Wikinews:Requests for permissions/CheckUser/Acagastya


 * Congratulations Acagastya. 25 supports and 2 opposes. --Green Giant (talk) 21:44, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

— Checkuser
I would like to nominate Acagastya as a checkuser. Acagastya is a very active contributor, reviewer, administrator and VRT volunteer. The reason for this nomination is that Wikinews needs local Checkusers because we have had an increasing need for checks specific to English Wikinews. You may or may not be able to see the Special:CheckUserLog but it shows that in the first six months of 2021, stewards have needed to carry out 55 CU checks as a result of vandalism, spam and other longer term abuse by a small number of users (both registered and unregistered). In addition to requesting a lot of these checks from the stewards on Meta, Acagastya has highlighted to me some problematic accounts over a similar period including over a dozen in the last few days. I have carried out CU checks on loginwiki for these and a number of others (for example multiple accounts operated by one person). If we had local checkusers, these tasks could be carried out more directly and quickly on the wiki. Those that are crosswiki would still need to be done by stewards or the local checkusers on other wikis. In Acagastya we have a strong candidate to carry out such CU checks quickly and act upon the data e.g. by temporarily blocking account creation from an IP or range. Acagastya has worked hard on creating filters to automatically stop creation of pages which match certain patterns. An example is the recent surge in "phone support number advertisements". Acagastya has helped with tackling this kind of spam and abuse but would be more able to help if given access to additional tools. Therefore I highly recommend you support this nomination. --Green Giant (talk) 14:15, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
 * do you accept the nomination? --Green Giant (talk) 14:15, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the nomination and the vote,, and yes, I accept the nomination. •–• 14:18, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Questions and comments

 * I should know this by now, and am a bit embarassed that I don't......but: what the heck do CU's do, actually? --Bddpaux (talk) 18:55, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Checkuser permission allows them to search for the IP that another user edited from in the last three months or so. It is very intrusive, hence why it is treated as an advanced permission and the search must be justified. To give an example, let’s say User:Greener_Giant added some spam links to pages and was blocked. Then 20 minutes later User:Greenest Giant is created and starts adding the same links. You block that account but find half an hour later there is now a Greenest of the Green Giants adding more spam. Clearly they are linked but rather than guess their next account, a CU search might reveal they edited from the same IP or IP range. That IP could be temporarily blocked to prevent more spam accounts being created. I doubt most people have seen the search results but they look something like this:
 * Greenest of the SuperGreen Giants talk contribs block (CentralAuth) (Check) (22:00, 14 July 2021) [1]
 * 301.302.303.304
 * Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/537.36


 * Greenest of the Green Giants talk contribs block (CentralAuth) (Check) (21:00, 14 July 2021) [1]
 * 301.302.303.304
 * Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/537.36


 * The Absolute Greenie Meanie of Giants talk contribs block (CentralAuth) (Check) (20:30, 14 July 2021) [1]
 * 301.302.303.304
 * Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/537.36


 * Greener Giant talk contribs block (CentralAuth) (Check) (20:10, 14 July 2021) [1]
 * 301.302.303.304
 * Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/537.36
 * Obviously that is all fake data but such search results would be a strong indication that one person is creating multiple accounts for spam purposes. You could then block that IP for about a month. This would help limit the spam accounts.
 * The reason for the nominations is so we have at least two people who can carry out searches locally on English Wikinews rather than having to submit a request on Meta-Wiki and waiting for a steward to do the search. Separately from local CU searches, the stewards can also do searches at the LoginWiki, which gives a somewhat different set of results. I hope this clarifies the purpose of CU. --Green Giant (talk) 19:31, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Good, clear answer. Thanks!!--Bddpaux (talk) 15:40, 15 July 2021 (UTC)


 * I'm a bit confused: if I am reading Meta correctly, it appears this user is already a CheckUser....?--Bddpaux (talk) 22:33, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Are you referring to myself or Acagastya? If myself, then yes you are technically correct. I am a steward, which means I have full access to all roles on every wiki. This includes being able to carry out Checkuser (mostly in an emergency). However I cannot use CU on any wiki where I have high levels of involvement e.g. Commons, English Wikiversity, English Wikinews, unless I pass a vote on that wiki and gain the CU role formally. --Green Giant (talk) 23:17, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * And if you meant me, I am an ombuds; that is separate from CU, and though I have CU tools at my disposal, I am not authorised to used them. •–• 05:17, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, I mean you. I think I'm understanding how all the roles between projects work vs. don't work.--Bddpaux (talk) 14:43, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * on meta I have mentioned I am:


 * enwn admin (you know that)
 * enwn reviewer (you know that too)
 * commons reviewer (I verify licenses of media on commons)
 * commons file mover (I can rename files on commons)
 * commons rollbacker (I actually don't know this, I guess I can rollback edits?)
 * a Commons VRT agent (I can access emails sent to permission-commons@ and some other emails)
 * an OC member (Listent to complains maid by plaintiff if they feel their privacy was violated by a CU on any WMF-wiki)
 * I don't have CU privs anywhere. •–• 14:52, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Votes

