Steward requests/Checkuser/2011-11


Sockpuppets accounts @zh.wikipedia

Seems (s)he does not mean spam but 'sockpuppets'. Imaxy and 神的邻居 are found to be sockpuppets in some earlier CUs. --Bencmq 16:10, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
Okay... but how can you be sure that w:zh:User:栽一棵树 and w:zh:User:Partricksharep did anything against WP:NPOV and WP:LIVING ? I will need more details, especially on those two accounts. Thanks -- Quentinv57 (talk) 18:35, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
These accounts are registered in one day and upload many pictures in commons for w:zh:User:Cnzhengzhou's Articles which is not hot topic in the same time. However,the pictures are likely from the same auther.--Amazingloong 01:51, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
I suggest to do this check. Imaxy used to abuse other users then use other puppet accounts to get rid of indefinite block, which is against the puppet policy.--Kegns 09:43, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
Imaxy and 神的邻居 are too old while Partricksharep and 栽一棵树 are mispelled (and I cannot find the real one since I cannot understand ZH at all).
  Confirmed 郑大好样 → 襄樊一夜 → Cnzhengzhou → Xiuxiudi → Zxganbu → Woaizx → Zgdxq → 文物保护家 // Cnzhengzhou→Hunhund →Buyaopohuai →Herstory→Danyangdy while Huanlede9 has no incoming arrows but to me it's yet another puppet.
--Vituzzu 16:31, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
But, and other similar ip are still extremely active. How to deal with it ?--Amazingloong 07:31, 2 November 2011 (UTC)


Actually I don't see a local consensus (which is afaik needed on about your requests (anyway you should check the first link, I had to find the right one via special:search). --Vituzzu 16:29, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
You can take a look at this: w:ko:사용자토론:Dragons#해명 요청. The first link was not a discussion indeed (I was confused), sorry. Ykhwong 16:33, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
Ok, Bencmq is on it. --Vituzzu 16:37, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
I saw the links and missed out the part that no request was made on ko:위키백과:다중 계정 검사 요청 so I checked the accounts. Apologise for that, but anyway the two accounts are   Confirmed. --Bencmq 16:49, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

BF101 on cywiki and shwiki

Sorry but   Declined. I know this is a good faith request notwithstanding per edit patterns and projects editted I think it's —as you say— clear it's him so no need for CU. I see that the IP does not edit since early today so IMHO there's no need for a globalblock either right now. However the IP looks like an open proxy. If the proxy can be confirmed or problematic edits starts please post at SRG. I'm working on determining the open proxy right now, though. Best regards, —Marco Aurelio (Nihil Prius Fide) 14:04, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
Okay, the IP was already blocked. πr2 (tc) 02:06, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Easyeasy is clearly unrelated to others per CU data (and others are not really together too).
But I would advise to take this negative CU result with precautions, because they are obviously ducks. For example, the first edit of 杨五郎的护卫兵 is on the user page of EasyEasy. So they are necessarily related somehow.
After all, even if the CU results are inconclusive, I would not take these comments into account, as people creating an account to comment somewhere are not members of the community, so their vote is not representative of it (that's why a lot of wikis have conditions on the date of creation and the editcount for an account to vote). Best regards, -- Quentinv57 (talk) 15:52, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


Can you explain better your request? Afaik I'd say checkuser is not for fishing. --Vituzzu 19:56, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
lt:user:Nomad is admin in Lithuanian Wikipedia. In WP LT often negative comments. Suspicion is: Nomad owner of anonim and author of negativ comments. We do not have checkuser in WP LT. We can not verify/proof. Decent user can not be admin of Wikipedia. And "writer" of insults. --Brox 20:07, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
  CheckUser is not for fishing + We don't make links from IP addresses to usernames unless there is a listed one of six exceptions. Trijnstel 20:25, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

sockspeppets@ko.wikipedia (2)

[4] No need to say. --관인생략 06:37, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
  Not done for exactly the same reasons as a month ago. -- Quentinv57 (talk) 13:15, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
I do agree with the decision : communism and anti-feminism is a matter of opinion, not illegal, and as long as these opinions are not harassing and insulting or threatening directly some designated persons, and also allow the contradiction without forcing others to adopt their one or delete their own contributions, and do not spam the subject in unrelated areas where they are completely out of topic, this opinion can be respected ; in articles, sources may be asked but verifiable public statements by personalities or authors can be cited as long as there's no breach of copyright. Users can have very different opinions and defend them. This is freedom of speech, a freedom that Wikmedia defends, even if those opinions do not please to everyone or just to a local or global majority. verdy_p 20:56, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
Please don't make an ideological matter out of a merely technical one:) CU needs local consensus and is intended to be used to avoid canvassing, sockpuppeting, etc. etc....
--Vituzzu 15:38, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

