Steward requests/Checkuser/2018-12



  Doing... --Alaa :)..! 12:22, 6 December 2018 (UTC)


  • UndDerDie   Confirmed with HawardRoark
  • HawardRoark   Likely with Nika Baramidze
  • ჰერცოგ   Confirmed with Gobrona

However, there's no enough data sample, so make your decision with behavioral data --Alaa :)..! 12:40, 6 December 2018 (UTC)


  Done - the behavioural evidence seems very weak here, but I checked the blocked account.   Unrelated to any of the others on the list. No comment regarding IPs. – Ajraddatz (talk) 04:08, 7 December 2018 (UTC)


  • Support a check on this as behavioural evidence itself isn't enough to do a local block but with CU it's enough. Discussed extensively with local sysops. And do run a sleeper check also. Thanks.--Cohaf (talk) 02:44, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

  Done - the following accounts are   Likely:


There are a number of different UAs being used, which makes me think they could be meatpuppets editing from the same location rather than sockpuppets. I would recommend only blocking if there is disruptive behaviour occuring. – Ajraddatz (talk) 04:11, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

  • Ajraddatz.Thanks, will report back. Appreciate the swift response.--Cohaf (talk) 04:14, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • (Comment removed by original author まっすろな未来 (talk) at 08:23, 7 December 2018 (UTC))
    • @まっすろな未来:Locally blocked already, nothing more to do. I also think the stewards are experienced enough to know these and perBEANS, such statements are not encouraged.--Cohaf (talk) 08:15, 7 December 2018 (UTC)


  Not done - we cannot connect an IP to an account for you publicly. Please address based on behavioural evidence. – Ajraddatz (talk) 07:07, 14 December 2018 (UTC)


  • Added 1 more target per local discussion.--Cohaf (talk) 06:25, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Added 1 more target, since cross-wiki abuse on ru.wikipedia, resorting threat towards No1lovesu.--Mend My Way 06:34, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
  • АБВГЛЧ not create at zh.wikipedia(that means АБВГЛЧ is not have account at zh.wikipedia.),so don't check it.--MCC214Talk with me#Contributions with me 08:43, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
    • I would appreciate it if steward would do checks on both zhwp and loginwiki.--Mend My Way 09:30, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
  •   Done - the following accounts are   Likely: 魏瓔珞 (likely sleeper, currently unblocked), 富察瑯嬅, 聖母院男婊. Chljhsn and АБВГЛЧ are   Unrelated technically, but of course may be blocked based on behavioural evidence. – Ajraddatz (talk) 07:04, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks Ajraddatz will report back.--Cohaf (talk) 07:23, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
    • All necessary work done, case can be closed.--Cohaf (talk) 07:40, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Hidden username@wikidata

Status:    Done

Can one of you check out this vandal at Thanks. Drmies (talk) 03:40, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

  • Rschen7754 Could you comment on this?--Cohaf (talk) 05:42, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
    • I am neither a CheckUser nor a steward, so no. --Rschen7754 05:52, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
  Done; no further accounts found. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 09:59, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Hotline again

Status:    Done

Now via . Thanks. Drmies (talk) 02:50, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

  • Mentifisto, are you around? And will one of you please protect that WikiQuote talk page, that talk page that I never asked for on a project that I never edit, and that only invites this little troll and others? Drmies (talk) 02:57, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
Drmies, if you're requesting a global block please see SRG. Also, in most cases, stewards will not protect pages on wikis with active admins. You can find a local Wikiquote's admin noticeboard here. Thanks, Vermont (talk) 03:02, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, but right now I don't care about technicalities. Stewards, CUs, assistance and suppression requested at User:DoctorMichelAaij on WikiQuote. Seriously, WikiQuote seems to be a weak damn link. Drmies (talk) 03:24, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
This probably needs a RD also. The speedy deletion does nothing apparently.--Cohaf (talk) 03:35, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
  Done. Everything seems to have been taken care of. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 12:29, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Learning Ln@th.wikipedia

