Redirect to:
"WP:A" redirects here. You may be looking for Wikipedia:Announcements Shortcuts WP:ADMINWP:ADMIN WP:SYSOPWP:SYSOP WP:AWP:A WP:MOPWP:MOP Administrators...
Click to read more »and I believe that he has shown people that he could be trusted with the CU tools. He has agreed to follow the privacy policy and I fully trust him to...
Click to read more »relationships. I am online more than ever for this wiki, and available for CU requests. I am also available to crosscheck other checkusers. I am already...
Click to read more »created with the proxy. I think it's most likely waste of time to perform a cu on an open proxy. Q: What do you know about XFF? A: XFF data are not always...
Click to read more »"feature" of CU. We do not and can not work in solo. A lot of CU results (not all by any stretch) are shared amongst all of the WMF CU, globally. We...
Click to read more »very important. CU is a great tool but only if a person uses it. It takes a lot of experience with vandals and sockpuppeteers to make CU really work for...
Click to read more »Administrator note: CU requested (Special:Diff/9799659). MathXplore (talk) 23:14, 30 September 2024 (UTC) Administrator note: CU-blocked (Special:Diff/9799752)...
Click to read more »for CU, am over 18 years old and am willing to identify myself to the WMF and sign the Access to nonpublic personal data policy. My previous CU election...
Click to read more »also a sysop and a bureaucrat here but I think that I could help more with CU flag. Thanks --vector ^_^ (talk) 18:46, 22 September 2007 (UTC) Support, if...
Click to read more »do not modify it. for the same reason I would like to candidate myself as CU, and as we can see here M7 is not too active, thanks all. --vector ^_^ (talk)...
Click to read more »are not CU's can so frequently see socks :) Most sockpuppeters have a very clear style that they follow whether they know it or not. The CU tool also...
Click to read more »CU, which have usually been supported by the evidence. The community need to have active, reliable, and trustworthy people to be able to use the CU tools...
Click to read more »Having another CU & OS admin would be helpful to review blocks made by both CU & OS reasons. I look forward to working with the new CU. MathXplore (talk)...
Click to read more »changes) End date: Th 5 February 18.20 UTC I would like to help with the CU flag because Creol had leave this (as well as the other) flags. If he won't...
Click to read more »IamNasirZaman (talk • contribs) 07:06, 9 October 2022 (UTC) Strike out comments from CU blocked account. MathXplore (talk) 07:34, 9 October 2022 (UTC) Keep as has...
Click to read more »trustworthy and will do well with this tool. 'Cratship is not like having the cu tool. CU requires technical knowledge while 'crats are to take decisions. Pmlineditor...
Click to read more »and as I continue on those paths I don't think it's fair for me to occupy a CU 'spot' here. I still expect to be periodically around in my admin capacity...
Click to read more »No reason not to. Will not abuse the CU. Kennedy (talk) 18:36, 29 January 2009 (UTC) Support When it comes to CU the only important thing is trust not...
Click to read more »–Juliancolton (talk) 18:12, 26 March 2009 (UTC) Support - We need a 3rd CU and I can't think of a better one. -Djsasso (talk) 18:21, 26 March 2009 (UTC)...
Click to read more »permissions request that did not succeed. Please do not modify it. Result: RfdCU unsuccessful. Chenzw Talk 13:29, 28 December 2023 (UTC) Fr33kman (talk ·...
Click to read more »March 2008 (UTC) Candidate's acceptance: This is not my first nomination for CU tools. I was nominated by Eptalon back in September 2007 and then withdrew...
Click to read more »archive of a successful permissions request. Please do not modify it. Result: RfCU successful. Chenzw Talk 13:59, 25 May 2026 (UTC) Barras (talk · contribs ·...
Click to read more »job both with his work with Fr33kman and I and through his work with the En CU community at SPI and I fully support him seeking this position within the...
Click to read more »needed for this flag. I question this users' judgement about running an RfCU so soon after becoming an admin. Razorflame 08:20, 20 December 2009 (UTC)...
Click to read more »successful permissions request. Please do not modify it. The outcome of this RfCU is Successful. Per multiple stewards a closing Bureaucrat even one that has...
Click to read more »relationships. I am online more than ever for this wiki, and available for CU requests. I am also available to crosscheck other checkusers. I am already...
Click to read more »their CU's. He is the same person who on meta protected the CU listings which led to a situation that is being discussed against between CU's dealing...
Click to read more »are often connected cross-wiki and go on for some time. For this reason a CU who only rarely uses the tool is not in a position to follow current events...
Click to read more »you for your checks, I have found suspicious actions so I have requested CU actions (Special:Diff/9534606). MathXplore (talk) 15:35, 9 May 2024 (UTC)...
Click to read more »Creol(talk) 05:36, 14 September 2007 (UTC) The level of our need for a local CU is increasing, I think. - Huji reply 10:51, 14 September 2007 (UTC) Unfortunately...
Click to read more »(UTC) Administrator note: CU requested (Special:Diff/9662334). MathXplore (talk) 03:10, 23 July 2024 (UTC) Administrator note: CU-blocked. MathXplore (talk)...
Click to read more »to 2025. I used to be a CU at wikidata so I am familiar with the tools, it's uses, and especially about what not to do as a CU. I am also a former steward...
Click to read more »like to note that our percentage for becoming CU/OS is at 70%, which is also a bit low for my taste. Per m:CU#Access_to_CheckUser and m:OS#Access the percentage...
Click to read more »user for record. MathXplore (talk) 08:17, 24 May 2024 (UTC) Done by non-CU action (as block evasion of Skymansky3), now globally locked. MathXplore (talk)...
Click to read more »of policy. Ytf2 (talk) 21:11, 7 May 2008 (UTC) The above user has has a RfCU made for Benniguy sockpuppet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Da Punk...
Click to read more »22:59, 13 December 2020 (UTC) CU is not for fishing, so unless you have a more concrete suspicion, I (or any other CU) won't be able to dso much...--Eptalon...
Click to read more »checkuser. Firstly, he is very active, and often at a time when no current CU is active. Peter is also a mature man with a mature man's wisdom and mind...
Click to read more »access to the CU information for a followup report if it continues. Jamesofur (talk) 22:53, 18 November 2009 (UTC) Second two are Confirmed by CU to be socks...
Click to read more »oc Odia – or Oirat – xal Ojibwe – oj Okinawan – ryu Old Church Slavonic – cu Old English – ang Old French – fro Old High German – goh Old Irish – sga Old...
Click to read more »are from either IPs who have made no other comments or users who are now CU-blocked; those !votes are not being considered. --Auntof6 (talk) 16:26, 22...
Click to read more »place he wasn't but that the other account was vandalizing and looked like a CU match to wioow. In other words good hand bad hand accounts. It appeared that...
Click to read more »checked prove notability. In addition, the article has been created by an LTA (CU confirmed on English Wikipedia). Ahmadtalk 06:11, 22 April 2020 (UTC) Please...
