Commons:RFCU

Shortcuts: COM:CHECK • COM:RFCU • COM:SOCK

This is the place to request investigations of abuse of multiple accounts or of other circumstances that require use of checkuser privileges.

Requesting a check

These indicators are used by CheckUsers to allow easier at-a-glance reading of their notes, actions and comments.
Request completed
Confirmed Technically indistinguishable
Likely Possilikely
Possible Unlikely
Inconclusive Unrelated
 No action Stale
Request declined
Declined Checkuser is not for fishing
Checkuser is not magic pixie dust.8ball The CheckUser Magic 8-Ball says
 It looks like a duck to me Checkuser is not a crystal ball.
Information
Additional information needed Deferred to
 Doing… Info

Please do not ask us to run checks without good reason; be aware of the following before requesting a check:

  1. Checkuser is a last resort for difficult cases; pursue other options first, such as posting on the administrator's noticeboard. (This is not a venue for requesting administrative action such as blocks or file clean-up.)
  2. Running a check will only be done to combat disruption on Commons, or as required to assist checkuser investigations on other Wikimedia wikis.
    • Valid reasons for running a check include, for example: vandalism where a block of the underlying IP or IP range is needed and suspected block evasion, vote-stacking, or other disruption where technical evidence would prevent or reduce further disruption.
    • Requests to check accounts already confirmed on other projects may be declined as redundant.
    • Requests to run a check on yourself will be declined.
  3. Evidence is required. When you request a check, you must include a rationale that demonstrates (e.g., by including diffs) what the disruption to the project is, and why you believe the accounts are related.
    • Requests to run a check without evidence or with ambiguous reasoning will result in delays or the request not being investigated.
  4. The privacy policy does not allow us to make a check that has the effect of revealing IP addresses.

Outcome

Responses will be brief in order to comply with Wikimedia privacy policy. Due to technical limitations, results are not always clear. Closed requests are archived after seven days.

Privacy concerns

If you feel that a checkuser request has led to a violation of the Wikimedia Foundation privacy policy regarding yourself, please refer the case to the Ombuds commission.

Category:Sockpuppet investigations#Requests%20for%20checkuser

If this page is displaying outdated contents even after you refresh the page in your browser, please purge this page's cache.

To request a check:

Cases are created on subpages of Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case.

Creating a request
  • Insert the name of the suspected sockpuppeteer (the main account or puppetmaster, not the sockpuppet!) in the box below, leaving out the "User:" prefix. Do not remove the text in the box, add to the end only.
  • Please explain/justify the request by saying what it is you suspect and why it is important that the check be carried out. Indicate the usernames you suspect, using {{checkuser}}. Please do not use this template in the section header, as that makes it difficult to read the account names. Include the diffs or links required to support the request and reason for it.
  • There are people to assist you and help with maintenance of the page. Just ask for help on the admin noticeboard if you really are stuck, or take your best shot and note that you weren't completely sure of what to say.
  • If a case subpage already exists, edit the existing page instead, either adding to the currently open section (if the case is not yet archived) or adding a new section to the top using {{subst:Commons:Requests for checkuser/Inputbox/Sample}} (if the case has been archived). When editing an existing case, be sure to list/transclude the subpage here.
Example
If you want to request a checkuser on User:John Doe, enter the text Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/John Doe then click "Request a checkuser". You will be taken to a page where you can fill out the request. Please make your request there brief and concise.

Then transclude your subpage on the top of the list at Commons:Requests for checkuser and remove {{Checkuser requests to be listed}} from the top of the case subpage.

Checkuser requests to be listed (empty)
nothing found

Requests

Yuuuuuuuuuuuyiut

Status: resolved • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 15:57, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

Rationale, discussion and results

Reason: This user keeps uploading the same selfie, then gets blocked, and then creates a new account. Already 5 accounts in 4 days. Please block any sleeper, and the range. Thanks, Yann (talk) 15:57, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

Confirmed, no range block possible. --Krd 16:04, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

OgaMusa

Status: open • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 15:06, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

Rationale, discussion and results

Reason: Please note that both are the same (CU results: w:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/OgaMusa, w:simple:Special:Diff/10342086), and both caused file issues (see warnings at User talk:SirikaHadi2025, User_talk:OgaMusa#File:Youngpiero.jpq.jpg). MathXplore (talk) 15:06, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

It appears this was already confirmed at enwiki. What is the exact purpose of a check a Commons? Krd 16:06, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
Well, I add some suspected users, not yet confirmed at enwiki, who just as OgaMusa have uploaded "own work" images without exif, with extensions "....jpq.jpg" and description "Hausa". I think a check is justified. Perhaps I can take this one later (but other CUs may of course do so as well). --Lymantria (talk) 20:12, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

Anogenyogan5

Status: resolved • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 08:04, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

Rationale, discussion and results

Reason: LTA with uploading copyright violations to nominate them for deletion immediately after uploading. GPSLeo (talk) 08:04, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

Working The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 19:59, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Confirmed:
The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 20:09, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

Momowearingmic

Status: resolved • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 03:25, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

Rationale, discussion and results

Reason: Obvious DUCK. Re-uploading deleted materials. Related user was already blocked for abusing multiple accounts hence I believe that the sockmaster's username is another which I'm not sure which since the block log doesn't state such on Commons. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 03:25, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

Moving case to Momowearingmic. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 20:11, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Confirmed
All blocked and tagged. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 20:19, 20 June 2025 (UTC)


Baginda 480

Status:  to be archived • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 15:15, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

Rationale, discussion and results

Reason: Like uploading images related to Mahathir Mohamad, but some of them were out of scope or falsely licensed. A1Cafel (talk) 15:15, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

Results: Confirmed Baginda 480 = BujangLapok05. --Lymantria (talk) 19:21, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

Liaaaapple

Status:  to be archived • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 07:47, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

Rationale, discussion and results

Reason: All users uploaded photos of girl group Itzy's member Lia falsely claiming they were own works. They follow the same pattern with naming conventions and may be linked to another bunch of users who has been uploading copyrighted photos of K-pop girl groups for around 6 months, some of which were already object of check-user requests. Chiyako92 (talk) 07:47, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

Inconclusive --Krd 16:56, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

서울출장

Status: resolved • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 23:08, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Rationale, discussion and results

Reason: Same picture Cyberwolf (talk) 23:08, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Please provide the exact reason for the check. --Krd 04:06, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
I understand what Cyberwolf is saying. They're pointing at the deleted version history of File:Ujawal Jha.jpg. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 11:50, 8 June 2025 (UTC)


This one is a mess. There's a huge amount of spam coming from this range, and it's difficult to tell how many humans are behind these accounts.

 It looks like the same person in the photos to me:

Likely a set:

Confirmed as a set:

Possible as part of one of these sets:

Inconclusive

  • At least a dozen other accounts in this range that have had their contribs wiped as spam already.

I've blocked UjawalJha34, Ujawal Jha A, Latifat97, and Odeyalepeter13 for abuse of multiple accounts. I'm only comfortable tagging the first two as socks of 서울출장. If a more experienced CU wants to take a look at this case themselves, I'd encourage them to do so. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 11:50, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Added Fathia 9 (talk • contribs • Luxo • SUL • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log ) to the group of Latifat97 and Odeyalepeter13. --Lymantria (talk) 11:18, 10 June 2025 (UTC)
For older requests, please see Commons:Requests for checkuser/Archives