 * Strong as nominator. --Green Giant (talk) 14:15, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
 * . You need a sitenotice otherwise it's going to take forever... Edit: maybe not. Impressive. Leaderboard (talk) 18:14, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
 * -RockerballAustralia contribs 06:45, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your hard work in this area. --Gryllida (talk) 19:46, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
 * —chaetodipus (talk &middot; contribs) 02:51, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * How could I not? Brilliant work he's done. --JJLiu112 (talk) 04:10, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
 * --Wikiwide (talk) 07:14, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
 * No hesitation from me, both two great candidates. --LivelyRatification (talk) 07:33, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
 * per nom. I also think someone should add a sitenotice as Leaderboard said so these noms get a bit more traction. Seemplez 07:54, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Death to the spammers (figuratively). Phearson (talk) 09:53, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
 * --Esteban (talk) 10:38, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
 * —- Have my support, reliable editor. DARIO SEVERI (talk) 13:02, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
 * trusted user and long-time person keeping this afloat. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:31, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
 * --Bddpaux (talk) 15:40, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
 * —AlvaroMolina (✉ - ✔ ) 15:46, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
 * -- Shakata Ga Nai ^_^ 16:49, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
 * --William S. Saturn (talk) 19:57, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't know a lot about you or Green Giant, but I do know that you are both great contributors and admins to Wikinews. ICameHereForNews (talk) 21:04, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
 * &mdash; While I'm leery of checkuser permissions for obvious reasons, it has always been - and remains - a necessary evil. &mdash; Gopher65talk 02:57, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
 * --Patrick M (TUFKAAP) (talk) 03:05, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I do not know this person but I have had wiki-collaborations with their nominator Green Giant and I can readily see that this user has a long history of productive contributions to Wikinews, including as an admin. For Wikinews to develop it needs a checkuser community and this user is a suitable candidate.  Blue Rasberry    (talk)   15:02, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Acagastya's dedication and devotion, which I have observed countless times, leads me to give my vote to him. Henrymyman (talk) 18:49, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
 * My interactions with this user where part of the reason that I stopped contributing to this project for a while, and my experience with them is that they sometimes used admin tools in violation of policy and in situations they were involved in. While this is undesirable for admin actions, at least those leave a public log and can be scrutinized - if CheckUser is used inappropriately there is no such public log or public scrutiny. I simply don't trust them with CheckUser access. --DannyS712 (talk) 09:53, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Can you cite some examples of "sometimes used admin tools in violation of policy and in situations they were involved in"? Leaderboard (talk) 12:16, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't remember all of the specifics but I had a summary at Special:Permalink/4568217 --DannyS712 (talk) 13:17, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I've read all this carefully and I'm not sure I disagree entirely with some of the things you've said. Honestly, though: it is near impossible for some pet peeves to not come through from time to time. We all have our quirks and there isn't a SINGLE Reviewer or Admin. around here to whom that doesn't apply. At the end of the day: we should all be focused on simply getting, writing and publishing news.--Bddpaux (talk) 22:29, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * User is experienced and responsible. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 12:32, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
 * - Xbspiro (talk) 04:16, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I admit I'm not an active Wikinews community member, but I still want to note my concerns here. I've interacted with Acagastya a couple of times as a steward, and those interactions weren't always pleasing. For instance, they've reported a couple of vandalism-only accounts in #wikimedia-stewards IRC channel, and when I locked them and globally blocked an IP, they've explicitly asked me (in -stewards, which is a public channel) to confirm if "all those accounts [edited] from ". That's highly concerning to me – an ombuds and a CU candidate should definitely know stewards aren't allowed to publicly comment on connection of any IP with any account. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 17:34, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I had asked if you had glocked all IPs, a yes/no question, and when I said "you could PM me, as [I am] an OC" -- that was a joke. I know far too well that isn't what I am supposed to know.  But I think I did clarify in the channel it is a joke almost immediately. •–•  17:38, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * ....and, well, jokes often get 'lost' in our strange little world here. Acagastaya can be, yes, often aggressive when it comes to dealing with vandalism and vandals at large....BUT, there are MANY individuals who like to treat English Wikinews like it is their little private graffiti wall for all manner of garbage and marketing whatever. So, just my two cents..... --Bddpaux (talk) 17:43, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * @Acagastya I'm sorry, but your first request was clearly asking me to publicly comment on an IP (if a given account edits from a given IP).
 * I'm happy to publish the raw logs so the community can consider it themselves. However, since it's IRC conversation, I shouldn't do that without approval from you. Are you okay with me publishing the logs here? Martin Urbanec (talk) 18:00, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I said twice “I am not requesting access -- it was my way of saying -- are you sure there was just one IP, or were there many -- and maybe a range block might help me not having to deal with the as frequently as I do.” and “No, I am asking "hey, you checked for all accounts, right? I saw you block only one of the accounts -- please make sure you have blocked all, and if a range block applies, please do -- that will be very much appreciated".”
 * The LTAs were creating more pages and triggering some AFs while we were speaking, and they have created enough trouble for me, that I had to stay up past my bed time, just to get rid of their helpline support spam. Perhaps I could have worded it differently.  Perhaps I could have said "Jokes aside, and my bad, not the best time to joke; however, please make sure you have checked all IPs because we are *still* receiving the spam as I speak and if they come in a range, that will surely help me divert my attention to more important things both on and off wiki."  My apologies.  I should have considered, it is not the channel or people where I frequently speak and the way I speak (the way I mean things) might be perceived it differently.  I shall be more careful in future. •–•  02:46, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
 * @Acagastya Could you please answer the question asked in my previous comment? Quoting: „Are you okay with me publishing the logs here?“ Thanks, Martin Urbanec (talk) 12:44, 27 July 2021 (UTC)


 * is a reliable, experienced and responsible user. Edu! (talk) 12:02, 27 July 2021 (UTC)