Click to read more »(UTC) Mad as it sounds, you are probably the best CU candidate. However I'm not sure we need another CU so badly. Majorly talk 16:40, 29 January 2009 (UTC)...
Click to read more ».. Lazybones2016 (talk) 02:46, 29 October 2024 (UTC) Administrator note: CU requested (Special:Diff/9860076). MathXplore (talk) 08:02, 2 November 2024...
Click to read more »07:33, 4 March 2015 (UTC) Wouldn't be able to comment on this request as a CU because it would link a user to an IP. But they have done it to themselves...
Click to read more »Quick delete - COI issues (the subject of this article is the author, see CU investigations) and not notable. Griff (talk) 12:29, 8 February 2022 (UTC)...
Click to read more »also CU there is never a rush. I think response time shouldn't be a matrix in determining CU activity as CUs are not to be rushed. I don't want a CU declining...
Click to read more »instead. This is only a swap and if this request fails then I'll remain a CU. This is because it takes a large amount of experience, restrain and proven...
Click to read more »the crat percentage is higher than CU and OS, but also think the percent should not be lowered. Can we raise the OS/CU percent, or are we unable to do that...
Click to read more »nor in check with other elections that we have held (we've got 25 votes for CU elections in the past over 1 week, so why do we need three weeks for the OS...
Click to read more »Razorflame 16:49, 4 March 2008 (UTC) I agree about my unnecessary CU flag, new elections for CU and bureaucrat should take place. --M7 (talk) 16:46, 4 March...
Click to read more »--Farsadx (talk) 06:51, 8 December 2024 (UTC) Administrator note: User is CU-blocked per Special:Diff/9932361. MathXplore (talk) 12:24, 11 December 2024...
Click to read more »and no use. enwiki does not have a similar thing. If you want to talk about CU results, {{checkuserblock-account}} is enough. MathXplore (talk) 03:05, 31...
Click to read more »addresses, the other IPv6 addresses (of different providers). So, from a CU point of view, no match. Eptalon (talk) 07:48, 27 July 2024 (UTC) (Non-checkuser...
Click to read more »twice on being Chris19910 (his first en:CU and by both Eptalon and my own checks here) and is up for a second en:CU which would likely give similar results...
Click to read more »would be useful in assessing block times if offense could be shown 2) The CU policy is not about running such tests, it mostly deals with the modalities...
Click to read more »22:22, 15 July 2020 (UTC) Administrator note: A vote has been struck per CU investigation. Operator873talkconnect 22:51, 15 July 2020 (UTC) Delete -...
Click to read more »page itself. Behaviour is similar so it appears a CU is warranted. Side Note: Although nothing CU can do, there seems to be some questionable IP activity...
Click to read more »improve Farsadx (talk) 07:08, 8 December 2024 (UTC) Administrator note: User is CU-blocked per Special:Diff/9932361. MathXplore (talk) 12:25, 11 December 2024...
Click to read more »one blue link in the body Template:RussiaAdmMunRef Template:RussiaAdmMunRef/cu/admlaw Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't...
Click to read more »Article creator is blocked as part of a pretty extensive sock farm - see the CU on En - [1]. Ravensfire (talk) 18:43, 5 September 2023 (UTC) Delete aninews...
Click to read more »here. BewynDaniel (talk) 06:39, 10 December 2024 (UTC) Administrator note: CU-requested (Special:Diff/9938543). MathXplore (talk) 12:23, 11 December 2024...
Click to read more »candidate, Self-noms and especially people who are targeting other hats (CU/OS) before they even have the admin hat to me generally smack of hat collecting...
Click to read more »Shortcuts WP:RCUWP:RCU WP:RFCUWP:RFCU WP:SPIWP:SPI CheckUser is the process of checking information about two or more users (including named users and...
Click to read more »2008 (UTC) All right. I thought that this was serious enough to warrant a CU, so I posted it. Please disregard this notice. Thanks. Razorflame 19:43, 8...
Click to read more »need in having people with access to sensitive data (doesn't matter if os or cu) when they are not really active and don't really use it. I don't know if...
Click to read more »March 2009 (UTC) Edits such as this and this. Seems to be quite obvious; CU is probably not needed. Chenzw Talk 13:04, 30 March 2009 (UTC) I would disagree...
Click to read more »Macdonald-ross said it's PR Type Comment: This user was indefinitely blocked by CU. MathXplore (talk) 06:07, 31 July 2021 (UTC) This request is due to close...
Click to read more »an itwiki CU for this case (it:special:diff/140834715). MathXplore (talk) 03:12, 28 August 2024 (UTC) The user is confirmed via itwiki CU. MathXplore...
Click to read more »19:44, 29 July 2019 (UTC) Shall we do a CU Vermont--Cohaf (talk) 10:16, 3 August 2019 (UTC) Per policy, CU's can't link IP addresses and usernames...--Eptalon...
Click to read more »really be useful to combat the vandalism. For clarity's sake, I am currently CU blocked on en-WP but I am not involved in the sockpuppetry anymore. If you...
Click to read more »NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:15, 22 August 2020 (UTC) Thanks for the heads up. Requested CU. --Infogapp1 (talk) 21:21, 22 August 2020 (UTC) Delete looking through Google...
Click to read more »Perhaps a CU can take a second look at these accounts and find something else. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 03:22, 25 January 2024 (UTC) Hello, as per CU policy...
Click to read more »(just as a reminder: Anyone can apply or be proposed for CU, they just need to meet the CU requirements (most notably:Proof of Identity/age mailed to...
Click to read more »have multiple CU's. As for Alison, since she is not a CU here, she can not verify but as she is covered by the privacy policy by being CU in other places...
Click to read more »much.(ImranMohammedAli (talk) 01:48, 26 June 2020 (UTC)) Administrator note: CU strike Operator873talkconnect 17:12, 26 June 2020 (UTC) Delete not notable...
Click to read more »user · block log · SUL · CA · checkuser (log)) I would like to request a CU investigation on the above two users. Their edits were to the same kind of...
Click to read more »accounts vandalizing one page at the same time would establish the need for CU action. MathXplore (talk) 21:50, 23 September 2024 (UTC) Skiditoiletsigmaman...
Click to read more »Alirio & socks. Also, if this user is confirmed to be a sock, then I'd ask the CU to indef Alirio too. Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 19:55, 6 October 2014 (UTC) Confirmed...
Click to read more »MathXplore (talk) 05:00, 30 June 2024 (UTC) (Note) The 2nd user is now also CU-blocked. MathXplore (talk) 11:22, 5 July 2024 (UTC) Administrator note: The...
Click to read more »eat da 🐑! 15:19, 26 February 2024 (UTC) Btw, only having one account on a CU request is called a fishing expedition and isn't allowed. RiggedMint 15:28...
Click to read more »contribs). ···Lauryn 23:33, 12 January 2010 (UTC) Done No evidence from CU to support this. fr33kman talk 01:08, 13 January 2010 (UTC) Hmm, strange....
