Shortcut: WD:CHECK

Wikidata:Requests for checkuser

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

For the place to request CheckUser access, see Wikidata:Requests for permissions/CheckUser.
Requests for checkuser
This is the place to request investigations of abuse of multiple accounts or of other circumstances that require use of checkuser privileges.

Requesting a checkuser


Please don't ask us to run checks without good reason; be aware of the following before requesting:

  1. Checkuser is a means to choose for difficult cases. If multiple accounts show clear behavior patterns or editing type, please post on the administrator's noticeboard.
  2. Running a check will only be done to combat disruption on Wikidata, or as required to assist checkuser investigations on other Wikimedia wikis.
    • Valid reasons for running a check include, for example: suspected block evasion, vote-stacking, or other disruption where technical evidence would prevent or reduce further disruption.
  3. Evidence is required. When you request a check, you must include a rationale that demonstrates (e.g., by including diffs) what the disruption to the project is, and why you believe the accounts are related.
    • Requests to run a check without evidence or with ambiguous reasoning will result in delays or the request not being investigated. Do not post requests for fishing without any grounds.
  4. The privacy policy does not allow us to make a check that has the effect of revealing IP addresses. Do not post requests to compare IPs to accounts or IPs to IPs comparisons.
  5. Requests to run a check on yourself will be declined.
Outcome

Responses will be brief in order to comply with Wikimedia privacy policy. Due to technical limitations, results are not always clear.

Privacy concerns

If you feel that a checkuser request has led to a violation of the Wikimedia Foundation privacy policy regarding yourself, please refer the case to the Ombuds commission.

To request a checkuser

Cases are created on subpages of Wikidata:Requests for checkuser/Case.

Creating a request
  • Insert the name of the suspected sockpuppeteer (the main account or puppetmaster, not the sockpuppet!) in the box below, leaving out the "User:" prefix. Do not remove the text in the box, add to the end only.
  • Please explain/justify the request by saying what it is you suspect and why it is important that the check be carried out. Indicate the usernames you suspect, using {{checkuser}}. Please do not use this template in the section header, as that makes it difficult to read the account names. Include the diffs or links required to support the request and reason for it.
  • There are people to assist you and help with maintenance of the page. Just ask for help on the admin noticeboard if you really are stuck, or take your best shot and note that you weren't completely sure of what to say.
  • 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/transclude the subpage here.
Example
If you want to request a checkuser on User:John Doe, enter the text Wikidata:Requests for checkuser/Case/John Doe then click "Make a checkuser request". You will be taken to a page where you can fill out the request. Please make your request there brief and concise.


If this page is displaying outdated contents even after you refresh the page in your browser, please Purge.
OOjs UI icon folderPlaceholder-ltr.svg For older requests, please see Wikidata:Requests for checkuser/Archives

Requests[edit]

Swaggerdeevs[edit]

15 January 2021[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results[edit]

Reason: Have recreated several previously deleted entrepreneur spam items. Please see here Trade (talk) 18:20, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Results: Declined You must provide evidence of abuse of multiple accounts. Checkuser is not for fishing. --Jasper Deng (talk) 06:52, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

22 January 2021[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results[edit]

Reason: Re-creation of previously deleted item Rockpeterson (talk) 08:44, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Results: Artículo bueno.svg Confirmed to Swaggerdeevs. Blocked and nuked. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 11:41, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Could you take a look at Q104762601 and Q104817353 and see who created them? @1997kB: @Rockpeterson: --Trade (talk) 11:49, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
Trade, It's Swaggerdeevs. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 12:30, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

20 May 2021[edit]


Rationale, discussion and results[edit]

Reason: Re-creation of prev deleted item . @Trade: @Sotiale: Can you please look upon Rockpeterson (talk) 18:59, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Results:

10 September 2021[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results[edit]

Reason: Re-created previously deleted item Q108486580 Rockpeterson (talk) 16:14, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Possibly related:
Both edited an item on The Real Preneur (see this in relation to Swagger Deevs and of course this). Lymantria (talk) 18:59, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
@Sotiale: Still needs attention. Lymantria (talk) 19:50, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Results: Symbol redirect vote.svg Completed

