Steward requests/Checkuser/2012-04



  Unrelated The data shows no relationships, sorry. fr33kman 16:55, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. We'll keep patrolling on it. -- Codicorumus  « msg 06:08, 2 April 2012 (UTC)


  Unrelated --Vituzzu (talk) 23:21, 3 April 2012 (UTC)


The following accounts are socks of Bencum:
The following accounts are socks of 乌拉跨黑:
These two groups are   Unrelated to each other or to 乌立跨氪 . Ruslik (talk) 07:58, 4 April 2012 (UTC)


  Unrelated fr33kman 23:20, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Carro Voador@pt.wikipedia

All accounts are most   Likely related to eachother. I'd advice you to protect the articles as a range block isn't possible. Trijnsteltalk 18:41, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Arthur Chevailier@pt.wikipedia

  Confirmed. Two socks: MasterSock and MaîtreSock. Trijnsteltalk 18:17, 6 April 2012 (UTC)


Gakma is a   Confirmed sock of Rightpeople. I locally blocked the underlying IP address for 1 month. Trijnsteltalk 18:25, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

RedMosQ, Shut up!@ko.wikipedia(2)

Hi! Why do you want to check? Is it to block them if they are the same? In that case, please identify yourself as a Korean 관리자 (Administrator). If not, please specify why you do need the information. Thanks in advance! - Andre Engels (talk) 08:03, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
I want to know and I have to show this information's result in w:ko:백:다중 계정 검사 요청#사용자:RedMosQ, Shut up! 관련 다중계정 검사 요청. -- 09:14, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
  Not done. 'I want to know' is no reason, and the given link seems to be a discussion about whether to do this request, and the outcome is not clearly positive. - Andre Engels (talk) 20:06, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
sorry, we dont agree. this chack and Idont know this chackuser. please do notdone please--DangSunM (talk) 23:05, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
To do a checkuser we need a better justification than a request. Evidence of the problems, examples are multiple cases of spamming, or multiple cases of abuse; or abuse of SULin a voting process. billinghurst sDrewth 13:18, 7 April 2012 (UTC)


The checkuser can never "absolve"...anyway your previous request was a nice try ;) --Vituzzu (talk) 23:14, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
I think several user is multiple account of other user. checkusing can find it. So it is steel necessary. --04:19, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Checkusing can find Unypoly's or other missing sockpuppet-- 04:21, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
sorry, we dont agree this chack . and I dont know this chackuser requests because this user don't write atko:백:다검. please do notdone please--DangSunM (talk) 23:05, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
We didn't agree this request. is Unypoly and he has misused IP, although you have a result, You don't declare a result about this request. and you should block and It is strongly advised that you check ko:백:다중 계정 검사 요청 and consensus of some request. At the conclusion, We don't have any consensus of this request. Stop checking. --RedMosQ (talk) 03:41, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
  Not done No consensus from the local community to perform this check. -- Quentinv57 (talk) 15:30, 7 April 2012 (UTC)


Those three accounts are   Confirmed.
It is   Likely to belong to this group :
  • Thuydungims11
  • Iwantpatient
  • Katewinlest88
  • Thiephong
  • Mattroi88
  • Xuanhoa
and to this one :
  • Agulal
  • Phamsofia811
  • Signsapr2
  • Facup0980
  • Majgoaye90
  • Vimegu990
  • Vimegu90
  • Pitivi90
  • London578
  • Florist26th
  • Lasermarking546
  • Pourboir
  • Lisimsta229
  • LeHanhNga
  • Kevilcuongpro
  • Thongkaka71
  • Thongkaka66
  • Thongkaka61
  • Katanara
  • Thongkaka58
  • Thongkaka50
  • Dienthoai9
  • Tuixachs90
  • Thongkaka44
  • Leeena77
  • Phonglan90
  • Thuyenbien89
  • Lili887
  • Thongkaka28
  • Thongkaka27
  • Thongkaka26
  • Liliseos6
  • Xuan12
  • Noithat12
All of them are more or less spammers, anyway. I blocked the ones that were not already blocked. Cordially, Quentinv57 (talk) 06:52, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
At Q's request I have done further digging. All   Confirmed and if you look at the block log you will see the problematic ranges have been blocked for the medium term. I only saw 1 possible account that would take collateral damage. I have notified CU to see if others are having similar issues. The preceding unsigned comment was added by Billinghurst (talk • contribs) 09:24, 7 April 2012‎.
First of all, wow. Nice work uncovering this everyone. Billinghurst, you say one account could take collateral damage. I think it can just be given the IP block exemption flag? --Krenair (talkcontribs) 12:36, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
Zero edits anywhere,, and I couldn't be sure that it is a good account, so I wasn't overly fussed. If MW thinks that it should be, then I can dig it out and grant exclusion. billinghurst sDrewth 12:46, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks a lot! I have to say that since your blocks we have received at least 90% less spam!--Jasper Deng (talk) 02:33, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

