Steward requests/Checkuser/2015-07

Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created in July 2015, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion.

Requests

Тэллэй@sah.wikipedia

Status: Not done

List of users: Тэллэй (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser)

CU log

Reason(s): Hello, We had a contest in Sakha wikipedia with money prizes. One of the winners failed to provide information (such as bank details etc - which was required by the funding organization) in a timely manner in despite our notifications. Thus the results were carried out that he didn't win. And now he appears and demands his righteous place. But the results have been published already and there's no way of turning it back. I would like to request IP address history for the participant as we are afraid it has been a fraud (maybe there's a duplicate account for the same user) I am in the jury team for the contest as one of the active members of the wiki. Thanks in advance. Egerman (talk) 06:10, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Obviously Not done as against CheckUser policy and privacy policy. Egerman 1) The CU tool is to fight vandalism, 2) We will not disclose IP history to anybody as forbidden by the Wikimedia policies. Sorry. —MarcoAurelio 12:47, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

A.berjis@fa.wikipedia

Status: Not done

List of users: A.berjis (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser); Yanamata (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser)

Reason(s): The first account has edits in the same articles the second has had (I have listed some of them above). The second account has been blocked before and I am afraid if the user has abused socking to evade block. ● Mehran^Debate 12:38, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

I withdraw the request, the account is obviously a dock. ● Mehran^Debate 12:53, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Sorush110@fa.wikibooks

Status: Done

List of users: Sorush110 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser); Sadaf110 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser)

CU log

Reason(s): The user is doing uncontrollable vandalism and making subpages under his/her username page and then transfers them to main namespace. Once I banned one of hi/her acounts but it seems that he/she is opening a new account everyday.--Doostdar (talk) 15:17, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Sorush110 is

Unrelated to Sadaf110. Sadaf110 has the following

Confirmed socks: 145maryam, 15mitra. Ruslik (talk) 20:11, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks but I don't see any 145maryam or 15mitra in Persian Wikibooks.--Doostdar (talk) 13:57, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

b:fa:User:145maryam and b:fa:User:15mitra. Ruslik (talk) 19:15, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Oh yes! You're right. Thanks.--Doostdar (talk) 16:03, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Seahunter4@ru.wikibooks

Status: Done

List of users: Seahunter4 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser); Mazinkaiser1970 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser)

CU log
Discussion: Example

Reason(s): related materials on the topic is not relevant to Wikibooks (SPETSNAZ LE MC). Thanks. Oleg3280 (talk) 13:19, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Confirmed though their association was quite obvious based on their contributions. Ruslik (talk) 16:59, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Кръстоносец@bg.wikipedia

Status: Done

List of users: Кръстоносец (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser); Mpb eu (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser)

CU log
Discussion: Vote to ban user Mpb eu for 6 months

Reason(s): User Mpb eu has been blocked for 6 months after community vote but has known habit of creating other accounts or editing anonymously. I request formal validation that the newly appeared account Кръстоносец (Crusader) is indeed the same user. See also this account. Петър Петров (talk) 21:54, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

For me Inconclusive, but if somebody else wants to recheck, be my guest. —MarcoAurelio 10:11, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

TimurKirov@wikidata

Status: Not done

List of users: TimurKirov ([[; Special:Contributions/TimurKirov|contr]] · [[; Special:DeletedContributions/TimurKirov|deleted]] · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser); FreightXPress ([[; Special:Contributions/FreightXPress|contr]] · [[; Special:DeletedContributions/FreightXPress|deleted]] · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser); 80.134.89.98 ([[; Special:Contributions/80.134.89.98|contr]] · [[; Special:DeletedContributions/80.134.89.98|deleted]] · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser)

CU log
Discussion: d:Wikidata:Administrators'_noticeboard#Special:Contributions/80.134.89.98

- GZWDer has not provided enough evidence to support the sockpuppetry accusation; therefore, for now I do not endorse conducting this check.--Jasper Deng (talk) 18:07, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
  - Sorry, but I agree with Jasper Deng. Last time, the evidence was much stronger. Don't have a strong feeling about this one. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 18:10, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
    - @Ymblanter: considered the IP as an obvious sock.--GZWDer (talk) 19:05, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
      - withdrawn; already confirmed per w:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tobias Conradi.--GZWDer (talk) 02:02, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Timmy terner@el.wikipedia