  • Artículo bueno.svg Confirmed Pratiksinahauthor, Shreyasinghrawat, Garimaagarwalbrk, Sahilgaliya, Ruchigangwarking, Runupmediallp, Riyajaiswalsinghkk, Shreyasinghsaggu, Vasundhramishra, Runupmediallp, Riteshtiwari008

@Lymantria, Rockpeterson: Okay, now it's your turn. --Sotiale (talk) 01:34, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Nuked. Lymantria (talk) 07:16, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Hardik1430[edit]

07 August 2021[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results[edit]

Reason: These user are creating promotional items of marketers ,etc . And I caught the similar editing pattern by checking items created by each of the user , there are edits made by the ip mentioned above in all the items which are created by this users . A block as well as quick deletion of items is needed to prevent further promotions Rockpeterson (talk) 17:27, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Results: Symbol redirect vote.svg Completed

  • Artículo bueno.svg Confirmed ToddRampe121, ScottThomas121, CaseyPond121, Joshua1430, YaserjkAlsaidi, DavidGomez2, TModelys, MarkOkello2, SahDoctor, YaserianDR, Anshu121, DomLucre, Pierre143, Hardik1430, Ishovonahmeds, JonesCJ, TheCollectiveCO2, Baghdas3, Baghdas2, TheBrownsfish, Amit Raj121, CaseymPond121, JasonKhan121, AkaBhai

@Rockpeterson: Congratulations, you've found a good fish tank. As a service, I blocked them all. But ask RFD or other admins for their spam. --Sotiale (talk) 11:57, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks @Sotiale: , I have asked Lymantria for the deletion of this spam items Rockpeterson (talk) 14:33, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Just a note that this is likely a PR/SEO firm, see commons:File:Google Knowledge Panel Services.png (archive) where they have self-outed. Pahunkat (talk) 12:58, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
I did clean up the created pages (also of socks of 10 August below). Lymantria (talk) 07:12, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

10 August 2021[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results[edit]

Reason: I had a look to see if I could find any others. All the accounts are SPAs that edit the items of entrepreneurs, musicians etc and overlap with other confirmed/suspected socks.

  • Q107563170 Sanju098, Colombus08, Tasnimul Rafi, Tasni087. Created by confirmed sock MarkOkello2.
  • Q16882101 Rtqord. Edited by Sanju098.
  • MirBhaiOp - Involved in hijacking of Q56849410 and the creation of Q107452406, both events involved confirmed socks.
  • Q106540570 Dualina, Edited by suspected sock Rtqord. More overlap on other entries, such as Q107920856. Also some w:WP:BEANS behavioral traits.

I would say that Wikidata:Requests for checkuser/Case/RokiRoyOfficial is likely to be related given considerable overlap with Rtqord/Dualina. Pahunkat (talk) 09:55, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

I'm busy today, so it's hard to deal with it right away, but if another checkuser doesn't handle it within this week, I'll do it. --Sotiale (talk) 13:28, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Maybe.. I'll take care of it tomorrow(TGIF!) --Sotiale (talk) 13:30, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks Sotiale! One of the suspected socks just made lots of edits, and I'm currently looking through them to see if I can find any more. I'll update the case if necessary. Pahunkat (talk) 20:49, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Results: Symbol redirect vote.svg Completed

  • Artículo bueno.svg Confirmed Group 1: Tasnimul Rafi, Tasni087, Emu087, Golapi0, Sanju098, Colombus08, Aman098, Roy098, Ishma087, Taspu
  • Likely Group 1 and previous confirmed group
  • Likely Rtqord and Group 1

  • Artículo bueno.svg Confirmed MirBhaiOp and previous confirmed group

  • Artículo bueno.svg Confirmed Group 2: Ashton47a, Samia898, Dualina, Ashami921
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Possible Group 1 and 2