Click to read more »that's needed in order to be able to interpret the results I receive from a CU request. And of course, if I had any trouble, I would not hesitate to consult...
Click to read more »but we could always use admin logged actions, for OS and CU I think it should be OS and CU actions, if your not using them do we really need you to have...
Click to read more »Wikipartnerasad (talk • contribs) 14:31, 29 September 2024 (UTC) Administrator note: CU requested (Special:Diff/9799728). MathXplore (talk) 00:20, 1 October 2024...
Click to read more »Zahedi. Ravensfire (talk) 18:33, 21 January 2026 (UTC) And Yorkhand has been CU blocked on en wiki as a Kagoz sock. Ravensfire (talk) 14:25, 27 January 2026...
Click to read more »During this time, I thought about how to proceed. In the end, an admin, crat/cu candidate has no more standing than a regular user here, or on any other wiki...
Click to read more »people being this wrong in the exact same way could need CU opinion given part of the crowd is CU banned from en. How exactly is six sentences not written...
Click to read more »cases and the comment in the block is clear. If they are already blocked by a cu with such a reason, then there is no need for a request here. Case closed...
Click to read more »Ben and ask him to stop this. Plus, CU said OYUFM was not a sock. SwirlBoy39 13:45, 17 May 2008 (UTC) First of all, CU is not a magic wand which reveals...
Click to read more »constantly active (unlike me^^) editor. I can't see any issues with that CU either. The life of brian (talk) 13:04, 14 October 2008 (UTC) Support - I...
Click to read more »Furthermore, just making bad edits doesn't warrant a CU. Marking this as Not done as patrolling admin/non-CU. -Barras talk 15:49, 12 May 2026 (UTC) These Tas...
Click to read more »connect 06:11, 28 April 2024 (UTC) My apologies, @Operator873, I forgot that CU cannot check IPs. Sorry for my mistake. DIVINE 06:13, 28 April 2024 (UTC)...
Click to read more »themselves in these categories (in the case of the advanced rights admin, crat, cu, oversight). If they are not there, the solution is to add the category on...
Click to read more »(UTC) CU blocked and now globally locked. SHB2000 (talk) 01:48, 18 October 2021 (UTC) Keep The fact that an article is created by a banned, even CU blocked...
Click to read more »to whom; it states that CU should not be used for bad things (like stalking), and that there need to be a valid reason for CU. So there you go... --Eptalon...
Click to read more »Kennedy and then renames a username of Kennedy's choice (confirmed by edit and CU) back to (the now, non-existent) "Kennedy". But, it's not supposed to be used...
Click to read more »28 June 2023 (UTC) Also, the user that created this article (Armgodgun) is CU blocked on EN as a sock of the accounts I listed, as is Grodkiller who has...
Click to read more »be improved. Ssojic (talk) 21:55, 8 January 2021 (UTC) Administrator note: CU strike Operator873talkconnect 22:07, 14 January 2021 (UTC) Hello. Here's some...
Click to read more »oppose to this reason. I stated already (see below) that I supported NVS for cu. If you look at why I opposed JC, you'll see that this was not to numbers...
Click to read more »IPs will be blocked as well. So what do you expect to gain from running a CU? --Eptalon (talk) 11:52, 28 February 2009 (UTC) If it is indeed that these...
Click to read more »have another active CU back :) sonia♫ 08:42, 5 April 2011 (UTC) Supposing everyone is fine with the idea, do we need to run an RfCU just for the formality...
Click to read more »to edit constructively, I'm not sure a CU would ever look into it, as there really isn't grounds to run a CU... If a user is banned by the community...
Click to read more »who are CU and/or 'crat here on simple. Because they have enough to do. If we elect people to have this tool then people who aren't 'crat/CU. To many...
Click to read more »2024 (UTC) Once confirmed, please switch the 1st user's username block to a CU-block. MathXplore (talk) 14:21, 2 December 2024 (UTC) Confirmed and blocked...
Click to read more »Definitely. Lauryn☆ 00:45, 17 February 2010 (UTC) Support He is a very active CU and has the trust of the community to handle it. --Bsadowski1(Talk|Changes)...
Click to read more »expectations for navboxes. The original creator of these templates have been CU-blocked and globally locked, cannot activate QD G7 and not being able to resolve...
Click to read more »:-) Shappy talk 17:39, 6 August 2009 (UTC) Why are a lot of candidates (for CU/OS mostly) stating their offline credentials (to 'impress', perhaps) when...
Click to read more »suppressing info, nothing to do with CU fr33kman 00:22, 27 April 2024 (UTC) My vote was indeed nothing to do with CU, it was about you posting oversightable...
Click to read more »without directly asking a CU was wrong. However, in this case, I assumed two things incorrectly, 1. that the block was done using no CU evidence, and instead...
Click to read more »notable. Macdonald-ross (talk) 09:32, 21 June 2020 (UTC) Administrator note: CU results: Special:PermaLink/6989121#Iamjackyang. Chenzw Talk 04:42, 15 June...
Click to read more »most likely all copyrighted and not the work of the subject. I will ask for CU if enough data is retrieved from behavioural checks.--A09 (talk) 08:24, 2...
Click to read more »at least three other people (preferably only with admin flags, not crats/cu's...), we should do that. Note: I say three people, since I do not want to...
Click to read more »these articles coming from various editors with no edits prior is inviting a CU. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 09:55, 20 April...
Click to read more »17:22, 23 July 2009 (UTC) Well you are clearly wrong then as I supported your CU request which is a much more dangerous position in terms of seeing private...
Click to read more »only lasts until consensus is formed (25 votes in support). Lar's meta RfCU closed after 3 days, for example. It didn't need to last the week. Best, PeterSymonds (talk)...
Click to read more »What have I done? 17:30, 5 June 2021 (UTC) Global lock(s) requested: User CU blocked on en-wiki. Darubrub (Let me know) 13:34, 7 June 2021 (UTC) 5.188...
Click to read more »75%. CU/OS is 80% if I remember correctly. Crat on en is at 90%. So its not like we are difficult. -DJSasso (talk) 20:48, 8 January 2010 (UTC) CU/OS (source:Meta)...
Click to read more »(Non-administrator observation) Due to the time-limit of CU investigation (about 90 days), I hardly imagine that this CU request can be accepted. MathXplore (talk)...
Click to read more »I talked with), he would need to create another account. Judging from his CU block on en-wiki, he isn't too good at keeping those activities constructive...
Click to read more »(RfO, RfB and RfCU). I dropped the crat and os rights quite some time (4 or 5 months?) back and about one and a half months ago the cu right. I just needed...
Click to read more »m:Special:CentralAuth/Samboadu), as well as Special:Diff/10053715 (another similar CU request). MathXplore (talk) 15:47, 3 February 2025 (UTC) Confirmed and blocked...
