Meta:Requests for CheckUser information/Archives/2020

Checks for suspicious accounts

All SPA, might be related to User:علاء/case1. All only have the same intention to vote at Stewards/Confirm/2020/Mardetanha. Ping علاء as well as Ahmad252 for ideas on whether they can / cannot be related. --Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:41, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
Their main language doesn't seem to be the same; Sofia3878 is mainly active at the Spanish Wikipedia, میرعلی_797 at the Persian Wikipedia and لاله171 at the Arabic Wikipedia.This is the editing interaction report on Wikidata. That being said, all the three accounts mentioned on their user page on their homewiki that they speak Azerbaijani, and their edits on Wikidata confirm this. In general, I'm not sure, especially about میرعلی_797. The interaction timeline is really varying; from 4 minutes, to more than one or even two years. Ahmadtalk 14:42, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
Thanks Ahmad252 for your views. Alaa also said is not related. I think this can be   Request withdrawn Let's monitor their edits further before CU then. --Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 14:47, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: --Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 11:04, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Slowking4 sock edited here

Slowking4 was community banned in enwiki and has engaged in sockpuppetry since then. They have also been blocked on Commons and Wikidata for sockpuppetry. Just recently, several Slowking socks were CU-blocked by Berean Hunter and one of them, Galtzerdiak, edited Meta during a time when Slowking4 edited there. Due to precedent, a request for CU to see if the result on enwiki is sufficient to warrant a CU block should be made.

Note that while the Galtzerdiak account was blocked on enwiki per behaviour evidence, it still registered initially as "[p]ossible as they are technical matches but [b]ehavioural evidence needs evaluation". That said, it's possible other Slowking socks blocked on enwiki (though not the others blocked recently alongside Galtzerdiak) edited here. ミラP 18:32, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Delayed note: since Slowking4 was blocked on Wikidata for failing to disclose sock accounts, it is possible a similar situation would apply on Meta if sockpuppets were confirmed to Slowking4 on Meta. ミラP 18:37, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

I did a brief behavioral evaluation, the only page both accounts edited is Talk:Community Engagement/Leadership Development Dialogue. Both seems to have an interest in GLAM. The 2nd account seems to know templates and tables in less than 10 edits, but I will not discount they are due to the engagement in other projects as this is metawiki. I will note the enwp CU block is marked as checkuserblocks but it's based on a mixture of CU evidence and meta edits. However, I will take it as it is a CU block as the template state so.
I will say behaviourally there seems to be a match and per the other projects blocks, I will say it is reasonable to call them socks. Wikidata have a policy in which undisclosing different accounts will equate to a block. I am of the point there isn't abusive usage of the 2nd account but the non-disclosure of alternates isn't ideal. I will endorse a CU to check for any sleepers and if proven they sock extensively here, a sock/CU block will be in place.--Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 18:50, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
  Comment there is no ban on using multiple accounts here, are they voting or otherwise double-dipping on opinions, etc. and being problematic with the editing? Please don't just bring other wikis issues here.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:40, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
  •   Declined - it is well known that Slowking4 (ab)uses socks on other wikis. A fair bit of his Meta contributions are aimed at trash-talking users/situations on other wikis as well. But the conversation of "should he be allowed to edit on Meta" is different from "should a Meta CheckUser invade his privacy to see if he is doing the thing we all know he is". I don't see sufficient evidence of abusively using multiple accounts on Meta to warrant a check here. – Ajraddatz (talk) 01:02, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
  • @Miraclepine: Do you have other accounts Slowking used here abusively (i.e. vote stacking, opinions racking) as meta we don't ban multiple accounts unless they are editing abusively per the comments above and I am of the view the 2nd account didn't undertake the activities billinghurst mentioned (per my comment above). There is no way to block them locally and not globally (that requires a global community ban not global lock as you had submitted yesterday). Thanks much.--Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 07:14, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
    @Camouflaged Mirage: That sounds like you are encouraging speculation or fishing. Check user is used to identify where accounts are clearly problematic, shared, and to identify that is the case. If we have problematic accounts, the user is warned, or blocked.  — billinghurst sDrewth 07:25, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
    @Billinghurst: To be clear, I am asking them to check the enwp confirmed accounts, commons confirmed accounts, as well as wikidata confirmed accounts and report here if any of the confirmed socks (by other projects) have abusively edited meta. If not case closed. This is in referenced to their request here. I will not allow checking of any accounts based on mere spectulation. Thanks for allowing me to clarify.--Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 08:40, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
    Umm, no, why are you sending out a hunting party? That is not the purpose of checkuser.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:01, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
    Upon deeper inspection of the requester edits, they seems to made several bad SRG requests. My fault for not going deeper here. @Billinghurst: you are right, they seems to be a hunting parties for multiple users. I apologize for not looking in depth before suggesting the above few steps. The CU isn't valid in the first place in this sense.--Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 09:38, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Somewhat relevant to some discussion above (but not to the result of the CU request itself): Meta:Requests_for_help_from_a_sysop_or_bureaucrat/Archives/2019-09#Slowking4_sockpuppets. --Yair rand (talk) 06:24, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: ~riley (talk) 06:14, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Ednei Campos De Jesus De Brito

Abuse of multiple accounts for trolling on my PDU. Apparently a vandal from ptwiki who was blocked in other projects. --EVinente (talk) 16:56, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

  Confirmed and blocked. – Ajraddatz (talk) 16:59, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:31, 19 July 2020 (UTC)


Status:    Not done
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 16:34, 21 July 2020 (UTC)


Status:    Done

Looks like all 3 users did many reverts each other, that already beyond 3RR many times, on both Meta-Wiki and Wikidata. I doubt if they are 3 people rather than one person controls 3 accounts. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:24, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

  It looks like a duck to me re Achomia and Tashbad based on purely editorial behaviour. They're editting the same pages and identical editting style. See diff & diff. Iranshahr1 has not editted on Meta so I'm not sure why do you list it here. No checkuser run at this point. Behavioural evidence looks enough here. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 09:44, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
Tashbad blocked indef. Achomia blocked for a week. No action on Iranshahr1. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:01, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 09:13, 27 July 2020 (UTC)


Status:    Done

Both users have new editor-like edits in RfC.--GZWDer (talk) 18:32, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

  •   Done, users are technically unrelated, though the edits of the first (in particular) are disruptive. – Ajraddatz (talk) 18:40, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: DannyS712 (talk) 18:10, 4 August 2020 (UTC)