In any case, their behavioral patterns are so clear that it doesn't matter if they belong to the same user or the same spam company. --Sotiale (talk) 12:35, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Brilliant, thanks @Sotiale:. I've requested a lock for the accounts given that this is an x-wiki farm (enwiki SPI). Pahunkat (talk) 14:23, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

24 August 2021[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results[edit]

Reason: Please see deleted contribs, where Samiulansari9 has an overlap with sock Dualina on the item Shotok Khan. Thanks to Lymantria for helping to check this. Pahunkat (talk) 20:31, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Results: Symbol redirect vote.svg Completed

  • Artículo bueno.svg Confirmed FarasiaAbedin, MazharRahmanbabu, Monirrahmanmizan, Ashikfaruq22, Sifullahakramul, Samiulansari9

  • Artículo bueno.svg Confirmed Dualina accounts group

@Pahunkat: Yes, they're. And hello, @Lymantria:. --Sotiale (talk) 12:49, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

10 September 2021[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results[edit]

Reason: Recreation of Abdul Kader Mirza (Q108396504), something created by previous socks. Uploaded an image of Shovon Ahmed. Pahunkat (talk) 20:46, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

+ MehediShovon, see AF/Deleted contribs with recreation of shovon ahmed. Pahunkat (talk) 20:49, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
+Rashedkhan001, typical story with a creation on a Bangladesh artist. Also off-wiki evidence that I can email on request. Pahunkat (talk) 22:12, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Results: Symbol redirect vote.svg Completed

  • Artículo bueno.svg Confirmed Group 1: Maharsohailofficial, Chaamp69, Santhoshi Reddy 97, Megan Skye61, Jyotsnareddy62, SanthoshiReddy121, Santhoshi Reddy, ScottThaj, Jahidul530
  • Artículo bueno.svg Confirmed Group 2: Tokenjays, Herdik087, Roi087, MassimoDidomenico, MehediShovon, ToddRampe, Taylomusic, UbaAmichael, PierreLoupDupre, JasonFernandess

  • Artículo bueno.svg Confirmed Group 1 and 2
  • Symbol unsupport vote.svg Inconclusive Rashedkhan001

From a technical point of view. --Sotiale (talk) 03:17, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Sotiale. I'd say to delete the creations that remain, along with Q107718407 (a repeat of something by MassimoDidomenico and likely IP sock) and the other one created by that IP. Pahunkat (talk) 16:35, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

15 September 2021[edit]


Rationale, discussion and results[edit]

Reason: Has created previously deleted item Q108507594 Rockpeterson (talk) 07:47, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Results:

Mạc Thái Tổ[edit]

15 September 2021[edit]

Rationale, discussion and results[edit]

  • Reason: Huynhucc adds a lot of ridiculously long and biased description (in Vietnamese) about Chinese and Vietnamese politician, similar to Mạc Thái Tổ, who was blocked 5 months ago after this discussion.
  • Evidence:
    • Manual reversions: Huy and Tổ, Huy and Tổ, Huy and Tổ, etc.
    • Biased descriptions:
      • Q1195391: "một trong 14 anh hùng dân tộc Việt Nam với chiến công đánh đuổi quân Minh xâm lược" – "one of the 14 heroes of Vietnam who has the distinguished military service of getting rid of the Ming evasion"
      • Q701326: "một trong những mưu sĩ kiệt xuất nhất trong lịch sử Trung Quốc" – "one of the most outstanding strategist in the history of China"
      • Q184999: "một vị quan liêm khiết và là anh hùng dân tộc của người Trung Hoa" – "an upright mandarin and hero of the Chinese"
      • etc.

Unnamed UserName me 11:40, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Results: Sadly, the data for Mạc Thái Tổ has expired, making it impossible to proceed with the investigation. If you are sure that Huynhucc is Mạc Thái Tổ, visit AN to block with evidence. Thanks. --Sotiale (talk) 01:38, 18 September 2021 (UTC)