Click to read more »*Timsar* (talk) 04:30, 27 November 2024 (UTC) Administrator note: The user is CU-blocked (Special:Diff/9932626). MathXplore (talk) 01:11, 9 December 2024 (UTC)...
Click to read more »warn someone when you do not know it is them. Unless you suggest I should CU every user every day (completely out of the question) or every new account...
Click to read more »and as there has been no CU unblock I can only assume that the ISP wasn't a schools. I can only say so much, as I'm not a CU and don't know the details...
Click to read more »ahead and do a checkuser on me. The CU will definitely clear me of wrong doing and will come as a surprise to the CU. Yelromcc (talk) 16:20, 12 November...
Click to read more »long process. Prominently, there is no urgent need for a new crat. Unlike RfCU or RfOS, there are no minimum number of votes, and right now NVS has 100%...
Click to read more »sockpuppet. I can provide further info (on paid editing for this article) to CU's, if needed --Arian (talk) 01:10, 22 December 2025 (UTC) Delete Having mostly...
Click to read more »days. After referring to larger wikis like wikimedia commons, wikidata, OS/CU elections tend to take 14 days. Given our smaller size, I am proposing we...
Click to read more »the sole purpose of creating invalid usernames (and voting against RfA/RfCU's). 43 separate accounts since August 21, 2007. - Blocked entire range for...
Click to read more »filling the role of CU is currently more important than that of Crat.--Eptalon (talk) 20:54, 19 August 2010 (UTC) Agree with eptalon. CU is more important...
Click to read more »account Gyurik Zita. J991 12:02, 2 November 2017 (UTC) Difficult to check as CU info is not held for long periods of time. This one could be proved by the...
Click to read more »November 2024 (UTC) +1 - Thanks so much @Vermont not only for dealing with this CU request but for also mass closing all of the RFDs that were submitted, If...
Click to read more »to check further into collateral damage and range blocking. Trust in your CU's should apply to trust that they are doing much more work behind the scene...
Click to read more »@Thegooduser: CU can be used for possible compromise, and the IP geolocation tool can then be used to find the location. No comments if a CU is appropriate...
Click to read more »given to local wikis to do? I always thought it was in the same group as CU/OS which had to be done by stewards due to the fact it can work x-wiki. -DJSasso...
Click to read more »regaining the tool despite these problematic actions. A recent response to a CU request at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser#Tata Socks convinces me you are...
Click to read more »dont know is that ive had a sock on here for months and no-ones noticed. I'd CU your admins if I were you :D 82.40.44.71 (talk) 21:54, 24 June 2010 (UTC)...
Click to read more »Spanish "está lloviendo fuerte". Incidentally, in Romanian it would be "plouă cu găleata" (It's raining with the bucket) -- a less idiomatic translation might...
Click to read more »SPI page but sockpuppets can be reported at WP:AN (if there's CU results already), and a CU can be requested at WP:RFCU.— *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 22:21...
Click to read more »(Talk page) (Contributions) 07:22, 2 September 2024 (UTC) Administrator note: CU requested (Special:Diff/9746406). MathXplore (talk) 08:18, 3 September 2024...
Click to read more »(talk • contribs) And that user never provided a source and has since been CU blocked (not that this final point should affect the outcome). Still no indication...
Click to read more »unsigned comment added by Fathertyme74 (talk • contribs) Administrator note: CU Strike 3 accounts' votes. Operator873talkconnect 18:58, 7 July 2020 (UTC)...
Click to read more »(UTC) Very suspicious... I remember a similar thing at YW, and suggest a CU... (Though WP:DUCK could apply) Goblin 19:26, 26 September 2009 (UTC) I ♥...
Click to read more »steward or elsewhere)? EhJJTALK 19:20, 3 June 2009 (UTC) Not me. As with CU requests, we only requested CUs when we found that we were running over to...
Click to read more »block user · block log · SUL · CA · checkuser (log)) I ask CU for a block review. 1st is CU-blocked by Fr33kman, 2nd/3rd is blocked by SPI results. 3rd...
Click to read more »request for adminship, and so did Da Punk (Spiderpig0001). The result of the CU request came back inconclusive, showing that the IP behind Sam24 was an open...
Click to read more »overdue RfD here as the 7 days is just a minimum here. And as a CU I definitely don't want RfCU cleared or if it is not any faster than a number of months...
Click to read more »Struck out (and converted support template to a link) because user has been CU blocked and globally locked --DannyS712 (talk) 03:25, 6 August 2021 (UTC)...
Click to read more »January 2016 (UTC) Previously, suspected sockpuppets (no confirmation by CU, typically means tagged due to WP:DUCK) were all placed together in Category:Suspected...
Click to read more »(UTC) I agree with PeterSymonds here. I believe that we should only allow CU's to assign the permissions, however, I would not be opposed to the idea of...
Click to read more »log · SUL · CA · checkuser (log)) - previous account blocked here They are CU blocked as a Smita Patil PSP sock on en wiki, so mostly pro-forma to make...
Click to read more »have for admin, cu, etc A page where those with these rights can be posted. Would prefer to put it on the same list with admins, cu, etc Also need to...
Click to read more »have sufficient confidence this NOTHERE/CIR will stop. As of socking can a CU verify are they socking? I will say unblock only on 3 conditions, 1. no socking...
Click to read more »26 January 2013 (UTC) The user passes the duck test with flying colors. a CU to confirm it is the same person is not needed (and should be declined anyway)...
Click to read more »Possible WP:EVASION. The 1st user is the author of the article and they are CU-blocked by Bsadowski1. After the block, new users have gathered at the page...
Click to read more »it is best to have a CU verify that would not have a negative affect on valid users but at the same time that can be seen as the CU peeking at issues that...
Click to read more »the deletion Dheab9689 (talk) 03:10, 30 June 2024 (UTC) Administrator note: CU requested (Special:Diff/9622695). MathXplore (talk) 04:55, 30 June 2024 (UTC)...
Click to read more »inexperienced users support to keep, this indicates sock accounts. I endorse the CU decision and favor for Deleteing the article. DMK-C5 (talk) 16:19, 9 September...
Click to read more »here. Majorly talk 13:26, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Endorse ban - per Majorly's CU check and the template on User:Sunstar NW XP's claiming it is not a sock....
Click to read more »month. -DJSasso (talk) 18:06, 19 May 2010 (UTC) If a handful at all. Most CU things get handled automatically by the CUs without a request on-wiki. Our...
Click to read more »Wiktionary, they can just go buy their own dictionary... This might be a troll. Is CU needed? Sebb Talk 16:05, 21 July 2008 (UTC) The current comment does not warrant...
Click to read more »time; this is in the context of assigning privileges/flags (Admin, Crat, CU, Oversighter). My take on this may be too simple, but I'll state it here anyway:...
Click to read more »through the range recently, there is one good, one unknown, and multiple bad. (CU check was re-run as a continuation of previous request)-- Creol(talk) 16:21...
