Open main menu

Wiktionary:Requests for checkuser

(Redirected from Wiktionary:Checkuser)

Request for CheckUser investigation:Edit

For Changing username see WT:CHU


A CheckUser investigation is a method by which certain Wiktionary users are able to determine IP information for logged in users, information which is normally hidden by the MediaWiki software. This ability allows them to determine whether a given set of usernames are or not connected to a specific IP address, range, ISP or geographical region. Because of the privacy implications, CheckUser requests are only to be used with long-term, persistent suspected sockpuppets and vandals. More information can be found on the Meta policy page. If you feel that your privacy has been violated through the misuse of this tool by a CheckUser enabled person, there is a CheckUser ombudsman service available.


  1. CheckUser investigations will only be conducted with the following cause:
    • with reasonable suspicion of the misuse of sockpuppets, including block evasion, persistent vandalism and vote fraud,
      • (a suspected sockpuppet may be investigated solely as a result of its edit behaviour if this reflects that of a persistent vandal)
    • to identify an underlying IP range of a persistent vandal in order to prevent likely repeat vandalism
    • upon the request of a user to be checked themselves for cause.
  2. CheckUser enabled users are restricted in their use of the tool by the meta CheckUser policy.


  1. If a CheckUser is in order, request one below including the following information:
    • Usernames and IPs suspected of association.
    • Concise examples of reasons for suspicion (diffs and deletion logs).
    • Other applicable notes and comments.
    • Sign your request.
  2. If the CheckUser investigation is merited, a CheckUser investigation will be made, with the results posted on this page.
  3. The results of an investigation are posted in a very succinct manner, per Wikimedia's privacy policy requirements. Because of the nature of the tool, often results will be inconclusive and no determination is possible.
Symbol keep vote.svg Confirmed
Symbol support vote.svg Likely
Symbol comment vote.svg Possible
Symbol unsupport vote.svg Inconclusive
Symbol delete vote.svg Unrelated
Symbol question.svg Additional information needed.
Symbol opinion vote.svg Note:
Symbol oppose vote.svg Declined
Crystal 128 babelfish.png Checkuser is not for fishing.
Nuvola filesystems trashcan full.png Rejected

Completed RequestsEdit

Due to their infrequent nature, all completed investigations will be archived periodically at /archive.

New RequestsEdit

Just An IB Nerd (talk) 08:23, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

No need for a checkuser on this one- too obvious. I blocked the IP for the same time as the account, but made the block on the account permanent. Fortunately, this is limited to two entries, which are easy enough to keep an eye on. Chuck Entz (talk) 13:15, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
  • @Chuck Entz, User:Wyang blocked User:Erminwin based on the evidence at the bottom of User talk:Erminwin as a sock of a known problematic user. I find this evidence to be flimsy, and Erminwin's use of English does not comport with that of this user or his only known active sock here (Hirabutor, currently unblocked). Can you use the information at w:Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Tirgil34 to determine if Erminwin is the same person? —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 16:47, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
    There's not much to go on. Hirabutor is the only Wiktionary account on the Wikipedia page that's made any edits I can check (exactly one), and that edit has absolutely nothing in common with Erminwin (I haven't checked every Wikipedia account listed, but I don't recognize any of them as having made edits in the past 90 days). Also, the physical location and the IP addresses given at the Wikipedia page don't match, either (I won't go into specifics). I don't see anything in either the edits pointed to by Wyang or in the checkuser information that makes a case for blocking as a sock, let alone making it permanent. Besides, I can't see why Hirabutor, who's not blocked on Wiktionary, would feel the need to use a sock to make edits in an area that has nothing to do with his Pan-Turkic interests, namely Vietnamese and Mon-Khmer linguistics. I have no clue about the original justification for the block (though Wyang wasn't the only one to point out sloppiness in ascribing things to sources), so I wouldn't feel comfortable unblocking him- but I think the permanent block is unwarranted. Chuck Entz (talk) 18:56, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
  • User:Feriorin - despite behavioral similarities being quite clear, the user claims their likely other accounts are only impersonators: User:Ferencecon, User:Phonysym, User:Ventionin (and some others that have done few or no edits). Even though it's likely complete rubbish, it's still probably a good idea to get some certainty here. — surjection?〉 06:57, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
    • Lying about their sockpuppets is part of their game. I ran a check on them yesterday, and all of those accounts are identical from a technical standpoint. Chuck Entz (talk) 14:00, 4 March 2019 (UTC)


This user may seem like an obvious sock of myself, but despite my persistent memory problems, I'm relatively certain that I didn't create this account nor did I perform any of the edits on it. There's the possibility to consider that this could be an instance of framing, as all of it's edits are within one day and were restoring edits of mine which had been reverted, and noting the edit summaries appearing to be a mockery of mine as well. Thanks in advance -/ut͡ʃxʎørnɛja / (탁ᷞ, кон-, ឯឌឹត្ស, 𐎛𐎓𐎄𐎛𐎚𐎒). 05:22, 18 February 2019 (UTC).

