Open main menu

Requests

Lucas Celso@pt.wikipedia

  Unlikely as I see no connection among these users.--Jusjih 13:35, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

法度,法度网,‎Returnnnulll@zh.wikipedia

  Confirmed Ruslik 18:01, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

පසිඳු කාවින්ද@si.wikipedia

  Confirmed Ruslik 17:55, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Maddox@pt.wikipedia

  Declined - no evidence provided that Maddox is related to any of these. PeterSymonds (talk) 14:08, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Luke7956@zh.wikipedia

  Inconclusive Ruslik 08:59, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Aontanna@th.wikipedia

The following request is closed: done
  Confirmed Lubleaa and Khelang are the same user.   Unrelated Aontanna is unrelated to two others. Ruslik 18:54, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Thank you very much --Mahatee 04:13, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Августу@zh.wikipedia

The following request is closed: not done
If the user admitted that they are this IP, checkuser is not needed. Ruslik 14:47, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
While I said s/he "admitted", this is not technically true. Literally the IP user used the name "user:Августу" to reply the discussion with the ip user. The other problem is that even though it is so obvious that this is the same person, admins in Chinese WP don't take any actions against the evasion of block. So I need concrete evidence to prove the prolonged block against Августу / 72.229.35.176 is legit. (I myself cannot explain this further in ZH WP because I was the one participated in the 3RR with 72.229.35.176 and is undergoing block.) -- Sameboat 15:10, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
CheckUsers won't generally link IPs to users anyway, per the privacy policy. Even if we ran this check, we could make no comment with regard to the IP. PeterSymonds (talk) 15:17, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
So there's no way to do with such evasion of block because the user starts editing anonymously, isn't it. -- Sameboat 15:20, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

(<-) Currently there is no need; if the IP misbehaves/does something bad, it can be blocked. When the block of the user is discusssed, a checkuser can be run to determine if the user edited since then, but without revealing IPs. --Eptalon 20:27, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

The IP has already been blocked for 3RR, it's the user:Августу editing thru evasion without local admins performing any countermeasure (which I'm very sure they're aware of the situation but remain silent for reason unknown). -- Sameboat 01:01, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

VUGD@lv.wikipedia

  Unlikely Ruslik 08:59, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks ~~Xil...(talk) 10:18, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Tudosobreatv@pt.wikipedia

The following request is closed: not done
Can you give a pointer towards that policy? - To me, the user names do not look similar; also, as long as neither broke any other rules, I do not really see a reason for a checkuser here. We are not the inquisition, we do not do fishing trips either. --Eptalon 20:17, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
To clarify: as long as you cannot show that both edited an article in a short timespan (first one, then the other), there is no reason to do a CU here. Neither broke any rules. They may simply have similar interests. --Eptalon 20:22, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Não tinha visto que falas português. Pois bem, estes dois usuários descumprem, a cada edição, pt:WP:V, nossa política de verificabilidade, sendo alvos de inúmeros avisos e até mesmo bloqueios por causa disso. Na nossa língua, talvez os nomes pareçam mais similares, tanto na sonoridade quanto na escrita. Roberto diz-cont 21:59, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
He don't speak portuguese Roberto. And violate WP:V is very common in a newbie. There are any reason to believe these 2 are the same person and are violating the CheckUser policy (i.e. evading a block, try to push a POV or something similar)? if there are show here the diffs. If there are not, as Eptalon said, there are no reason to check. Have similar (not that similar, anyway) usernames, per se, is not a reason to check anyone. Béria Lima msg 22:29, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
  Not done   CheckUser is not for fishing fr33kman 03:46, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Capitão Feiticeiro@pt.wikipedia

