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.
Transcluding the request
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.

Checkuser requests to be listed (empty)
nothing found

Requests

Kazi arifujjaman

Status: open • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 12:06, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Rationale, discussion and results

Reason: Both accounts uploaded the same photographs (Link 1 & Link 2) to two different contests. In addition, the usernames are very similar, which raises the possibility that they are operated by the same individual. Requesting a CheckUser to determine whether there is a technical connection. --Moheen (keep talking) 12:06, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Is it forbidden to participate in different contest with the same photo? Krd 13:09, 12 June 2026 (UTC)
@Krd No. My concern is not that the same photo was submitted to different contests. Rather, the combination of the identical uploads and the very similar usernames suggests that the two accounts may be operated by the same person. -- Moheen (keep talking) 14:39, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Viagrdfshsfdj

Status: resolved • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 13:23, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Rationale, discussion and results

Reason: Spammed various domains in common with the users already blocked:

  • Ratyed and Dektasi spammed balayage.live, also spammed by already-confirmed Balayage1.
  • Medicinessd1 and EDWIN010 spammed kamagra-kopen.nl, also spammed by Vidalista1. Also note username similarity with Medicinessd and Medicinessd2. EDWIN010 has also done some other spamming, including on enwiki.
  • Baccarat-thai spammed baccaratthai.org, previously spammed by Ddfhdfgshra.
  • Tvomegdg spammed travelhome.nl, previously spammed by Travelhome1.

Spam usually goes in the file source, either of files they upload or replacing the actual source. Reporting mostly for the sleeper check. lp0 on fire () 13:23, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

I found as Likely:
Ratyed is Stale, the other accounts are Inconclusive or even Unlikely to this case. --Lymantria (talk) 05:43, 11 June 2026 (UTC)
@Lymantria: Would you please evaluate the Inconclusive and Unlikely users' spamming behavior?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 13:46, 11 June 2026 (UTC)
Yes, but normally CU cases are not meant to replace AN requests. --Lymantria (talk) 15:15, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Hfhtdjf

Status: resolved • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 13:13, 10 June 2026 (UTC)}

Rationale, discussion and results

Reason: This user's only edit on Commons is to a file related to a portrait of an Indian governor. They have made the same kind of edits as Hfhtdjf and even did the same proxying through me, as HyperAnd stated: en:Special:Diff/1358686612. I have not edited one of these request pages before, sorry for any possible mistakes. Reconrabbit (talk) 13:13, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Likely to Hfhtdjf:
Blocked and tagged. --Lymantria (talk) 16:40, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

中華民國法務部

Status: resolved • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 08:12, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Rationale, discussion and results

Reason: Apparently w:zh:LTA:110.29 based on upload history and usernames. Midleading (talk) 08:12, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Based on CU data Likely to be LTA:110.289:
Blocked and tagged to Category:Sockpuppets of 蘇俞安. Data do not give more than Possible for 謝淑雅總經理.
葉品緯吳懷慈, 陳孝盈上校軍訓教官, and 陳玉雪陳郁菁陳孝盈曹立沄陳彥霖劉妍玲劉定瑋葉品緯 are Stale, they may be blocked on behavioral evidence (through COM:AN/B).
--Lymantria (talk) 20:46, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Anorangeapple

Status: resolved • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 23:00, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

Rationale, discussion and results

Reason: Someone using Wikimedia as a place to upload their favorite YouTube/podcast/etc. clips. The identical clip below was uploaded across all three accounts:

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 23:00, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

Confirmed Blocked and tagged. --Lymantria (talk) 05:22, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

FabioRomanoni

Status: resolved • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 08:55, 7 June 2026 (UTC)


Rationale, discussion and results

Both users have an interest in the city of Pavia in Italy and both upload images that they do not own as 'own work', with many of these having the same metadata indicating the same photo editor was used to edit the files (to obscure the original image when reverse searching). Recommend looking at deleted uploads of AmedeoRespighi and comparing them to File:Francesco Sforza, ducato d'oro, zecca di Pavia.jpg File:Presepio Ligneo (XV secolo).jpg and File:Pavia mappa (prima metà del XVIII secolo).jpg Traumnovelle (talk) 08:55, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

AmedeoRespighi is Stale so there is nothing we can investigate with CU tools. --Lymantria (talk) 16:04, 7 June 2026 (UTC)
I thought the behavioural evidence made this obvious enough.
I am familiar with en.wiki and its process for handling sock puppet reports, is there a separate place to report this if there is no CU data available but behavioural evidence makes it obvious? Traumnovelle (talk) 20:43, 7 June 2026 (UTC)
@Traumnovelle: COM:ANU.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 21:32, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

Drella8566

Status: resolved • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 18:11, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

Rationale, discussion and results

Reason: Reuploaded File:Garry Apgar.jpg. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 18:11, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

Results are Inconclusive. --Lymantria (talk) 07:15, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

Dummy Bhaava

Status: resolved • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 15:45, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

Rationale, discussion and results

Reason: Repeatedly reupload pictures, which are copyright violations, of the same person: Joseph Vijay, Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu. Please check for sleepers, and if possible, block the IP/range. Yann (talk) 15:45, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

Inconclusive --Krd 16:07, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

Elektrogurke

Status: resolved • view • edit • history • watch
Filed: 14:28, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

Rationale, discussion and results

Reason: Compare de:Wikipedia:Checkuser/Anfragen/Elektrogurke and Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Xocolatl, suspected Sockpuppets of Xocolatl et al. NDG (talk) 14:28, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

What is the abuse part you want to protect Commons from? I see the three accounts have been confirmed at dewiki, we would accept that outcome here as well. But I fail to see the reason to block any of them here. --Lymantria (talk) 20:34, 6 June 2026 (UTC)
My apologies @Lymantria for the late reply. The main reason for this request was the hope of obtaining additional data that could be shared with the dewiki CU, as this is a rather complex matter. NDG (talk) 18:51, 8 June 2026 (UTC)
Declined I don't think this case suits that. --Lymantria (talk) 20:59, 8 June 2026 (UTC)
For older requests, please see Commons:Requests for checkuser/Archives