Click to read more »Primarysorcerer (talk) 20:27, 16 November 2022 (UTC) A hoax article that I mentioned at CU has returned. Can we have this entry protected? MathXplore (talk) 03:59, 19...
Click to read more »clarifications are needed: The support percentages (65% for admin, 75% for crat/CU) are not cut in stone, the closing crat only takes them as a guiding rail...
Click to read more »connected to that. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 13:32, 30 March 2024 (UTC) CU actually shows that there is no overlap IP wise (we are in a range where two...
Click to read more »that User:Pahari Sahib is not a sockpuppet of Siddiqui (or Paknur) per this CU matches several users but not Pahari Sahib who had created an account and...
Click to read more »Whats all the drama she is hiding through her RfA? <self edit part> Our CU's could learn much without violating policy and our 'Crats are equally trust...
Click to read more »29 July 2009 (UTC) I think it should be 60% for RfAs, 80% for RfBs, OS and CU. Pmlineditor 17:49, 29 July 2009 (UTC) I think we should lay off Fr33kman...
Click to read more »considered autopatrol worthy creations. And the IP range is certainly him, no CU is required. They always edit at the same time – they clean up and patrol...
Click to read more »Checkusers, and Oversighters (yes, one of the differences of this wiki: CU/OS/Crat require adminship). Open conflicts are almost non-existent; appeals...
Click to read more »2009 (UTC) Awful accusations without any proof... How can this be a w worthy CU request? Yotcmdr =talk to the commander= 10:50, 29 August 2009 (UTC) It may...
Click to read more »checkuser who initially raised concerns about sockpuppetry. Along with another CU here and others elsewhere, I initiated an in-depth investigation. At one point...
Click to read more »(UTC) I'd block on duck. Snow fun at alls CU data is all long expired so unless a CU kept a personal copy a CU won't be much help. -DJSasso (talk) 00:14...
Click to read more »talked about on-wiki. If it is a wiki-matter, (and not privacy based, ie CU, admin dealings with things needing to be oversighted if posted on-wiki) then...
Click to read more »removing the admin themself, just their rights as admin (Im a former admin/crat/CU -my decision to give them up- .. former right holder but still a user. Only...
Click to read more »stale for CU on enwiki, but they're part of an extensive spam farm where CU has been helpful in the past. Compare e.g. JamesBrawler who is CU-confirmed...
Click to read more »and Auntof6 (extremely unlikely), can I ask whether you are obliged as a CU to verify those users too, even though they're admin, or are we safe to assume...
Click to read more »October 2021 (UTC) An FYI to all admins reviewing this, but this user is CU blocked on the English Wikipedia for creating a vandalism only account (source...
Click to read more »John-David-Gemma (talk) 19:57, 6 January 2025 (UTC) Administrator note: User is CU-blocked by Bsadowski1.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 15:10, 13 January...
Click to read more »after the RfD is finished, the keep votes should probably be checked by a CU.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 11:35, 22 November 2023 (UTC) For...
Click to read more »IPs will be blocked as well. So what do you expect to gain from running a CU? --Eptalon (talk) 11:52, 28 February 2009 (UTC) If it is indeed that these...
Click to read more »investigations/Annoimot. The AfD on enwiki had multiple socks !voting in it, and they were CU confirmed, where the socks also used the wording "should not be delete" in...
Click to read more »material." Fanalrino (talk) 15:18, 6 December 2024 (UTC) Administrator note: CU-requested (Special:Diff/9949254). MathXplore (talk) 13:43, 16 December 2024...
Click to read more »weak evidence of sockpuppetry. Because I can't see the exact CU results, from a non-CU's perspective of the SPI report, a positive checkuser result on...
Click to read more »There seems to be a dispute/vandalism in regards to the name of the sea (see edit history), can someone please keep an eye on it? Tsugaru Let's Talk! :)...
Click to read more »MathXplore (talk) 06:32, 29 July 2023 (UTC) checkuser done, commented on the cu page. Affected users blocked. What to do with the comments is up to the closing...
Click to read more »certainly. Our admins are bright enough to ignore silly spam here (and we have CU('s) enough to deal with evil issues) but thats a different issues. This is...
Click to read more »an edit to the Wikipedia names space (WP:RfCU) where he demanded an appology for someone suggesting a CU (which had been denied) I feel that his pattern...
Click to read more »should have no bearing on the CU blocked. I was actually cleared of the CU three days ago " TonyBallioni has performed the CU check and has verified no login...
Click to read more »prolific socker from en if it is who I think it is. I am going through some CU stuff right now.....he has used alot of IPs and I have already found a number...
Click to read more »geolocates to the same area where other ips used by this LTA geolocates. A CU can confirm and extend the block if needed. Thanks-BRP ever 16:50, 21 October...
Click to read more »blocked, and then he does it again. The entire time, someone requests multiple CU checks to find socks.. Blocking the account prevents anyone using a device...
Click to read more »report. The creator of the article GhaniAshraf and the first !voter Ertyua are CU confirmed. User John muriu12 is a duck case of socking (see EN wiki SPI case-page...
Click to read more »creation of accounts, unless it is done by hand. I don't see a reason to CU the accounts now. All we can do is to keep a record of this, somewhere (like...
Click to read more »Especially, if the blocking cu permitted an appeal. It needs to be handled by uninvolved at this point in time. Uninvolved CU? Something. I think you also...
Click to read more »deletion by Fr33kman. MathXplore (talk) 04:25, 1 September 2025 (UTC) From a CU point of view: completely different networks. Based on that evidence alone...
Click to read more »that he has not changed. The account denies that it is really him, but the CU who ran this check is the same who dealt with his original case over there...
Click to read more »they use different ISPs, and there's no overlap of IP addresses. So, from a CU point of view, there's no match.--Eptalon (talk) 11:13, 31 December 2022 (UTC)...
Click to read more »verified. Alexgrand22 (talk) 16:35, 21 December 2024 (UTC) Administrator note: CU requested (Special:Diff/9964990). MathXplore (talk) 12:26, 23 December 2024...
Click to read more »the list too. This time, it is from the same country. I'm going to ask for CU again, to see if these IPs belong to open proxies. - Huji reply 15:28, 13...
Click to read more »of such sensitive personal information which is a part of doing the job of CU. -- Creol(talk) 07:27, 19 September 2007 (UTC) The above adminship discussion...
Click to read more »one, by 71.161.38.171 (talk · contribs), is the user's only edit. Would a CU or rangeblock be out of the question? Cassandra 01:36, 10 July 2008 (UTC)...
Click to read more »this project. MathXplore (talk) 00:16, 2 July 2024 (UTC) Administrator note: CU requested, Special:Diff/9625983. MathXplore (talk) 00:25, 2 July 2024 (UTC)...
Click to read more »the cat issues, has nom'd one cat already for deletion). en:IP/simple:user CU would not be requested as the style of editing, wording, grammar, capitalization...
