Steward requests/Checkuser/2013-07

Very Likely Likely --Bencmq (talk) 02:05, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

• 習煮媳 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser )
• 進擊的巨人 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser )
• 蝙蝠俠 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser )
• 進撃の痴漢 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser )
• 丁日雄 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser )
• 武田盛輝 (contr · deleted · block · log · block log · guc · checkuser · lwcheckuser )

No need to check, these are all already blocked on several wikis (probably also found by checkuser) and locked. --MF-W 13:01, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Suggested discussion link is wrong. Please see ko:위키백과:다중 계정 검사 요청#사용자:ᄆᄌᄒ와 사용자:중복세력은 사용자:Minjujuui의 차단 이후 활동하고 있군요. (2). As an admin on kowiki, I confirm that community consensus is reached. And plus, kowiki community decided CU requests need community consensus. If community consensus about any requests is not reached, the investigation is ineligible. Thanks stewards for helping. Sotiale (talk) 15:17, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

중복세력 and ᄆᄌᄒ are Unrelated Unrelated to each other and to other accounts. 유체이탈영혼 and 유체이탈가카 are Confirmed to be the same user. Ruslik (talk) 18:46, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for linked wrong. And thank you so much --분당선M (talk) 20:24, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Confirmed:

• Nera456
• Neweditor26
• Imorthodox23

See also a check on the English Wikipedia: en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Imorthodox23/Archive#12_June_2013. Best regards --MF-W 01:25, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you-David1010 (talk) 08:57, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Done: Nahankhaneh is Stale, تیانیزم no other sockpuppets--Shizhao (talk) 13:02, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

• Comment Comment. (削除) Leitoxx is clearly not that IP (see this). These users have different locations in different parts of South America. LlamaAl (talk) 00:09, 16 July 2013 (UTC) (削除ここまで)

Comment Comment: As background information, Leitoxx is currently running for adminship on eswikt, nominated by a user (Edgefield). An IP (190.110.152.154) appeared usurping the nominator and inviting a user to participate in the vote, see diff. This message is similar to the messages left by Leitoxx during his previous RfA, compare with diff. The IP is from Chile, as is Leitoxx, as indicated on his userpage. There is a concern that Leitoxx is the same person as the IP, which he abused to mislead by using someone else's signature. Especially as the RFA is ongoing, this link could prove a lack of readyness for adminship. The fact that they share the same geographical area (country), same interest (RfA) and same style of writing (canvassing/encouraging to participate in the RfA) are the basis for this suspicion. Sa vh ^ñ 00:16, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

... and the IP is within the range exposed here, listing IP's used by Leitoxx across various projects. Sa vh ^ñ 00:34, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

(Edit conflict.) Sorry for my comment above. I was confused as Edgefield blocked a different IP (from Argentina) for identity usurpation when it was this IP the one which commited such action. Thanks Savh. LlamaAl (talk) 00:36, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I mistakenly accused and blocked the wrong IP from Argentina (my misreading). The IP who forged my signature to encourage voting was 190.110.152.154, which seems to be from Chile. --Edgefield (talk) 02:27, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

This process is no longer necesary as the user has confirmed that someone else was using his equipment and IP address while he was absence here --Cvmontuy (talk) 14:09, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Not done - request is withdrawn. --MF-W 21:09, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

A check on the IP addresses and user agents shows Unrelated Unrelated ✒ Bennylin 12:59, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Result: Confirmed for Stajdini and Barida, Possible Possible for Surour (same range, but no overlapping IP), Unrelated Unrelated for the last two. ✒ Bennylin 13:23, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Aristavod Unrelated Unrelated, other Unlikely Unlikely--Shizhao (talk) 13:20, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Confirmed:

• Makivan1733
• Csy100
• Shit
• Ychlpyss
• Kfk6
• Kfk4
• Cook
• Kfk3
• Kfk
• Kgftyy
• Csy500
• Csy400
• Csy200
• Kfk5
• Kfk7
• Kfk2
• Kingforking
• Makivan1733bot

--Shizhao (talk) 13:43, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Shinjiman (talk) 14:12, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Superburyat and Бадмажаб are confirmed socks; Губин Михаил appears to be unrelated QuiteUnusual (talk) 15:33, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

What is "socks"?--Region190 (talk) 18:50, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

"Sock" = "sockpuppet". Two or more accounts operated by the same real person. QuiteUnusual (talk) 19:30, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Please, blocked Superbaryat in Buryat Wikipedia, because he was created after Бадмажаб. Бадмажаб will warning.--Region190 (talk) 19:37, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