I would make a similar request. The contributions of the IP show that he always edit when Marcos is online (or very close to a logged action made by him). He would be asking for blocks and performing those same blocks, which is not allowed by our local policy (pretending that there are more people supporting a particular opinion). CasteloBrancomsg 22:26, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
  Unrelated --Vituzzu 22:54, 10 November 2011 (UTC)


Hi Agent, can you make your request again, in Portuguese? --Vituzzu 22:13, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I`m Portuguese.--Agent 22:17, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
I meant "por favor, me escreva em portugues". --Vituzzu 22:27, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
Yes, yes. "Os usuários são interessados em páginas da Record e dois deles tem nicks muito suspeitos. O usuário Andreluchesi cometeu os mesmos vandalismos do usuário Lucas081094".-- 22:33, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
  Unrelated --Vituzzu 22:51, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Marcus Luccas@pt.wikipedia

There does not seem to be any overt evidence linking Marcus Luccas with the other two accounts, which are both now stale. However, it is very   Likely that the following accounts are related:

-- Avi 03:16, 13 November 2011 (UTC)


--Miladkhoshtip98 18:31, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

  Stale. PeterSymonds (talk) 18:35, 14 November 2011 (UTC)


Your help is much appreciated. Wyang 09:26, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

I wanted to say unrelated, but for now   Unlikely Bennylin 09:49, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
OK, thanks. Wyang 09:50, 16 November 2011 (UTC)


  CheckUser is not for fishing. Sorry to say, but you didn't (or can't) provide direct evidence that this is Poetlister or any other long-term vandal. Therefore I need to reject your request. Rosenberg is a non-sul account and it's possible he doesn't own the other accounts, something he admitted: "Incidentally, the contributions to the Polish wikipedia aren't mine. I did make some contributions to the English wikipedia a number of years ago (on the subject of postal ZIP codes, as I recall) but I may have made those contributions anonymously."[12] Additionally you can't rule out that this is really his only account: "he [Ottava Rima] accuses me of being a sock (which I am not - this my only account and Rosenberg is my real name)". Further Abd could've had email contact with Rosenberg: "Adb didn't know me any more than Ottava does. But Adb was supportive, offered (and gave) his assistance, and really did make me feel welcome." The comment of Abd on the talk page of Rosenberg proves this: "Proxy accepted based on off-wiki email."[13] Therefore I see no ground for a checkuser at the moment. Kind regards, Trijnstel 11:42, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
", but you didn't (or can't) provide direct evidence that this is Poetlister " The only direct evidence ever when it comes to socks is IP checking. There is 100% no other way to directly prove two people are the same. It has always been circumstantial. And it is obvious that the user is not on his first account - This is his first edit. He had no experience with Wikiversity and that page is neither official nor blatant. He chose Abd with no way to choose Abd. The first edit followed Poetlister being crossed wiki banned [14] and the vote in support of Abd follows Abd unblocking Poetlister (which lead to the Custodianship vote, which is his second edit. At the very least, a sock check has to be performed on Poetlister and Poetlister1 accounts which are globally banned and have been recently active on Wikiversity. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:55, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Hotel spammer@zhwiki

It's my old friend? I'll be on it within some hours. --Vituzzu 13:01, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
There's an incredibly high number of account, all strongly related via CU but I need you support to check their edits, can you contact me via email? --Vituzzu 13:37, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
  Done I blocked 48 accounts. --Vituzzu 19:23, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


Hi there! I am an admin on Thai Wikipedia. Recently we are bombarded by unprecedented amount of SEO/ads/spams. We are implementing several measures to cope with the problem. Could you please confirm that these users are operated by the same person(s) and indicate other account(s) that relate to them? Thanks in advance. --Taweethaも 14:11, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Reviewing. —Marco Aurelio (Nihil Prius Fide) 15:01, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
Done. Results being reviewed. —Marco Aurelio (Nihil Prius Fide) 15:38, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


  • Very   Likely:
  1. Blacklist all spammed domains (ask me for help if you've never used it).
  2. Prevent account creation (ask me for help if you've never used it).
  •   Note: some accounts are blocked, but I did not checked for how long.

