Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created on 01 February 2017, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion.
@Multichill: I'm not sure if we should handle this. Oursana neither take a part in the discussion, nor in small edit war in the Q1980210 (her last edit on this page was in January, discussion took place in August); none account has been blocked. In Q869902 there wasn't any editwar/discussion, so no violation of the policy. Close as not done. einsbortalk 11:16, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
@Multichill: I saw the edit history. It looks quite simple for me: Oursana changed the administration unit (4th January) - initial value was added by AudeBot (27th September 2013), next edit by Srittau (26th January!) reverted that, then Tanzmariechen appeared. No multiple reverts including both suspected accounts, no socking in discussion. I don't say they are not sock, but imo no policy violation was proven. Secondly, working on quite old issue (almost 6 months) is pointless. einsbortalk 15:06, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
Reason(s): vandalism. please block all asociated accounts and IP. आर्यावर्त (talk) 07:39, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
Done, confirmed that they belongs to the same person. They can be blocked in hiwiki. The network range they use is also used by good users, so we can't block it. Stryn (talk) 15:15, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. local Admin has been block this all user account.--आर्यावर्त (talk) 06:18, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
Reason(s): The second user attached here, Abedwyz, was blocked for 1 month for disruptive editing and behaviour and had used at least 3 more acccounts in the past. The accounts were used alternately, never overlapping and in the same area of interest (in this case movie topics) with similar edits. The administrator who applied the block required a checkuser in the link I attached at discussion and I quote „Văd de asemenea aici un cont destul de nou care pare a categoriza la fel de voios. Poate un checkuser nu ar strica, pentru a lămuri suplimentar lucrurile”, which means in English „I see a pretty new account that categorizes the same cheerful way (my note - the user doesn't listen to anyone and adds categories in a chaotic way, like putting both main and secondary category in the same article, for example). Maybe a checkuser would't hurt, to clarify things further.” Since we don't have any local Checkuser, I ask you to clarify if OfeliaOrr is the clone of Abedwyz. Thanks.Ionutzmovie (talk) 15:13, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
Vituzzu, can you do a checkuser on Vaaraalaamaa with the users indicated above? The account was made after the second account indicated here was blocked, so the user seems to try to avoid the block of one month applied previously. Thanks.Ionutzmovie (talk) 22:59, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
@Ionutzmovie: Vaaraalaamaa == Abedwyz, though from a possibly shared connection. --Vituzzu (talk) 17:29, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
Reason(s): User Ark25 has been banned and blocked indefinitely on ro.wikipedia, following the local community’s decision of December 12, 2016. Since then, he repeatedly asked to be allowed to make minor and harmless edits, such as spelling corrections (one recent claim of this right, on his English blog). User StoneJustice registered on January 28, 2017. He started indeed as a modest “corrector”, but then he rapidly evolved into a very active “patroller”, using Twinkle and other advanced features that would be rather ignored by most newbies. Eventually, it turned out that his almost exclusive concern was to hide any traces of Ark25’s doubtful contributions to talk pages.
Now, Ark25 is well known for his excellent technical skills and he might be able to use open proxies or other methods of anonymization. The fact is that the autoblock function applied to his previous IP address doesn’t seem to be effective in stopping his access to ro.wikipedia. There are strong reasons to believe that he uses other accounts in order to evade blocking (maybe some other sleeping sockpuppets too). A discussion around the present issue is currently running at our Village pump. The checkuser could help us to confirm or infirm these suspicions. Thank you, --Pafsanias (talk) 12:32, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Ark25 is Unrelated, StoneJustice has as a sock but it's Confirmed User:Qvrtz (also User:Remus322 is Likely). --Vituzzu (talk) 12:47, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Thank you again for your prompt response. This is really very helpful. --Pafsanias (talk) 12:53, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
@Bookvaedina: if you'll fear a vote was influenced (or is being influenced) by an abuse of multiple accounts feel free to ask a check, but we usually don't make preventive checks. --Vituzzu (talk) 20:17, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
Reason(s): Discussion: tg.wikitionary and tg.wikibooks
Users are blocked in tg.wikipedia and under one user IP and voting in different projects, thus violating the requirements of the administrator of the election procedure.
"Since we have no local CheckUser, I ask you to clarify, the IP user Jaloliddin Madaminov and Ҳусаинов. Thanks.--Шухрат Саъдиев (talk) 05:48, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
My name is a Jaloliddin my surname is Madaminov. I am a incomprehension Ҳусайнов. Jaloliddin Madaminov (talk) 08:42, 14 February 2017 (UTC).
These two accounts are Unrelated. However Ҳусаинов, ToJack, Tomophone, Исми хос, Tgwiktbot and Абдулло-Довуд are the same user. Similarly Jaloliddin Madaminov and Mardon A (+ Fight M and Dagir99, see above) are the same user. Ruslik (talk) 18:03, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
I had started looking into this a while ago. I'm not sure about the Jaloliddin Madaminov and Mardon A result - I'm seeing some UA differences there. Probably just a bunch of people on that range. – Ajraddatz (talk) 18:51, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
One UA string matches exactly and this is a rare device. Ruslik (talk) 20:38, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
Reason(s): Following User talk:-revi#Eq900, I would like to get a formal statement whether those two accounts are of same identity, which might mean he is voting on a RfA with multiple account. It does fall into SRCU justification as "Vote stacking". (Any sleeper discovery is also appreciated as 삼성영어 is obvious vandalism-only account.) Thanks, — regards, Revi 15:03, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
Reason(s): Bonjour. Il y a actuellement une vague de créations de pages sur fr.wikisource.org, venant de multiples nouveaux contributeurs, qui ont la même façon d'agir. Nous soupçonnons qu'il s'agit de la même personne, sans pouvoir en être sûrs, n'ayant pas de check-user local. Ces pages créées sont parfois des doublons de pages, parfois de nouvelles pages non sourcées, ce qui nous gêne car nous voulons savoir d'où viennent les textes en question. Hello. On fr.wikisource.org, there is currently a wave of creation of new pages, from new contributors, and we suspect these people are a same person, but we can not prove it, because we do not have local check-users. These new pages are pages we already have, are pages without references, which is completely annoying because we want to know where these texts come from. Can you help us please ? Consulnico (talk) 17:48, 28 February 2017 (UTC) Addedum : THIS REQUEST IS SUPER URGENT. Currently, someone is creating an account every thirty minutes, then creates a page without references, and then disappears definitely. Can you help us ? Can you discover the IP behind these creations ans, I think, block it from creating accounts, so that we can speak with that person. --Consulnico (talk) 18:34, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
Doing... Hard to say. I have the feeling these are multiple groups, but can't prove it yet. Could use help from someone else... Trijnsteltalk 19:16, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your help. I will edit the request if I see other accounts created with the same unusual scheme of contributions. --Consulnico (talk) 19:24, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
Looking into the edits I can see different users with different UA editing from the same ip. I assume they are classmates or similar. In some cases they share UA and ip, it is not rare when there is a shared public machine. IMHO MP. --Melos (talk) 20:07, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your time. We will investigate this. Two of the people I contacted have answered my questions, I hope your hypothesis is true. If we need further information, I will come back here. Thanks again ! --Consulnico (talk) 20:14, 28 February 2017 (UTC)