Shortcut:
WN:CHECK

This is the place to request investigations requiring CheckUser permission.

Caveats	CheckUser is a last resort for difficult cases, due to the effort involved, difficulty of interpretation of results and privacy issues raised. Use other methods first. Obvious sockpuppets may be treated as such without using CheckUser. DO NOT list non-disruptive "throwaway" accounts that only have a few edits. Data is kept for 90 days so we cannot compare against accounts that have not edited earlier. Block evasion: may be listed where the problem is ongoing. Routine 3RR violations: do not list unless there is: (a) an ongoing problem, (b) reasonable doubt as to whether sockpuppets are being used, and (c) disruption of editing that cannot be otherwise addressed. Vandalism: only for ongoing serious vandalism. Vote fraud: only if: (a) there is reasonable doubt about the validity of votes, (b) the vote or discussion has closed, and (c) the possible sockpuppet votes affect the outcome of the vote. Provide a link to the closed vote or discussion.
Procedure	*DO NOT post long discussions about the merits of the check. If a compact, reasonable request, with* the necessary diffs, cannot be made, then post it on WN:ALERT. List the request at the foot of the requests section. Clearly indicate the usernames or IP addresses you suspect. Use the format: {{Checkuser\|USERNAME TO BE CHECKED}}. Clearly lay out the evidence for sockpuppetry. Explain how your request fits the POLICY**. Sign the request.
Outcomes	Responses will be brief in order to comply with Wikimedia:Privacy policy; supporting data will not be provided. Results are not always clear due to the internal organization of some ISPs, and some users deliberately edit from unrelated IPs. The response to a request will be placed beneath the request. Old requests will be archived. Please check back here for responses. Possible outcomes: Confirmed, Inconclusive, Likely, Possible, Unlikely, or Unrelated.

Requests

Suspected lock evasion

It_is_the_blood_at_the_club (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)
Biil_eats_his_hat_and_likes_it (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)

Suspected global lock evasion. Both accounts posting similar, homophobic slurs.[1], [2]

Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 14:07, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They are both blocked here and globally locked. Pretty obvious, I don't see what I checkuser would tell us that the duck test wouldn't Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 20:54, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm hoping to get the IP behind the accounts blocked from creating new accounts. Otherwise we just continue to play whack-a-mole. Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 13:38, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Global stewards have effectively verified these accounts and also Trade me away im the sore (talk · contribs · page moves · block user · block log) are all sock puppets.[3] It would be helpful to have local, long-term, range blocks in place. Locally we can tolerate longer and wider blocks than are typical at the global level. --Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 17:06, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Inconclusive from the Checkuser but obviously the same behaviour. Two ranges locally blocked for a year. All accounts on these ranges (including the two above) were blocked indefinitely by the abuse filter. [₂₄Cr][talk] 20:13, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New request sent via email

I have sent a CU request to both Acagastya and Cromium using Wikimail and notified them both on their talk pages. Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Reviewer) 14:49, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Acagastya and @Cromium, you can disregard this request. I misinterpreted the registered account's actions. Sorry for the confusion.Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Reviewer) 16:20, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Check User

User:Tefepit and User:Kannotlogin. Sock of Quienton Declare. BigKrow (talk) 20:02, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]