If you need further help feel free to ask. Best regards.
Marco Aurelio (Nihil Prius Fide) 16:51, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks so much. I have (1) blocked all these users indefinitely except Jirapat.ks, (2) contacted Jirapat.ks to clarify himself/herself (3) added 6 regexps to Thai Wikipedia blacklist [15]. However, I haven't blocked those sites because I don't see an attempt to add the same site again to Thai Wikipedia. Each of the users above tried to SEO different site each time. --Taweethaも 03:18, 20 November 2011 (UTC)


I have blocked these accounts indefinitely but I just wonder

  1. if I miss any other spam account(s) related to them
  2. if this is related to carloan spam above or other known spam issue or this is an isolated incident.

Thanks so much. --Taweethaも 04:12, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello. I have results, but poor results. I don't think that CU is the best detection method for that, you should also try to match their patterns with a bot or with the AbuseFilter.
All are of course   Confirmed, and here is a list of other unblocked related accounts, but it's definitely non exhaustive :
Quentinv57 (talk) 08:32, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks so much. --Taweethaも 08:46, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
You're welcome. If you have any problems to detect these patterns with AbuseFilter / bot, feel free to ask ! -- Quentinv57 (talk) 08:47, 20 November 2011 (UTC)


  Doing... There seem to be sufficient grounds for a check here. PeterSymonds (talk) 17:57, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
All are technically   Unrelated. The only thing similar is geolocation, certainly not conclusive, but Bellavista1957 and Solhosafa both edit from the same European city, so it might be possible that they're familiar with each other. Otherwise, they are almost certainly three independent users. PeterSymonds (talk) 18:09, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. Americophile 18:12, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Bianchi-Bihan @ br.wikipedia

  Unrelated by CU. --Vituzzu 23:17, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
Not even by the place where they edit?--Kadwalan 03:52, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Carlos Lanazi @ pt.wikipedia

  It looks like a duck to me. There is no need to do this check, as they are obviously the same person. By the way, the contribution of Carlos the Brazilian Nazi has been hidden but not the other ones that are similar, so you could probably hide these ones too. Cordially, -- Quentinv57 (talk) 09:29, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Vih 14@ pt.wikipedia

By the way, Internacional Boy and Gallazaray have no editions. I don't really understand (probably because I lack some proofs), but can you explain us why they should be checked ? Thanks -- Quentinv57 (talk) 09:33, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
  Done Accounts are (sulled) proved sockpuppets on Anyway I didn't find any other sleeping sockpuppet, or better there's someone suspected such as Mvrsimoes, Camim27, Yurdnei, Tsubas.
--Vituzzu 16:08, 26 November 2011 (UTC)


I would consider them all, including the above, as   Inconclusive. -- Avi 17:40, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Joaquim C. Sousa@pt.wikipedia

  Confirmed Mendes Pinto, Luís Portman, Manuel Sousa e Silva, Joaquim C. Sousa. --Vituzzu 19:51, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Also Francisco Silva 1996, Ana Ribeiro da Silva are possible socks/meatpuppets. --Vituzzu 20:01, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Ajudante do Coelho da Páscoa@pt.wikipedia

  Not done I already blocked it here on meta clearly   It looks like a duck to me --Vituzzu 19:25, 27 November 2011 (UTC)


  • Also, they seems to be sock puppets of w:zh:User:铭达, and the first three users are already blocked for this reason. --DS-fax 06:07, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
I'm on it, there are *a lot* of sockpuppets :| --Vituzzu 13:10, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
  Confirmed 二郎神, 天朝上邦, 天朝圣国, 天朝, 第1王牌, 魂斗罗, 六耳猕猴, 铭达 铭达, Leadson, 滨崎步, 拳皇, 街头霸王, Trumps and the IPs.
I suggest zh:Special:Block/, zh:special:block/, zh:Special:Contributions/ (block in case of emergency only), the same for zh:Special:Contributions/ There are some slight similarities to the spambot vandal, anyway I suggest to ask for a CU on every account you'll lock in the future.
To be honest it has been one of the hardest checks I've ever done! --Vituzzu 15:48, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks ;) --DS-fax 12:04, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Wide range of recent '다중계정 검사 요청' document that produced a similar pattern is seen. (Each user of the contribution and the contribution has been deleted Please confirm by clicking. -- Lagnaqar 05:29, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

To be honest I don't see so much local consensus, are you sure there is any? --Vituzzu 19:27, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
  Not done done some sections below this. --Vituzzu 17:21, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Wide range of recent '다중계정 검사 요청' document that produced a similar pattern is seen. (Each user of the contribution and the contribution has been deleted Please confirm by clicking. -- Lagnaqar 05:29, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