--Wanburry (talk) 21:02, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I cannot confirm that community consensus about it is reached. At first, account is created for this request. Second, the discussion is green, not ripe. As an admin on kowiki, I'm not sure this investigation is conducted by kowiki community consensus. --Sotiale (talk) 15:05, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Please note that this is also a matter of English Wikipedia. The user with the accounts listed above has been editing a number of articles in the English Wikipedia on people in Korean history [8],[9],[10] ect. Seeing from the mass edit record, this user is probably using machine translation which tends to generate quite cryptic text. This has little difference with vandalism.--Wanburry (talk) 16:08, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

You clearly wrote 'xx@kowiki'. kowiki community decided CU on kowiki need consensus but it doesn't satisfy the consensus. If you want to request for investigation on enwiki, please go not here but en:WP:SPI. --Sotiale (talk) 13:53, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

This is the right place for sockpuppet checks in cases of abusing multiple accounts on many different language Wikipedias. It wouldn't be practical to ask for CU of a cross-wiki sockpuppeteer like this user [11],[12],[13] on every single local Wikipedia.--Wanburry (talk) 01:57, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

You suggested discussion as the consensus but the discussion wasn't enough for CU. Now, you change your opinion 'It wouldn't be practical to ask for CU of a cross-wiki sockpuppeteer', right? Sadly, stewards cannot override local consensus if it isn't emergency. It isn't spambot case or emergency one. Please, Meta isn't platform of discussions. And I'm so curious, what is your main account? :D --Sotiale (talk) 11:15, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Let‘s see how the stewards will make decisions. And please take a look at the blocked sockpuppet accounts I have linked below.--Wanburry (talk) 23:57, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

not yet in my opinion, it is request checkuser from kowiki. So if checking, I think we need more consensus just than 2 support. Regards,--분당선M (talk) 11:10, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

I would greatly appreciate it if you could post the blocked sockpuppets mentioned below at the discussion page on kowiki. This will help build a stronger consensus on this issue.--Wanburry (talk) 23:54, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

I have just found out three of the accounts listed above have been blocked for sockpuppetry on ja.wikipedia:

• ja:利用者:Almust
• ja:利用者:Creteos
• ja:利用者:Lacbert

And the user ja:利用者:100범 has been identified as the sockmaster.

--Wanburry (talk) 23:47, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

I think Steward shouldn't continue checkuser. Consencus in ko.wiki is not successful though I gave Support Support on it. only two support is not enough for Checkuser. --Revi ^Discuss _{SUL Info} 02:45, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

A consensus means a general agreement among the participants in a discussion not necessarily an unanimity in a community. Therefore a consensus can be assumed implicitly by a lack of objections. In this case, there was no single opposing statement against supporting argument for the possibility of the sock puppetry. A consensus with no objection is a stronger consensus than that of several supportive votes which can be easily distorted by canvassing or even by operating meat puppetry.--Wanburry (talk) 20:39, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

I confirm consensus is reached. And @Wanburry, Do not use another account first :) --Sotiale (talk) 09:46, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

{{doing}} Ruslik (talk) 17:47, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Waiting for result.... --Revi ^Discuss _{SUL Info} 17:50, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

The following accounts are Confirmed as socks of the same user:

Almust

Dokgodaistik

Korejos

Lacbert

Pugoberto

랭카스터공작2

作明價

랭카스터공작

Geiva

Husege

Rudulic

Tonggarhor

Dogobert0

Commender

Sasuqear

Nuarebos

Losenpert

Lusegg

Gleanhard

全農炳夏

Lekeberto

Mogabros

Dinoriakoria

Astralos and Creteos are Stale. Ruslik (talk) 18:03, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much and I will notify to kowiki community! --Revi ^Discuss _{SUL Info} 18:06, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

— The preceding unsigned comment was added by Csy100 (talk)

Adding up zh-yue:User:경기도상인연합회 in Cantonese Wikipedia. Shinjiman (talk) 12:44, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

I want to inform you that first and third are blocked in Kowiki because of suckpoppetry. 군포시상인연합회 is suckmaster. --Revi ^Discuss _{SUL Info} 13:13, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

From tech point of the CU, 중국은 오전9시, 오후1시, 오후7시 등의 나라 and 경기도상인연합회 is Possible Possible, 군포시상인연합회 is Unrelated Unrelated. --Shizhao (talk) 12:49, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Unrelated Unrelated. However Mahemonir = Sabr1390. --MF-W 16:44, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Only new socketpupet that I can Keep Keep is Jeibis. The result for Iedomeneo is Inconclusive Inconclusive. Ruslik (talk) 19:31, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

• Talk archives
• Steward requests archive/Checkuser

• Noindexed pages