The edits were made too long ago for a checkuser to check, so this request isn't going anywhere. Also, when I warned you seven months ago and said that my warning applied equally to the other account, you didn't claim it wasn't yours. Given your "persistent memory problems", I think this is an open-and-shut case. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:34, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
@Metaknowledge: Firstly, did you notice how little I used to reply on my talk-page? -/ut͡ʃxʎørnɛja / (탁ᷞ, кон-, ឯឌឹត្ស, 𐎛𐎓𐎄𐎛𐎚𐎒). 05:46, 18 February 2019 (UTC).
As Meta said. If you want to log into that account and make some edits I can then confirm it is yours, though. - TheDaveRoss 13:23, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
@TheDaveRoss: That's the thing; if it is mine, I would've written the password in my notebook. It being not there leads me to conclude that it's a sock of someone else intending to frame me. -/ut͡ʃxʎørnɛja / (탁ᷞ, кон-, ឯឌឹត្ស, 𐎛𐎓𐎄𐎛𐎚𐎒). 20:10, 18 February 2019 (UTC).
I was mostly kidding, but if they come back let us know and then we can check. - TheDaveRoss 21:05, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Well, I see that your SPI found the behavioral parallels so open-and-shut that they didn't even bother with the checkuser part, and a pattern of reporting one's own sockpuppets along with claims that they're someone else goes all the way back to Diabedia. Chuck Entz (talk) 09:54, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Sam away Sam away Sam away accusationsEdit

Recreation of attack page band hand. Former is temporary blocked, latter is not. There might be sleepers. @Equinox —This unsigned comment was added by Sam away Sam away Sam away (talkcontribs).

You forgot to include yourself in the list. That's okay. I've got it.
For more of the same, see the Feriorin discussion above. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:11, 30 May 2019 (UTC)


Aryabum (talkcontribsglobal account infodeleted contribsnukeedit filter logpage movesblockblock logactive blocks)

Seems likely to be a sock of banned user Irman (talkcontribs). —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 15:54, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Yeah,   Likely. Different ISP and not especially distinctive in the other technical details, but the ISPs are geographically close and the other technical details are identical for all practical purposes. It's all consistent with a scenario of the same device (of a relatively common type) accessing a different network. To be conclusive, you would have to rely on behavioral evidence. Chuck Entz (talk) 18:53, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll make a call here, then, and ban the account. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 06:07, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
Tell-tale signs of spurious etymologies insisting Turkic words derive from Persian ones. --{{victar|talk}} 13:16, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

User:Cyndaquil es mi homi, User:Se eimoh im Pikachu?Edit

Obvious LTA, of Blu Aardvark. please check for sleepers. Emulocks (talk) 15:07, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

These accounts (including the filer) are all obviously socks of Blu Aardvark/Incorrigible Troll, though they could be an imitation attempt by Wonderfool, given the behavior of the socks on en.wiktionary. LightandDark2000 (talk) 01:15, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
Not Wonderfool, just more sockpuppets reporting other sockpuppets, since no one would know or care about the sockmaster otherwise...yawn... Chuck Entz (talk) 02:32, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
If it's not Wonderfool then who is it? 12:56, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
That isn't how this works. - TheDaveRoss 15:25, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
Don't worry, anon. Dave is only saying that because he's a Wonderfool sock. (So am I.) —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 03:26, 8 June 2019 (UTC)


Shayan1376 (talkcontribsglobal account infodeleted contribsnukeedit filter logpage movesblockblock logactive blocks)

Activity looks like that of perma-blocked user Irman (talkcontribs). @Metaknowledge, Chuck Entz --{{victar|talk}} 06:56, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Probably not. Different device, different continent, near-overlap on dates. Chuck Entz (talk) 13:14, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

User:TheDaveRoss, User:MetaknowledgeEdit

Self-admitted sockpuppetry of Wonderfool, see above. 14:37, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

  Confirmed - Dangherous 15:23, 11 June 2019 (UTC)