To be honest I don't see so much local consensus, are you sure there is any? --Vituzzu 19:27, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
  Not done done some sections below this. --Vituzzu 17:21, 28 November 2011 (UTC)


  •   Stale: 떠돌이, 부산
  •   Confirmed:
    • Group1:
      • All IP user
    • Group2:
      • Lee Dong Hyeoon
      • Llagnaqar
      • Irafox s2
      • 성균관대 컴퓨터 권순현
      • 돌아이 클럿치
      • 레드모스큐사마
      • 친절한효리씨
      • 청담정담
      • 여성부의 눈 시즌2
      • Lagnaqarrr
      • Lagnaqarr
      • 소초랑
      • InternetD
      • Oh4223
      • 서민코스프레훈이
      • 훈련병오
      • Toyak
      • Toyac
      • Ksh0901
      • 관용드립훈이
      • 현동이
      • 현순권
      • 에스와이오
      • 베르무트
      • ヒョリ
      • 伽藍
      • チュグン
      • 영원한 순현시대
      • Doyak
      • Doyac
      • 베이징구
      • HangU Kwon
      • Stevoyoun
      • StalkerJeay
      • 김연하사랑
      • 이등병윤
      • 權純賢
      • 왕년에
      • 천진잠일천동신천경기경희
      • 역전 만루홈런이 터지는 그 날은 꼭 온다
      • 긍정적으로 살아가기 위해 노력하는 20대 청년
      • 킹종민
      • 위키스럽다
      • 서투른
      • 마법의천사 가라미마미
      • 오징어소녀
      • 희진6908
      • Ksh0901
      • Frenzwithmeb
      • 강동구에 사는 희진6908
      • Cshoon99
      • Seunghoon99
      • 청담20대청년
      • Choogoon
      • Seok91
      • 입닥쳐
      • 군입대
      • 부산에 살고 있는 이동현
      • Lee Soun
      • Garamimami
    • Group3
      • Lagnaqar
      • Dawtow
      • Rurun
      • Poreth
      • LowLow
      • Doint
      • Merobingian
      • Koverstord
      • Likard
      • Sqenwe
      • Odareike
      • Dagollus
      • Cenkara
      • Rlaeowndrotorrl
      • Geongu
      • Dorenki
      • Aqoinment
      • Drnsonq
      • Longtover
      • Agruhoslve
      • Dransng
      • Cscheonsh
      • Cadaq
      • Nordom
      • Cherif
      • Drenfor
      • Tarass
      • Cavevillean
      • Cecare
      • Seffrybulion
      • Pilotork
      • Emptybolt
      • Ideavnovich
      • Urdrede
      • Ksibdaggqu
      • Dakonqer
      • Fulkosdrama
      • Orland'olrang
      • Bultrain
      • Qhoranqe
      • Maber
      • Qongquer
      • Penroom
      • Ataekk
      • Morenate
      • Cerencki
      • Emperiss
      • 백괴부총리
      • Naster
      • Manqud
      • 森上
      • Caebian
      • Lagnakard

Group2 and Group3 is   Unlikely, Group1 and Group2, Group3   Unrelated. Hope CU no error...--Shizhao 16:39, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Actually I declined this request some sections above because it seems to be out of's policy, by the way Drpp is probably a sockpuppet of Lagnaqar's I'm wondering if it's testing CU techniques... --Vituzzu 17:20, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Account names in Group2 is only for trolling users in Ko.wp, and I think banning their IP is required. Ko.wp is suffered too much and too long about their trolling. --Mintz0223 10:09, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Diabo e Santo@pt.wiktionary

  Declined, Other sock puppets have blocked. Open proxies not used, just a few individual IP --Shizhao 17:10, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

وحید قاسمیان & ویکی خور @ fa.wikipedia

  Unrelated they live in two different cities.
Anyway, ویسکی خور is ویکی خور but dealing with both users there are some accounts sharing some infos, not enough to say "sockpuppets" but enough to take a look at them: Mamadex and Klaatu are similar to وحید قاسمیان and Mohammad bauer, Khazar T and Neghnegh may be ویکی خور. in these case CU-evidences are not enough at all but I think it's worth to take a look at their edits. --Vituzzu 23:20, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks a lot Mehran Debate 03:08, 30 November 2011 (UTC)


  •   Confirmed A PtWiki admin should contact me for the IP to block. -- Avi 19:49, 30 November 2011 (UTC)