  • We found the sockpuppet of 29 users now. Would there be any possibility of recommend about manage sockpuppet into the local administrators ? --Geonuch (talk) 05:00, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
What do you want from checkuser? There are indeed many such accounts. Do you want a list of them? Although you probably already know them. Ruslik (talk) 19:49, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  Done - best option here is to block socks based on behavioural evidence as they appear. I did check some of the accounts, and found that the range they are using is large and widely used. There is too much collateral damage to consider blocking. Sorry I can't be of more help. – Ajraddatz (talk) 06:16, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
@Ruslik0: Yes, especially user name that different from the sockpuppets for manage vandalism to a long term. @Ajraddatz: Thank you for help. --Geonuch (talk) 13:39, 20 December 2018 (UTC)


  Not done - there's no global CheckUser feature. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 13:40, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

a ton of accounts@din.wikipedia

  • Should a soft close be considered also since there is a void of local editors?--Cohaf (talk) 18:04, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
I'd rather not start that discussion here. Praxidicae (talk) 18:17, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
Tagging as not done as there's nothing that we can really do here with the tools we've got a.t.m. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 13:37, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

hyWB and hyWP, etc. vandal

Done --Melos (talk) 14:48, 23 December 2018 (UTC)


  In progress...MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:58, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  • XanthananD
  • TheModGonnaWreckit
  • TheModGuy2
  • Libertarianmoderate6
  • Libertarianmoderate5
  • Libertarianmoderate3
  • 42Fandom
  • Grimm324
  • Vulcandor
  • Nomorebanning0223
  • TelstraFiredaiLibMod
  • J.B. O'Connor
MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:08, 24 December 2018 (UTC)


  Unrelated to Gorvzavodru. Ruslik (talk) 20:53, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Kunok Kipcsak@ro.wikipedia

  • CU isn't for proving innocence and self requested CU are not allowed.--Cohaf (talk) 15:41, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
Hm, I don't see in this CU a necessity to proving innocence, however, maybe is a proof to withdrawal the patroller rights (as I write above).—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kunok Kipcsak (talk)
Update:I think Ruslik0 sorted out the patroller part over at SRP.--Cohaf (talk) 20:18, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
This check cannot be run because both accounts were   Stale at the time of submission to SRCU. (This means we cannot run the checks because there is no data left on the server.) — regards, Revi 10:47, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
Thank you! I solved the problem.--Kunok Kipcsak (talk) 07:39, 25 December 2018 (UTC)


Good day.   CheckUser is not for fishing. Having multiple accounts is not prohibited per policy unless they're used abusively. I see none of the accounts are blocked, and the justification provided is to merely know if the accounts are related. Similar edits on same articles could be a reason if the accounts are being used for edit warring, or avoiding the 3RR rule, etc.   Additional information needed. Best regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 15:01, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
I aware of policy & this is not first time I request to do Checkuser. Have a look on my previous successful requests. 3RR rule is not applicable in Therefore, I cannot take action by using 3RR. But the users engaged in edit war in same & uploaded similar files at Commons. I request here based on policy. Anyway you assume that I try to "fishing". In that case, no point to clarify. Plese close this request. I'll will do the best at --AntanO 01:57, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
I am just trying to understand your request. Your request, as originally posted, didn't had, to me, enough information based on CheckUser policy, the only policy that governs the usage of the CU tool. Now you have provided aditional infos such as the users might have participated in edit wars which can be a valid reason to run a check. I'll analyze that and make a decision. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:22, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  In progress...MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:39, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Muthuraja29 is   Stale and cannot be checked.
  •   Inconclusive for me, from a technical point of view about Mutharaiyar29 and Jkalaiarasan86; however on behaviour and interests it might be   possibly related, but that needs to be evaluated locally with care.
  • I am not satisfied with my own investigation though, so I'll ask for a second opinion.

MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:01, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

I have asked my fellow colleagues to help me out here. The results above do not change but the unlisted account Mutharaiyarinfo29 (blocked) can be   Likely Jkalaiarasan86. But please exercise caution as the evidence is not very strong. Given that I don't speak Tamil, behavioural analysis should be done on your side. I hope that this helps. Best regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 20:04, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
Thank you. Now they are not in edit war. I think I can avoid action. --AntanO 02:42, 27 December 2018 (UTC)


Try to believe this: Checking on English Wikivoyage takes much less time than on Chinese Wikipedia. How do you feel about that? --Super Wang on zhwiki (Share your opinions) 14:18, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

  Confirmed Wei805, 曾友蘭 and Cpw910. Some are/were blocked but I didn't checked for how long. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:57, 28 December 2018 (UTC)