ElectroStatic Jolt@pt.wikipedia

Well, I know ip's can not do requests. Then ask them to do in my name, because the pattern is very similar issues. Thank you.Érico msg 22:26, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
I'd say   Confirmed, based on the evidence and the checkuser results. No more sockpuppets found. Trijnsteltalk 17:12, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Conde Nolasco@pt.wikipedia

Small note: I blocked the Lord Nolasco for being DUCK obvious user. The editions of the users are really like.Érico msg 22:29, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

1 & 2   Likely or greater so, call it   It looks like a duck to me, remainder are   Stale. I would keep a watch on Waleran Bigot, and George Fitzalan as   Possible (both have zero edits). billinghurst sDrewth

Andrade Lira Brun@pt.wikipedia

Please check w:pt:User:Simone Lira. Simone Lira is a "false cousin" of Bruno Leonard. Karyne Lira Dias, Simone Lira and Dias Lira Leonard Bruno has a identic surname. Bytes (talk) 14:57, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Usuário Bytes nada mais é que o bloqueado Electro Static Jolt 15:39, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
Eu solicito a imediata suspensão da verificação: eu não tenho nenhuma coneção com essas contas. Esse covarde (usa nome Byte pra fazer acusações infundadas) usa meu nome pra me prejudicar na Wikipédia e por culpa dele estou bloqueado na Wikipédia. E ponto final.
Translate to English: I request the immediate suspension of the check: I no have connection with these accounts. This coward (use the name Byte to make unfounded accusations) use my name to harm me in Wikipedia because of him and I am blocked on Wikipedia. That's it. Bruno Leonard (talk) 00:37, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Not done at this stage. Hold over for appointment of CU atptWP. billinghurst sDrewth 13:16, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

ElectroStatic Jolt@pt.wikipedia

Bruno Leonard (talk) 01:26, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Lord Mota is a well known editor at wikipt, as is Luizpuodzius. There are very few evidences to warrant a check as inclusive as this, based only on geo info. Be careful, please. José Luiz talk 02:31, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Not done. Previous checks done in this area, and has level of tit for tat. Further efforts can await appointment of CU at ptWP. billinghurst sDrewth


Best I can tell   Inconclusive compared to historical data billinghurst sDrewth 14:01, 10 April 2012 (UTC)


I'm not a steward or checkuser, but this one might be related. Mathonius (talk) 05:24, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
I'm not either, but mw:Special:Contributions/ might be related. πr2 (tc) 05:26, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
IP blocked on Deng (talk) 05:29, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Unsurprisingly   Confirmed User is using what looks like dynamically assigned IP addresses from the one ISP (9 IPs identified on mw alone) and these IP are at least over 3 /8 ranges. Looking to manage this by blocking IP ranges would be problematic and have broader consequences and collateral damage. billinghurst sDrewth 15:02, 11 April 2012 (UTC)


  Unrelated fr33kman 21:55, 11 April 2012 (UTC)


  Confirmed and related to a previous checkUser request billinghurst sDrewth 14:05, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

plus today I have globally locked these socks

Lucas Teles banido (Talk | contribs | block) (Check) (12:39, 13 April 2012 -- 12:40, 13 April 2012) [3]
Vretarna Stovreten Karlstorp (Talk | contribs | block) (Check) (12:38, 13 April 2012 -- 12:38, 13 April 2012) [3]
Aporietkdj j lklsjjfjsjdllf (Talk | contribs | block) (Check) (12:35, 13 April 2012 -- 12:36, 13 April 2012) [3]
Dyones Ropper (Talk | contribs | block) (Check) (12:22, 13 April 2012 -- 12:28, 13 April 2012) [5]
Bernard Colliwing (Talk | contribs | block) (Check) (12:14, 13 April 2012 -- 12:19, 13 April 2012) [4]

though I see that there are edits that need attention. billinghurst sDrewth 12:47, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Pizza is Pizza and Pizza@mediawikiwiki