Status: Not done

List of users: Γιουγκοσλαβια (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser); Παοκ (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser); Δημοψηφισμα (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser); Timmy terner (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser); Jeanis 12345 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser)

CU log
Discussion: w:el:ΕΤ1

Reason(s): It appears that the first user creates the two others users for persistent vandalism of the page ET1. But they thing that me and the other user with the name Jeanis 12345, we are pupet accounts and control us the user Γιουγκοσλαβια. Please, do the checkuser so prove that we don't have any relationship. Timmy terner (talk) 13:36, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Can you explain why you are blocked on elwiki? —MarcoAurelio 09:04, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

User Timmy terner has been blocked on el@wiki due to his behaviour here and also here, according to our local policy Βικιπαίδεια:Όχι προσωπικές επιθέσεις. --Glorious 93 (talk) 09:27, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

I'd prefer if this request is endorsed by an user in good standing -an admin would be ok- as CU requests requires good faith and not be used as a tool against disputes. —MarcoAurelio 19:34, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, but if you see the dates, the attack happened 5 days after. and here is the reason.Timmy terner (talk) 15:54, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm leaning to decline this request. CheckUsers to "proof someone's innocence" ain't usually carried at this project, nor we have a custom of doing them. I'll let other stewards to have a look at this one though. —MarcoAurelio 14:51, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Blocks are clearly attributed to user activity rather than accusations of sockpuppetry. Checkuser not clearly required. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:34, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Abdolrahman Khazeni@fa.wikipedia

Status: Not done

List of users: Abdolrahman Khazeni (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser); Linda123~fawiki (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser); Zeddefesad (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser)

Reason(s): The user has had similar edits on the same article that the other two had before (including the article I showed above). Since the accounts belongs to a banned user, please specify all of his/her Sockpuppets too if they were the same. ● Mehran^Debate 09:49, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

@Ruslik0: Could you please verify this request too? Actually the request is going to be stale after one week! ● Mehran^Debate 05:22, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Apparently stale.

Closed — billinghurst sDrewth 13:36, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Seiavoshy@fa.wikipedia

Status: Done

List of users: Seiavoshy (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser); Maahmaah (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · CA · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser)

CU log
Discussion: fa:کتاب‌سوزی در ایران, fa:کتاب‌سوزی.

Reason(s): The first account has edits in the same articles the second has had (I have listed some of them above). The second account has been blocked before and I am afraid if the user has abused socking to evade block. Since the accounts belongs to a banned user, please specify all of his/her Sockpuppets too if they were the same. Thanks --Kazemita1 (talk) 20:09, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Sorry but you copied my previous requests even without one minor change! I am a sysop in fawiki and as far as I know, the user has not been banned and this request is not legitimate based on the above facts. ● Mehran^Debate 02:40, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Apologies for the copyright violation! But user:Seiavoshy was editting during the time user:Maahmaah was blocked. As for the original banned user, I am talking about the notorious user:Truth Seeker. who has abundance of socks--Kazemita1 (talk) 07:00, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

All right, that would be an acceptable reason, however I did not understand the relationship between Truthseeker and the accounts. ● Mehran^Debate 07:28, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Closed Please take discussion back to local wiki to determine the need and value of a checkuser. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:37, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

@billinghurst: The consensus in the above discussion was that the request is legitimate. Can you do the checkuser? Because right after this request, both of the users announced retirement Seiavoshy, Maahmaah; but because of the delay in the process, they started their activity again. Best, Taha (talk) 03:24, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Unrelated between the two accounts. I do see a relationship between Maahmaah and Basp1, though the latter account only edited for a month.

To note that if you are going to start using the "Truth Seeker" reasoning then we would be expecting to see editing in that style mentioned for the check, so we have some evidence that it is the user. I think that checks like this should be proposed with admins at faWP first. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:20, 30 July 2015 (UTC)