send me an email. I will usually respond swiftly to any queries. I assumed that the issues would have at least temporarily subsided on this wiki for a few months longer, but unfortunately, that hasn't been the case. I am thus more open to any suggestions in regards to what further steps should be taken and how this issue can be avoided in the future. ~ Troy (talk) 04:16, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
In progress. Requires crosswiki checks. ++Lar: t/c 12:19, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- OK, so just making sure that it's ptwiki, lawiki (la, not lt) and itwiki that need to be looked at, respectively. In any case, I would expect some kind of result from those projects, first and foremost. ~ Troy (talk) 00:14, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
- Still working this, it will take a block of time to get to the bottom of this. Sorry for the delay. ++Lar: t/c 21:52, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
- No worries, you can take your time. I'm not in a rush right now because I know that the IP socks responsible for this mess will turn up again sooner or later, so, steady as she goes. ~ Troy (talk) 01:37, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
- Minor update: WHOIS query for User:189.73.71.46 matches identically with the other IP addresses. I have thus added that IP to the list for the sake of tracking purposes—these IP ranges are a little more dynamic than I would like. I'm sure to find more, of course. ~ Troy (talk) 00:08, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Declined requests
Completed requests
- Supporting evidence: Earlier this morning, I reverted two edits ([1], [2]) by an anonymous IP editor, 98.110.243.99. As you can see from the diffs, they were changing the articles so that it would say that Messianic Judaism was a Christian denomination, which is not the case. A few hours later, whilst reverting vandalism using Huggle, I noticed that KosherYid was doing exactly the same kind of editing ([3]). To add such a factual inaccuracy for the same purpose would be most likely to indicate a sockpuppet, or less likely, a meatpuppet. the odds are low that two people would converge on the same article with the same motive. — neuro(talk) 21:28, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
- Clerk note: No overlapping history. Couldn't this just be an anon who decided not to be an anon anymore? —Wknight94 (talk) 21:38, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
- Whilst I would tend to agree, it seems like it has only been created to be disassociated from the IP and the warnings attached - see their contribs for more. — neuro(talk) 21:40, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Confirmed - 98.110.243.99 and KosherYid are one and the same. Raul654 (talk) 22:07, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
- Clerk note: Not sure that blocking would be appropriate here, like Wknight94 said above it could simply be a case of a once anon user deciding to now edit using a account. Neither the IP or the account have ever been blocked, and the named account does appear to have at least one good edit, I say WP:AGF. Tiptoety talk 22:50, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
|