Done what we can, you may wish to block the url locally. Thanks. billinghurst sDrewth 05:32, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
Since the same link is being added globally, I've requested a global blacklist of it. Since I don't know and I can't do so, would there please be eyes on Talk:Spam blacklist?--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:34, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
Global blacklist can only be applied to a domain, the full url or other components needs to be handled locally. billinghurst sDrewth 05:36, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
Ugh. So what would the regex be for it if I were to add it locally?--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:40, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
I would just add the full url suitably modified, or you could just look to \WA4jgXQQns8A billinghurst sDrewth 05:43, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
Locally blacklisted on mediawikiwiki now, would be nice if we had a bot to add and sync such links.--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:47, 15 April 2012 (UTC)


Counting out a shared IP with no suspicious activity, I could find no other account than ChicoBot checking Chicocvenancio's IPs.Elfix 18:38, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Jancen sergio@pt.wikipedia

  Question: Err, wait. Are you asking us to redo the check? Any new elements that would justify re-doing the CU? Elfix 21:08, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
I'm trying to see if it's possible to uncover other accounts. On this CU result Jancen sergio was connected to this case, which involved a huge number of socks and manipulated pools (see here and here). On the last few days he raised suspicion due to unusual edits on this pool and its related pages. --viniciusmc (talk) 21:59, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Well, without any great eagerness I performed a check on this user, and found nothing suspect. The new data is still different from the one associated with Caroline Rossini: there is still no way to link them up. If you have any new accounts, it would help a lot, though. Elfix 22:20, 17 April 2012 (UTC)


  Possible, but meat-puppetting seems more probable in this case. Elfix 22:27, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Lazário Lagário@pt.wikipedia

All   Confirmed. Elfix 21:18, 17 April 2012 (UTC)


  Confirmed, as expected. I locally blocked the underlying IP address for two weeks. It could be an open proxy. I'll ask others to check that. Trijnsteltalk 19:39, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

George miranda do nascimento@pt.wikipedia

Luckas12 (talk) 21:20, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Some polls that users participated: Wikipédia:Escolha do anexo em destaque/Anexo:Discografia de Backstreet Boys, Wikipédia:Escolha do anexo em destaque/Anexo:Lista de singles número um na Promusicae em 2011, Wikipédia:Escolha do anexo em destaque/Anexo:Discografia de Chris Brown, Wikipédia:Escolha do artigo em destaque/Born This Way, ikipédia:Escolha do artigo em destaque/Turn Up the Music (canção de Chris Brown), Wikipédia:Escolha do artigo em destaque/Turn Up the Music (canção de Chris Brown). But also in some polls he voted in a "different".Érico msg 22:30, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
Can we have it confirmed by an administrator that they are concerned about someone trying to pervert processes, and whether there has been attempts to resolve this onwiki. billinghurst sDrewth 09:23, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Érico is a bureaucrat at --viniciusmc (talk) 22:00, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
That response doesn't answer my request. Checkuser tool is not a magic wand, and such a request should be coming from someone who has the concerns and can do something about it rather than from a general user. At this point, there seem some superfluous requests. billinghurst sDrewth 12:36, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
I do not think the same people (my opinion). And if there are more doubts applications will finally be done locally, without the necessity of come here.Érico msg 21:07, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
  Not done billinghurst sDrewth 09:57, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, it was not malicious intent. Just a suspicion, I'm glad to know it was not fake accounts. Luckas12 (talk) 15:14, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Xos Ylyunga@sah.wikipedia

  Confirmed - I already locked it earlier today. Apat ng GABRIELA (also locked) is a confirmed sock. Trijnsteltalk 21:29, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Bedankt--Ymblanter (talk) 05:46, 18 April 2012 (UTC)



--Shizhao (talk) 14:11, 19 April 2012 (UTC)


The following accounts are   Confirmed. Unfortunately I can't block an IP address and/or range.