Please compare Capitão Feiticeiro to ElectroStatic Jolt, who has been banned from Portuguese Wikipedia due to persitent vandalism (see block log). This account is editing on a request for comments created by ElectroStatic Jolt, with the same purposes and behavior, as you can see here. It has also assumed being a sockpuppet of ElectroStatic Jolt and it's also an obvious impersonator of Capitão Pirata Bruxo, a trusted user on ptwiki. Ruy Pugliesi 01:45, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
Relation between Capitão Feiticeiro and ElectroStatic Jolt   Confirmed, also pt:User:Samurai Feiticeiro is ElectroStatic Jolt. -- Màñü飆¹5 talk [es] 02:01, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. Capitão Feiticeiro and Samurai Feiticeiro have been blocked. Ruy Pugliesi 02:11, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
189.100.174.6: IP address used by ElectroStatic Jolt to evade block. Please, check for possible sleepers and inform if it is possible to apply some block on this IP range in order to prevent further evasions. Thanks in advance. Ruy Pugliesi 13:04, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
No sleepers on this IP. PeterSymonds (talk) 20:49, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
I'm NOT sockpuppet of electrostatic Jolt.Solicict unlock my imediatamente.Your's three managed to embarrass me and make me angry.--Capitão Feiticeiro 13:12, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Oceano Atlântico@pt.wikipedia

+201.76.114.112. A probable block evasion with destructive editions. Thank you. Leandro Martinez msg 07:17, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
  Confirmed All three accounts are the same user. Jafeluv 07:29, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Please, check also Laslopedia. It's a clear 'vandalism-only account' that edited the same articles edited by the above mentioned accounts (example: [2] [3]). I need this confirmation to reset the block of the master account according to local policy. Thanks.” Teles (Talk @ C G) 21:01, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
  Likely. Jafeluv 22:01, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Krokodillesko@no.wikipedia

  Confirmed
Spøkelse3
Drangedalsatelitten
are socks of Krokodillesko. Ruslik 12:52, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Tratra22395768,Chinaraileng38265@zh.wikipedia

  Confirmed and also found and blocked; JustbeBPMF, and a couple of IP addys. Let me know if you want a full list/range of IPs being given so you can do long term local blocks. :-) fr33kman 18:52, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Human.gold,飞菇@zh.wikipedia

They do not appear doing anything improper. Ruslik 08:22, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
  Confirmed A deeper investigation shows a good reason for CU to be done. The checkuser also found w:zh:User:偶菇. These geolocate to China and the USA. I've checked the USA IP address and found it is not an open proxy. This leads me to wonder if the account is being shared??? fr33kman 12:53, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
they are usernames for administrator attention.--UAL55 09:25, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

bd4703@ko.wikipedia

these is proved by meta wiki on Feb 2011. 'puppets of Leno'

Less sure I am about the following names, but still likely enough to mention here:

Of the other names you provided, checkuser gives no information about Antinobba. And for History no. 1 and Backbeom, the checkuser comes out negative - no reason from the CU result to believe that they are among this sockpuppet group. - Andre Engels 00:18, 4 February 2011 (UTC)]

--여성부의 눈 11:56, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

  •   Note: Reviewing this request. -- Dferg ☎ talk 15:05, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Hello. I am the one 여성부의 눈 accused of using sockpuppets, and I strongly insist that there is no evidence at all to consider me as a follower of 'communism','Nazzism', nor that I 'hate female person and male or female feminist'. As you can see, my contribution to korean wikipedia ranges ONLY to (1) Republic of Korea Ministry of Gender Equality & Family (2)Republic of Korea Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (3)Wilard van Orman Quine (4)Donald Davidson (5)Hilary Putnam(6)functionalism(philosophy), none of which might attract interest of a communist, Nazi, female-hater, anti-feminist!

(maybe Ministry of Gender Equality can be disputable, but I edited some items which seemed to me as biased, and claims indicating violation of neutrality pre-existed before 2-3 months ago when I signed in korean wikipedia)

I insist that the accuse of 여성부의 눈 is grounded on nothing. 여성부의 눈 is making use of inaccessibility of english wikipedia users, but anyone here can ask to a korean wikipedia adminstrator whether I am a communist, Nazi, female-hater or whatever. And as a matter of fact, the whole reason of the accuse is a personal-attack-grounded-on-none. Oh, I hope Checkuser procedure go really fast, so that every fact revealed, my innocence proved, ill-will of the personal attack identified.