Click to read more »User:Niehddydudyd. GoingBatty (talk) 06:04, 31 December 2021 (UTC) @GoingBatty:, I made a CU-case on these users. Let see if they are sock or not.--Jyoti Roy (talk) 08:57...
Click to read more »previous users. That said, I'm not an admin/CU, but just leave it to them and they'll sort it out. It is obviously a CU issue, though. (Still.) Goblin 18:15...
Click to read more »also be deeply involved in fundraising and that may be why she was hired as CU has had major financial problems, but president of a major institute of higher...
Click to read more »Rschen! I've blocked them (except for the one that's locked) and I'll get a CU to try to see if we can't find any more lying around. Osiris (talk) 20:33...
Click to read more »admin-level role with the least amount of work that needs doing (compared to CU/OS), and all work now centres around permission requests of some kind, be...
Click to read more »org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Garashov_Farhad. Thank you. I also sent in a CU request for this user as well. PotsdamLamb (talk) 19:36, 17 June 2022 (UTC)...
Click to read more »(UTC) Just thought the admins should be aware. I'm not a big fan of filling CU requests on behalf on IP adresses nor do i know if the admins here are aware...
Click to read more »checkuser (log)) Procedural request, confirmed and blocked as a sock through CU on enwiki and Wikidata and on ruwiki [cross-wiki hoaxing]. Part of a massive...
Click to read more »need is seen for other previous rights (B'crat, CU) to be also included. (Getting the vote #'s for a CU is a bit difficult but since I already passed the...
Click to read more »blocked" blocks? cassandra (talk) 04:49, 9 September 2008 (UTC) Perhaps a CU could try hardblocking the IP range? Majorly talk 04:53, 9 September 2008...
Click to read more »en:User:Jenkins2011. --SEPTActaMTA8235 13:44, 21 April 2011 (UTC) Done Blocked per CU in en and the fact that they have a SUL account. Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 13:58...
Click to read more »CountryANDWestern (talk) 16:15, 4 August 2026 (UTC) I can't take any action based on CU data here. Just the same with the first accounts, it is Possible they are...
Click to read more »appears to be a pattern, doing the bare minimum just to keep the admin and CU hats, and this has gone on for 9-10 years. It is also disappointing that despite...
Click to read more »2021 (UTC) Keep notable. Wincerabin (talk) 10:00, 26 September 2021 (UTC) CU-observation: Antezblik, Gringotee, and Sikpink are likely the same user; closing...
Click to read more »certainly going to end in a wp:Duck reply so I brought this here (although a CU may be needed to check for socks): Abuse of multiple accounts to evade a block:...
Click to read more »should have no bearing on the CU blocked. I was actually cleared of the CU three days ago " TonyBallioni has performed the CU check and has verified no login...
Click to read more »CountryANDWestern (talk) 15:24, 20 February 2026 (UTC) Note – 赛义菲 has been CU blocked on enwiki as a sock of Alakmarsaify/Edition of India. Emk9 (talk)...
Click to read more »volunteers and elect at least 2 people. Election would have to be like the CU elections, means a least 25 voters. Barras (talk) 20:45, 7 July 2009 (UTC)...
Click to read more »answers except for #4. Any account blocked with the CU tag is only able to be addressed by a CU. Even if it looks like a bad block. There may be more...
Click to read more »mee-jee). I've reported them here before. They jump across IPs in Hong Kong, CU is no use. Page protection is the best option. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page...
Click to read more »this information on? Vermont (talk) 03:57, 27 March 2020 (UTC) This user is CU blocked on enwp, blocked on meta for NOTHERE (both with TPA revoked and email...
Click to read more »being no history of abusive multiple accounts on the BG7 account. Also, a CU is permitted by the checkuser policy to see if BG7 has in the past edited...
Click to read more »patrol them is to swarm them with tags first. I say in all likelihood as a CU will not be done so they have no idea if this abuse is occurring. As it can...
Click to read more »aware of that page. --Auntof6 (talk) 21:30, 3 October 2014 (UTC) After the CU, considering the user has not made any efforts to follow the rules and contribute...
Click to read more »one additional user in that group is currently going through both AN/I and CU on en:wp but their actions here support their statement that it is a school...
Click to read more »it should be fully protected, if not access-restricted to admins, crats, cu or similar (if that's doable). If off-wiki a maintained text-only file would...
Click to read more »(UTC) Yes, i'm diff gathering. Or, I could just point everyone to James' RfCU. That works. And no, an oversighter wouldn't remove such comments - please...
Click to read more »(UTC) RfD closed as QDd fr33kman 17:15, 8 March 2025 (UTC) Sign them in is CU blocked on en as a sock of Johnofred9999 (talk · contribs) who's been blocked...
Click to read more »(V) Chromium (Cr) Manganese (Mn) Iron (Fe) Cobalt (Co) Nickel (Ni) Copper (Cu) Zinc (Zn) Gallium (Ga) Germanium (Ge) Arsenic (As) Selenium (Se) Bromine...
Click to read more »As has been noted on his talk page, Tharnton345 (talk · contribs) has been a persistent nuisance on en:Wikipedia, using multiple sockpuppets including...
Click to read more »the sole purpose of creating invalid usernames (and voting against RfA/RfCU's). 43 separate accounts since August 21, 2007. - Blocked entire range for...
Click to read more »share the concern that M7 is not very active here. My top two choices for CU would actually be Archer and Creol. I would perhaps be happy to have M7 and...
Click to read more »another account blocked as a result of the RfCU. If they pass both then I would double-check with the blocking CU to see if they have any objections, and if...
Click to read more »was already deleted at RfD. --Ferien (talk) 12:47, 28 November 2021 (UTC) CU was inconclusive. If UPE, behaviorally speaking, they're possibly multiple...
Click to read more »created after Sarcastic was blocked. These are some proofs that will help in CU. 1. Thakur he restored same content was added by Sarcastic kshatriya and his...
Click to read more »Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Archives/2024-12#Fiorenzo_Manganiello_accounts. After last CU/deletion by Fr33kman, the 4th user recreated the page. MathXplore (talk) 22:41...
Click to read more »Bv Bw Bx By Bz Ca Cb Cc Cd Ce Cf Cg Ch Ci Cj Ck Cl Cm Cn Co Cp Cq Cr Cs Ct Cu Cv Cw Cx Cy Cz Da Db Dc Dd De Df Dg Dh Di Dj Dk Dl Dm Dn Do Dp Dq Dr Ds Dt...
Click to read more »Vermont (talk) 11:06, 25 February 2019 (UTC) Mentifisto's comment om the CU request indicates the accounts are unrelated by IP. Vermont (talk) 17:41,...
Click to read more »contribs). ···Lauryn 23:33, 12 January 2010 (UTC) Done No evidence from CU to support this. fr33kman talk 01:08, 13 January 2010 (UTC) Hmm, strange....
Click to read more »created this page is an LTA who pushes this page, amongst others, and has been CU blocked on EN Wikipedia (with many, many socks) Global lock was requested...