  • 佛學
  • 佛法
  • 東方黃金
  • 愛心圖片
  • 愛愛圖片
  • 人人微博
  • 北京淘寶
  • 遊戲餐廳
  • 電影達人
  • 台北基金
  • 三國棒球
  • 手機遊戲
  • 手錶品牌
  • 大樂透
  • 拍賣
  • 電視
  • 購物
  • 求職
  • 電子書
  • 影片
  • 論壇
  • 圖書
  • 佛經
  • 弘憶論壇
  • 牟尼佛法流通網
  • 法師
  • 佛法
  • 大寬法師
  • 大寬
  • 電腦節
  • 平板電腦
  • 下載
  • 軟體
  • 公益
  • 雜誌
  • 釋大寬法師

Trijnsteltalk 16:07, 21 April 2012 (UTC)


A lock that reaches 16,000 users. This is prudent? Still blocked due to zealously. Observatore (talk) 21:39, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Clarification, the range of IP was unlocked.Érico msg 21:42, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
As I said before, in my state's near monopoly in fixed telephony. It has been clarified. Grateful. Observatore (talk) 21:46, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
  • Note: A large IP range was blocked by a sysop, which ended by disallowing edits by Observatore. This range block was done with intentions to stop edits from a third user. As the range was too large, it was unblocked. Apparently, Observatore wanted to prove innocence with this request, but it doesn't seem to be necessary anymore per what he says.‴ Teles (T@ L C S) 02:01, 21 April 2012 (UTC)


--ValJor (talk) 20:06, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Riam and Merriam are definitely   Confirmed, but I've asked other stewards to give some assistence in this case. You'll hear soon more. Trijnsteltalk 20:23, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
I added Quoda to the list, I'm almost sure it's him as well. Please check this one. Thanks again.
--ValJor (talk) 13:19, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
I would call it   Confirmed billinghurst sDrewth 13:32, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
Sorry to keep extending this, but I have now added LoboBobo to the list. Thanks!
--ValJor (talk) 12:55, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Interestingly two IP addresses, one clear match for service provider and the behaviour, the other belongs to same location, though through TV cable. Enough of a duck to say   Confirmed. billinghurst sDrewth 14:51, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for all the work so far, but I really need that overall check of new accounts. There has been way too much suspect activity this past few days, this guy is on a roll, I can't keep coming back here to list each case. Thanks.
--ValJor (talk) 08:51, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
CheckUser is not a prophylactic, nor is WMF able to filter new users. We simply have to judge users on their edits, and if there are problematic edits or editors then we will deal with them as they appear. Even (especially?) stewards are to comply with CheckUser#Use of the tool. billinghurst sDrewth 13:51, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
It looks like the good guys have their hands tied and the bad guys can do whatever they want. Sad state of affairs...
As I mentioned before, this guy is really insidious, his first "contributions" look very innocent for someone looking at them for the first time. He then establishes his puppets and after that starts the real vandalism. I have been trying to stop him before he can do real harm.
Anyway, in the past it has happened that you guys would find more sockpuppets than I had originally listed. I was asking for something like that.
Well, I listed a few more names that may be puppets of this vandal. Please check those. Thanks again for all the hard work!
--ValJor (talk) 14:40, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

  Comment Request reopened. The last five accounts (Jorge Bruno Canadá, Jorge Messe, Gualdim, Vale Jorge Canadá and Mecanismo) aren't checked yet. Trijnsteltalk 16:06, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

We really can't check every new account. There must have a good reason to do it (i.e something on the username, something on the user edits that matches any pattern) or we run the risk of checking innocent users. For example, 'Mecanismo' is a regular user from and - though I can't assure that - it is very unlikely that he is related.‴ Teles (T@ L C S) 00:22, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
Oh well, while we here discuss the merits and problems of checking all new users, he has created another one: I replaced Mecanismo with Charroque da Boca Profunda‎. I really need your help guys!
It seems pt.wikt needs a dedicated CU person...
--ValJor (talk) 15:20, 21 April 2012 (UTC)


  • Charroque da Boca Profunda
  • Jorge Messe
  • Djuzé
  • Jorge Bruno Canadá
  • Vale Jorge Canadá
I didn't check Gualdim as I could not identify any reason to do it. I'm ok if another steward wants to do it.‴ Teles (T@ L C S) 16:38, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
Now it seems he's trying to impersonate me, to create even more confusion. I just got the following message in my e-mail address:
Alguém, provavelmente você, com o endereço de IP, registou uma conta
"José Sócrates" com este endereço de e-mail no Wikcionário.

