Misplaced Pages

:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/header - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MuZemike (talk | contribs) at 18:26, 16 December 2009 (Bot is down again.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 18:26, 16 December 2009 by MuZemike (talk | contribs) (Bot is down again.)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
The SPI bots are currently down. If you file a new request, please note the case name at WT:SPI#New cases and a clerk will post it to the SPI page


WP:RFCU redirects here. You may be looking for Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/User conduct (WP:RFC/U), CheckUser policy (Misplaced Pages:CheckUser), or Misplaced Pages:Changing username (WP:CHU).
Shortcuts

Welcome to Sockpuppet investigations (SPI). Please see the sockpuppet policy for detailed definitions and descriptions of what sockpuppetry is and is not. This page is used to discuss whether a user is likely to have violated that policy, or breached other restrictions (eg blocks or bans) using multiple accounts.

Skip to current candidates Skip to: Submitting an SPI case • open cases • cases awaiting CheckUser

CheckUser

CheckUser is a tool that allows authorized users to look at technical information left when a user/IP makes an edit. This technical information can help determine if a single person is using more than one account. Use of the checkuser tool is governed by policies on the English Misplaced Pages and Wikimedia Foundation levels. For more information, see the Foundation policy, the local policy and the Foundation privacy policy.

When not to request CheckUser

There must be credible evidence supporting the suspicion of sockpuppetry, and good cause why CheckUser is required. Requests for checkuser without evidence will be declined, because CheckUser is not for fishing. CheckUser is also not magic pixie dust, and should not be requested to investigate canvassing or meatpuppetry,  Stale account(s) that have not edited for many months, or cases where behavioral evidence is sufficient to decide the matter (see also the duck test).

Making Quick CheckUser requests

See #Quick CheckUser requests. This page may also be used for other CheckUser requests unrelated to sock abuse, such as:

Evidence and SPI case guidelines

If the evidence is sensitive, privacy is needed, or if it involves sock puppetry by an administrator, seek advice by email from a Checkuser or the Arbitration Committee first. Private information, emails, logs, etc, may not be posted on the wiki; if they are important evidence, you must also seek advice by email first.

You need to provide evidence showing the accounts or IPs are likely to be sock-puppets and acting in a disruptive or forbidden manner, which other users will then assess. If there is no evidence showing forbidden sock-puppetry, then nothing will happen and the case is likely to be speedily closed by the SPI clerks. Most SPI cases are decided based upon behavioral evidence, that is, the behavior of the accounts or IPs concerned. This evidence needs to be explicit; that is, use verifiable evidence in the form of diffs, links to the pages in which the sock puppetry is occurring, and reasonable deductions and impressions drawn from said evidence. Evidence solely consisting of vague beliefs or assumptions will be rejected.

Some general guidelines when making your SPI case:

  • Remember to always assume good faith when possible.
  • After submitting a case, consider notifying the suspected accounts by adding {{subst:socksuspectnotice|PUPPETMASTER}} ~~~~ to the bottom of their talk pages. Notification is not mandatory, and may, in some instances, lead to further disruption or provide a sockpuppeteer with guidance on how to avoid detection.
  • Do not use any section headers ("===") on case pages as this will break the report templates and mess up the formatting.
  • Keep it simple. Simple, concisely presented evidence leads to a quickly resolved case.
  • After administrators and/or checkusers have reviewed the case, it will be closed and archived by an SPI clerk. (Administrators may mark a case closed using {{SPIclose}}.)

Submitting an SPI case

Create the case by replacing "SOCKMASTER" with the name of the oldest account, or previous case name in the box below. For example, if the case name is about User:John Doe or a prior case is at Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/John Doe, then you should enter Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/John Doe in the box, then click the button.

Start an SPI case WITHOUT a CheckUser request Start an SPI case WITH a CheckUser request


Instructions for requesting checkuser on open cases

Anyone can request CheckUser at any time on an open case if it is necessary. (This is done automatically if you use the "Request CheckUser" box to create your new request.) If you wish to request CheckUser to any existing open case, then do the following:

  1. Add {{RFCU|CASE LETTER|No2ndLetter|New}} under the "Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments" section.
    • Note: if you used the "Start sockpuppet investigation plus CheckUser request" box to create your new request, then this will already be done, and the template will be placed under the "CheckUser request" section.
  2. Replace "CASE LETTER" with one of the code letters provided (A, B, C, D, E, or F)
  3. If a second reason to request CheckUser is necessary, then replace "No2ndLetter" with another code letter.
  4. A clerk will review the case and make a determination as to whether CheckUser is needed. A clerk will either  endorse the case for CheckUser attention or  decline the case.
  5. If the case is declined, then the case will be included back on the list of SPI cases that do not have CheckUser requests. If the case is endorsed, then a CheckUser will check all given accounts for technical evidence; this may take a while. At the end, CheckUser may post their results under the "Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments" section, stating which accounts are  confirmed to be the same user, which ones are  likely,  possible, or  unlikely that they are the same user, and which ones are  unrelated or  inconclusive. Sometimes, underlying  IP(s) may also be blocked.
  6. The case is then placed back in the list of non-CheckUser requests pending further comments from clerks or patrolling administrators, or it may be closed by a CheckUser or clerk if all issues have been addressed.

Administrators' instructions

If you wish to help out at SPI, but are unsure how to get started, please read Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Administrators instructions. If you need help with anything, please ask one of the active SPI clerks.

See also