Click to read more »"Secondly, your CU request was valid, and anyone can request CU. You were about to commit 3RR violations while removing that notice from the CU page." - One...
Click to read more »don't buy that you simply "forgot" that you voted in BG7's recent RFA. The CU was righteous and you got caught by it, tough luck. To be honest, if I'd have...
Click to read more »this discussion (which is going to end up in 'deletion' regardless of the CU result), I don't know what good it would do. Quakewoody (talk) 14:54, 26 May...
Click to read more »15:57, 21 October 2020 (UTC) Struck vote. Admitted to being same user as CU striked vote. --IWI (talk) 16:16, 21 October 2020 (UTC) Delete Looks spammy...
Click to read more »here, Thanks. –Davey2010Talk 12:38, 19 May 2024 (UTC) (Note) The editor is CU-blocked/locked. MathXplore (talk) 08:46, 21 May 2024 (UTC) Delete Respectfully...
Click to read more »this request for any trusted or advanced permissions such as sysop, crat, CU, oversight, now, or in the distant future. You have requested adminship once...
Click to read more »votes of users with a small number of edits will not be counted in the RfCU. Nishkid64 (talk) 16:52, 22 September 2007 (UTC) Also, I'm not going to make...
Click to read more »you are a good guy. Blocking all those who are disturbing the kindergarden. CU --77.0.146.51 (talk) 07:44, 19 November 2013 (UTC) Delete: Per my previous...
Click to read more »(V) Chromium (Cr) Manganese (Mn) Iron (Fe) Cobalt (Co) Nickel (Ni) Copper (Cu) Zinc (Zn) Gallium (Ga) Germanium (Ge) Arsenic (As) Selenium (Se) Bromine...
Click to read more »A SPI investigation on enwiki might be of interest to the closing admin. CU evidence has found the creator of this article (Ddragoner), editors of this...
Click to read more »and was later unbanned from the English Wikipedia as a result (originally a CU ban for sockuppetry). Shalom Yechiel has admitted to having several abusive...
Click to read more »Checking whether he were a newbie or not, I was stunned to find he are an admin, CU, crat and oversighter. I requested clarification of their two reversions at...
Click to read more »– Cyber.Eyes.2005Talk 19:12, 3 September 2024 (UTC) Administrator note: CU requested (Special:Diff/9748295). MathXplore (talk) 00:39, 4 September 2024...
Click to read more »replace="$1ifferentiat$2"/> <Typo word="Difficult" find="\b([dD])if(?:cu(?:il|l)|f(?:cu(?:il|l)|icu(?:il|li))|icu(?:il|li?))t(ies|ly|y?)\b" replace="$1ifficult$2"/>...
Click to read more »private discussion about this topic and both agreed that at least one new CU is needed to keep up with requests. Please note that not all of the checks...
Click to read more »and grabbed another admin to pull into this. I have already spoken with a CU tonight via email and it was handled until once again this editor has now...
Click to read more »note: CheckUser strike applied along with confirming Auntof6's strikes as CU confirmed. Operator873 connect 22:34, 4 February 2023 (UTC) This request is...
Click to read more »above as, the blocking admin and CU on en.wiki, this led to an incorrect block over there; I have already conferred with a CU here, concurring this finding...
Click to read more »Hulged (talk) 17:18, 4 August 2021 (UTC) Talk with TGSL, the nominator. He is CU blocked, so he kinda is overenthusiastic and a bit, well, off the rope. Elytrian...
Click to read more »Secondly, your CU request was valid, and anyone can request CU. You were about to commit 3RR violations while removing that notice from the CU page. Thirdly...
Click to read more »(talk) 03:53, 14 December 2023 (UTC) Comment: Would it be worth doing a CU check as this RfD has been the target for sockpuppetry.- FusionSub (Talk page)...
Click to read more »investigation, the blocks were done by a CU Plutus 💬 🎃 — Fortune favors the curious 23:42, 5 November 2025 (UTC) Ping if en wiki CU: user:Girth Summit Plutus 💬...
Click to read more »Macdonald-ross (talk) 13:02, 29 May 2013 (UTC) Actually the 25 votes for CU is a WMF requirement we do actually have to have that number. But you are...
Click to read more »served on the other RfD. DUCk says that it is a likely block evasion... A CU could verify the offense Pure Evil (talk) 04:56, 10 September 2023 (UTC) I...
Click to read more »SUL accounts). It is also tied to multiple problem accounts and cross wiki CU problems. -- Creol(talk) 03:11, 5 July 2008 (UTC) Done bug 13507 is fixed...
Click to read more »to see open proxies. I am admin on de-wiki since many years and I was de-CU and de-Arbfor a term each. I'm also the first IP-viewer on fr wiki. As I have...
Click to read more »19 April. --Ferien (talk) 16:49, 29 March 2023 (UTC) Bureaucrat note: OS/CU type requests do not have a set time we have to close them in. Historically...
Click to read more »Administrator note: CU requested (Special:Diff/9754372). MathXplore (talk) 02:13, 7 September 2024 (UTC) Administrator note: Frwiki CU has been contacted...
Click to read more »(UTC) Note to closing administrator: Kyriaki Verrou and Lucky Billy 1999 are CU confirmed to each other as well as two other accounts. Vermont (talk) 01:13...
Click to read more »random checks on this person. See Tishreen07's talk page for more info. No CU needed at this time. fr33kman 22:30, 3 May 2025 (UTC) I won't care anymore...
Click to read more »2025 (UTC) Administrator note: Moved comments to the discussion section, CU requested (Special:Diff/10052988). MathXplore (talk) 12:27, 3 February 2025...
Click to read more »Bot is "Freak222Bot" It's able to set Interwiki and to clean the sandbox. C.U. FREAK222|TALK| 08:06, 29 April 2012 (UTC) Comment. Bot currently blocked...
Click to read more »with this RFD. Bobherry Talk My Changes 21:20, 6 August 2023 (UTC) Comment: CU requested. MathXplore (talk) 01:14, 7 August 2023 (UTC) Delete Per rationale...
Click to read more »global account; autocreated Javert renamed (to Javert_renamed). Note: I did a CU to verify your claim of ownership. Thanks. --Eptalon (talk) 21:25, 26 July...
Click to read more »pages (often vandalism) during that time. Such users can be identified by a CU or simply by the DUCK test. In such cases, G5 can be applied. When shouldn’t...
Click to read more »You can see his edits [1] and [2]. Account does seem suspicious, however no CU evidence to confirm. Peterdownunder (talk) 11:48, 2 August 2025 (UTC) Yes...
Click to read more »10 December 2023 (UTC) (Non-administrator observation) Also reported to CU. MathXplore (talk) 15:07, 10 December 2023 (UTC) Thanks! Cyber.Eyes.2005 (talk)...