Para confirmar que esta conta realmente é sua, e para activar
as funcionalidades de e-mail do Wikcionário, abra o seguinte endereço no seu navegador:***

Caso este *não* seja você, não siga o endereço. Este código de confirmação
irá expirar 18h27min de 29 de abril de 2012.
Can you guys do something about this? Or is there another place to take this request, now that it is not related to checkuser?
--ValJor (talk) 12:46, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
In my message to you yesterday, I explained about the range blocks, and your ability to modify them. I would suggest that you discuss the email facility with your fellow administrators and determine whether that should be modified. At some point we simply have to let the irritations be seen as just that. This person is just an irritating prat, and will keep pushing the bruises. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:02, 23 April 2012 (UTC)


The following accounts are   Confirmed. I locally blocked the underlying IP address for two weeks.
  • Birdnicho
  • Ouchuquan
  • Ouchuquan1
  • Ou96choc1r
  • Ou96choc1r1
  • Ou96choc1r11
Inquisitor Ehrenstein is   Unrelated to the socks mentioned above.
Trijnsteltalk 20:36, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Everyone blocked except Inquisitor Ehrenstein. Looks like they all wanted to impersonate him.--Jasper Deng (talk) 21:47, 23 April 2012 (UTC)


  Confirmed and globally locked! --Vituzzu (talk) 19:00, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:03, 24 April 2012 (UTC)


  Confirmed and globally locked again. Thanks! Trijnsteltalk 20:36, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Dank je wel.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:54, 24 April 2012 (UTC)


  • Americophile
  • ایران=افغانستان
  • Soghanlig
  • Hezbol
  • Hamed alikhani
  • لئونیداس
  • Pai mei

--Shizhao (talk) 02:59, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. How about the IP ( (talk) 03:20, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

The IP are unrelated--Shizhao (talk) 06:32, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Baydoo Algamayev@kywikipedia

only the first was   Confirmed and actions taken to block, and to help further for a little while. Thanks for reporting. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:00, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. --N KOziTalk 12:04, 25 April 2012 (UTC)


  Confirmed and blocked for spam. -- Tegel (Talk) 18:29, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
Be sure to block the underlying IP(s).--Jasper Deng (talk) 18:31, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
That's done as well. -- Tegel (Talk) 18:31, 27 April 2012 (UTC)


  Confirmed, open proxy blocked. Bencmq (talk) 02:37, 28 April 2012 (UTC)


  • Yeah, the template doesn't take more than one wiki.--Jasper Deng (talk) 02:16, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
  •   Confirmed, was a duck case anyway, but global blocks were in order. Snowolf How can I help? 02:23, 28 April 2012 (UTC)


It does not seem to be related with previous accounts checked. No other accounts found.‴ Teles (T@ L C S) 03:27, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Strange considering that Dpuw6402, created just half an hour earlier, had his talk page also included in this spammer's spamming.--Jasper Deng (talk) 03:31, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Yeah... I saw that. Checkuser tool didn't relate it to Dpuw6402 though and I have no reason to check Dpuw6402.‴ Teles (T@ L C S) 04:21, 28 April 2012 (UTC)


Pai mei and همان are   Unrelated. No comment with regard to the IP address. Trijnsteltalk 20:24, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Please investigate the IP as well. The IP was very disrupting and it did serious personal attacks and voted with the users. If it is the sock of this user. It will be a huge issue.Behzad.Modares (talk) 20:34, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

As a response to your email you send to me: I can only say the IP address is definitely   Unrelated to user همان (who has sysop rights). Trijnsteltalk 20:37, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the fast response.Behzad.Modares (talk) 20:40, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Ada Dzhabrailnev@lezwikipedia

  Confirmed and I found a second account: Zhakail539. Both are globally locked now. Thanks! Trijnsteltalk 19:49, 30 April 2012 (UTC)