And I hope my self-vindication does not violate any of the wikipedia regulation. If it does, then I seriously apologize for my thoughtlessness. Bye!--Bd4703 17:49, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

  •   Unlikely - Bd4703 has used two ip addresses, neither of which is from Leno's isp. - Andre Engels 17:17, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Luke7956@zh.wikipedia , once more

Results

As follows:

  •   Likely - No mention on the IP addresses but already blocked users «Luke7956», «Protein wong» and «No same boat» shares same IP range and other technical data.
  • I've also found: zh:User:不同舟, zh:User:島彥彤周 and zh:User:Rook201 [6] which are   Likely to be Luke7956.
  • Among the list provided there are blocked users, but I did not checked for how long they are. Please check that yourselves.

-- Dferg ☎ talk 09:32, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Tio Chiquinho@pt.wikipedia

  Confirmed the relationship between these accounts — I've also found Leandrinho777 which is   Confirmed to be related to the rest. PeterSymonds (talk) 20:16, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Please compared Soli Deo Gloria do Yahoo.It´s sock of Tao Pai Pai.--187.37.104.35 20:30, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

As a former checkuser, I can confirm that IP addresses on this range (187.37.*) point to a banned user from Portuguese Wikipedia: Lucas081094, involving a serious and persistent case of sockpuppetry and impersonation: see.

His editorial interests usually involve astronomy (as you can see through the names of some accounts: Planetas do Sistema Solar), television, soap operas and things regarding Rede Record.

Please, take a look at this request above again and verify if it's possible to block certain ranges in order to prevent further abuses.

Note: the range 189.100.* has also been used by this vandal. Since ElectroStatic Jolt (a banned vandal and impersonator: #Capitão Feiticeiro@pt.wikipedia) also has editorial interests regarding soap operas, television and Rede Record, include him on the check.

Thanks in advance. Ruy Pugliesi 21:54, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

  Confirmed O Contribuidor as a sockpuppet of the banned vandal above. However, there has so far been only one IP, so no ranges are visible.   Confirmed (different IP range) Soli Deo Gloria do Yahoo = Biólogo Amador = Laslopedia (all blocked as far as I can see). One IP range is far too busy to consider a rangeblock but the other isn't so busy; I cannot share it publicly. PeterSymonds (talk) 22:26, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
  Likely «Ana Padula» = «Cassio Toledo» = «INMeditação» based on user agent strings. PeterSymonds (talk) 22:59, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
No,Peter.I`m NOT sockpuppet of ElectroStatic Jolt,Capitão Feiticeiro and Lucas081094.--187.37.104.35 13:07, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

O Satobador@pt.wikipedia

  Confirmed:

  • Sabotador: O Capítulo Final
  • O Satobador
  • RodatobaS O
  • T aoStradOb
  • Aquele que joga contra você

--PeterSymonds (talk) 06:57, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Please inclued Sabotador: O Capítulo Final and O Advogado do Sabotador.--187.37.104.35 12:58, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
  Unnecessary,   It looks like a duck to me.
-- Dferg ☎ talk 13:03, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

201.59.229.194@pt.wikipedia

It is rather useless to check these IPs. You can simply semi-protect the article. Ruslik 06:51, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Article semi-protect. Marcos Elias de Oliveira Júnior 20:10, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
  Not done. PeterSymonds (talk) 20:12, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

WikiFarsa@pt.wikipedia

  Stale - No check performed but Lmbassman does not edit since 2006 & Mlrm lmbassman neither, since 2007; so we can't confirm using this tool if they're or not sockpuppets. About WikiFarsa and those IPs: if the accounts and/or IPs are being used disruptivelly, I'd say to just block them. Regards, -- Dferg ☎ talk 18:19, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Quintinense@pt.wikipedia

  Not done - anonymous requests will not be processed. -- Dferg ☎ talk 22:29, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Matheus Camcho@pt.wikipedia

  Declined; no evidence of abuse from either account. PeterSymonds (talk) 19:19, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

189.31.89.222@pt.wikipedia

  Not done. Requests by IPs will not be processed.--Jusjih 16:23, 30 April 2011 (UTC)