Click to read more »significant cleaning. With the similar MO as the blocked IP range, maybe a CU could look into this? Ravensfire (talk) 20:11, 25 June 2023 (UTC) Possible...
Click to read more »also be able to use it on WP:RFCU but that will be done after consulting CU and community members.--BRP ever 11:45, 3 November 2024 (UTC) @Euku: Looks...
Click to read more »the quacking is so loud that it is trying to hide the obvious. As a former CU, the signs are often easy to see. It is rare when I point to a sock that I...
Click to read more »CountryANDWestern (talk) 18:43, 22 November 2025 (UTC) All accounts are blocked, CU unnecessary fr33kman 00:01, 23 November 2025 (UTC) This section was archived...
Click to read more »the mop. Once I had perhaps the crown jewels of hats. I was a global sysop, CU, OS, crat and steward. No one accused me of hat collecting because I put in...
Click to read more »Of Colorado Boulder Alumni List Of University Of Colorado Boulder Alumni - Cu Aerospace | Natnat Selma. Politics. Gordon L. Allott, former U.S. Senator...
Click to read more »Since this case seems to be outside the range of the 90-day CU time limit, I'm forwarding this information to here instead of WP:RFCU. MathXplore...
Click to read more »again and may be part of the blocked IPs from previous. This will require a CU investigatation. This is also a huge almost 100% copy vio from English Wikipedia...
Click to read more »So I would say roughly 90% of those are CU blocked when you take away everything else. If you look at our CU board they find a lot of farms too and we...
Click to read more »@MrBeardalien CU request filed here Plutus 💬 🎃 — Fortune favors the curious 08:05, 28 October 2025 (UTC) What about @MrBeardalien 's CU request? Asyoukniw...
Click to read more »community restored me to admin after just over a month of activity and elected to CU a few months later and I think I've done well especially in the areas of QDs...
Click to read more »2024 (UTC) Instead, I have requested CU action (Special:Diff/9583802). MathXplore (talk) 04:05, 6 June 2024 (UTC) CU is already Done. MathXplore (talk)...
Click to read more »2409:4085:9C87:B19C:0:0:8149:5A00 (talk) 19:17, 5 July 2024 (UTC) (Note) Talkback sent, CU requested. MathXplore (talk) 13:31, 6 July 2024 (UTC) Administrator note:...
Click to read more »Road_data/strings/DEU 393 Location_map/data/Europe 394 ISO_3166/data/BW 395 ISO_3166/data/CU 396 Location_map/data/France_Grand_Est/doc 397 Factorization/doc 398...
Click to read more »The named account is CU blocked as Steven1991. The IP's have edits from before temporary accounts. It's Polygnotus's (who is not a CU) view those IP's and...
Click to read more »activity overlaps at WP:AN, Windows 8 and their related pages. I think admins or CU should take a look at this. MathXplore (talk) 16:43, 2 August 2023 (UTC) (Typo...
Click to read more »April 2024 (UTC) Comment: For any admin - See logs at Parvej Husen Talukder. CU request opened. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑...
Click to read more »2024)[ct] Most edits by an IPv6 subnet: 240D:1A:4B5:2800::/64 (76,605 edits[cu] as of 27 June 2022) Most edits on a single temporary account: ~2025-31148-92...
Click to read more »2023 (UTC) Thanks to all who took part in my recent RfCU. I really feel we needed another active CU to take some of the pressure off of Eptalon who should...
Click to read more »invited to comment on a ongoing RFC on the compatibility of paid editing with CU permissions at this page. Sohom (talk) 16:41, 29 June 2025 (UTC) Hi! Can you...
Click to read more »report. FatalFit, for the future the best place to report socks (needing CU) is generally WP:RFCU. Best, Vermont 🐿️ (talk) 00:40, 21 May 2023 (UTC) All...
Click to read more »00:32, 7 October 2024 (UTC) Considering how RfCU works, I would want to see the bot be tested in a RfCU replica before firmly saying yay or nay.- FusionSub...
Click to read more »same person who's repeatedly created JFO Star), (JFO Star log), They're also cu-blocked on enwiki, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 14:10, 15 January 2025 (UTC) Thanks...
Click to read more »evidences showed what I said above, but I don't know about technical evidences (CU based). You have checked all the diffs? I think you have not closely checked...
Click to read more »guess in hindsight that was the incorrect venue as I wasn't requesting a CU, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 18:43, 21 December 2024 (UTC) Not opposed to a block...
Click to read more »October 2024 (UTC) It's with a heavy heart that I request a crat remove my CU flag and notify meta. My days as a CheckUser on this project were sincerely...
Click to read more »/Archive#09_April_2026). The report on en wiki was closed with everything CU blocked and then globally locked. My question is what to do with the articles...
Click to read more »mention to that article, Re those two; Agreed it looks very odd so I've filed a CU request, I hadn't looked at their contribs so thank you for also pointing...
Click to read more »Bv Bw Bx By Bz Ca Cb Cc Cd Ce Cf Cg Ch Ci Cj Ck Cl Cm Cn Co Cp Cq Cr Cs Ct Cu Cv Cw Cx Cy Cz Da Db Dc Dd De Df Dg Dh Di Dj Dk Dl Dm Dn Do Dp Dq Dr Ds Dt...
Click to read more »acceptable but not for a user who had created 10 accounts on enwiki which all got cu-blocked. I'll be honest I was going to let this slide until their comment...
Click to read more »2025 (UTC) I would like to add on to the discussion about this user. I see a CU has already been performed on them however, I am seeing a very similar edit...
Click to read more »2024 (UTC) Shall we elect Vermont and Eptalon to manage and set-up the new CU mailing list? fr33kman 19:38, 12 January 2024 (UTC) Hi, this is to let you...
Click to read more »other, more advanced privileges (bureaucrat, checkuser, oversighter; for CU and OS there are extra requirements imposed by MetaWiki). In the meantime...
Click to read more »pages you do still need quite a bit of work, you recently responded to a CU request you shouldn't have. Also more knowledge about policies/practices to...
Click to read more »𝕂𝕖𝕣𝕠𝕡𝕡𝕚𝕂𝕚𝕕 (talk) 17:56, 28 September 2023 (UTC) we know who it is, no need to CU fr33kman 18:00, 28 September 2023 (UTC) Note alos, that per polcy Checkusers...
Click to read more »votes. they also use other accounts. Either way either the closing admin or a CU will need to make the call, registered user or IP, it really matters not....
Click to read more »dealt with a situation) - Angerxiety! 13:28, 17 April 2023 (UTC) o ye WP:RfCU lol Angerxiety! 13:31, 17 April 2023 (UTC) I made the category Category:Categorization...
Click to read more »031 2 2,641 18 0 5.67 0.002% Old Church Slavonic словѣньскъ / ⰔⰎⰑⰂⰡⰐⰠⰔⰍⰟ cu 1,429 6,049 87,379 1 29,441 29 0 150.99 0.002% Tok Pisin Tok Pisin tpi 1,416...
Click to read more »