Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Clerk and checkuser procedures

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The sock puppetry investigation procedures page covers the procedures for patrolling, clerking and CheckUser work on the Sockpuppet investigations pages.

Shortcut

WP:SPI/PROCWP:SPI/PROC

More information Case decisions:, Information: ...

Indicators and templates (v · e)
Case decisions:
These indicators are used by Checkusers, SPI clerks and other patrolling users, to allow easier at-a-glance reading of their notes, actions and comments.
IP blocked {{IPblock}}	Tagged {{Stagged}}
Blocked but awaiting tags {{Sblock}}	Not possible {{Impossible}}
Blocked and tagged {{Blockedandtagged}}	Blocked without tags {{Blockedwithouttags}}
No tags {{No tags}}	Blocked and tagged. Closing. {{Blockedtaggedclosing}}
Information:
Additional information needed {{MoreInfo}}	Deferred {{Deferred}}
Note: {{TakeNote}}	In progress {{Inprogress}}
Clerk actions:
Clerk assistance requested: {{Clerk Request}}	Clerk note: {{Clerk-Note}}
Delisted {{Delisted}}	Relisted {{Relisted}}
Clerk declined {{Decline}}	Clerk endorsed {{Endorse}}
Self-endorsed by clerk for checkuser attention {{Selfendorse}}	CheckUser requested {{CURequest}}
Specific to CheckUser:
Confirmed {{Confirmed}}	Unrelated {{Unrelated}}
Confirmed with respect to the named user(s). No comment with respect to IP address(es). {{Confirmed-nc}}
Technically indistinguishable {{Technically indistinguishable}}
Likely {{Likely}}	Unlikely {{Unlikely}}
Possible {{Possible}}	Inconclusive {{Inconclusive}}
Declined {{Declined}}	Unnecessary {{Unnecessary}}
Stale (too old) {{StaleIP}}	No comment {{Nocomment}}
CheckUser is not a crystal ball {{Crystalball}}	CheckUser is not for fishing {{Fishing}}
CheckUser is not magic pixie dust {{Pixiedust}}	The CheckUser Magic 8-Ball says: {{8ball}}
Endorsed by a checkuser {{Cu-endorsed}}	Check declined by a checkuser {{Cudecline}}
Possilikely (a mix between possible and likely) {{possilikely}}

General notes

These pages are used to discuss whether a user is likely to have violated Wikipedia's sock puppet policy, or breached other restrictions (e.g. blocks or bans) using multiple accounts or IPs. When reviewing cases, keep in mind that there are legitimate uses of multiple accounts, and that improbable things can happen by chance. Unfairly blocking someone as a sockpuppet is a harm not easily undone.

Patrolling

The following users may do the following:

Any capable user

may:
- help or contribute on an open case. This includes adding analysis, evidence, and comments, as well as making minor obvious corrections and improvements, and posting optional notices to users if their input is necessary in the case.
- add a Request for CheckUser to a case by changing {{SPI case status}} to {{SPI case status|CUrequest}}.

Any administrator

may:
- make the decision in a case based on the evidence, if they feel capable, and tag as provisionally closed, changing {{SPI case status|<status>}} to {{SPI case status|close}}. A clerk will then review the case before archiving.
- take administrator action as appropriate, noting such action on the case's page. Remember that blocking a "sockpuppet" who in reality is not a sockpuppet is unfair to the person you have just blocked. The sock puppet policy requires firm evidence or similar before blocking a sockpuppet; see Identification and handling of suspected sock puppets. When in doubt, don't hesitate to require more information, or ask for a second opinion.

may not:
- archive cases. This is restricted to clerks and clerk trainees.
- endorse or deny a CheckUser request, or otherwise change the status of an SPI case to anything except close, moreinfo, hold, clerk or CURequest.

Trainee clerks

may:
- archive cases by removing the {{SPI case status}} template and moving the case to the /Archive page.
- remove or refactor (within reason) any material by any user that is not strictly relevant to SPI. This material should not be reinstated by anyone other than Clerks or CheckUsers. Rather, if there is concern that a trainee has acted incorrectly, please contact a clerk to look into the matter.
- endorse or decline requests for CheckUser by changing {{SPI case status|curequest}} to {{SPI case status|endorse}} or {{SPI case status|decline}}.

may not:
- take on another user as a clerk trainee or perform any actions not denoted by the clerk's trainer.

Full clerks

may:
- operate all SPI procedures including endorsing or declining CheckUser requests by changing {{SPI case status|curequest}} to {{SPI case status|endorse}} or {{SPI case status|decline}}.
- ask users to cease patrolling or posting to SPI pages (other than to open a case or present evidence) if there are problems.

CheckUsers

may operate all SPI procedures.
have the sole discretion and decision whether or not the CheckUser tool will be used. This includes the decision to use it when not requested or when declined, and also to decline (as denoted by {{SPI case status|cudecline}}) even if already provisionally endorsed by a clerk.

Process notes

Process overview for clerks

Please note that only clerks and CheckUsers may endorse or decline CheckUser requests

Cases generally follow the same procedure whether or not CheckUser is requested. The only difference is that CheckUser can provide additional evidence for the case.

It is recommended that clerks and CheckUsers use spihelper to help with changing states, and especially archiving.

More information Step, Actions ...

Step	Actions
I. Endorse cases	If you think a case merits a CheckUser investigation, on the `{{SPI case status}}` template, change the parameter to `endorse` or `decline`. In the "Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments" section, add `{{endorse}}` or `{{decline}}` and a short explanation as to why.
II. Mark checked	The CheckUser should change the `{{SPI case status}}` from `endorse` to `checked` after a check. (Clerks can do so if the CheckUser seemingly forgets.)
III. Take action	Review the case carefully. At this point, any administrator can make a determination as to whether sock puppetry or similar has occurred and take action if needed.
IV. Tag	Tag the user page of the sockpuppet an administrator has blocked with `{{sock\|MasterAccount\|blocked}}` or `{{sock\|MasterAccount\|confirmed}}`.
V. Cleanup	Once finished, add your notes (using `{{clerk-note}}` if desired), and change the `{{SPI case status}}` parameter to `close` to mark the case as ready for final clerk review and archiving. Another clerk or CheckUser will assess whether the case is ready to be archived. A key responsibility of Clerks is to review the case before finally archiving, to see if anything else needs doing, if it is really closed, and so on. This helps detect any errors by non-clerks (or clerks), and/or incomplete handling issues. In particular, it is important to check that sockpuppets' userpages are properly tagged. Check for additional evidence or notes added after the case was closed.

Advanced clerking

Whilst the procedure above deals with run of the mill clerking of cases, there are cases where clerks need to "tidy up" a case that hasn't been properly filed, or perform some other out of the ordinary action. SPIhelper makes this much easier compared to doing these actions by hand; please see also User:Blablubbs/SPI clerking cheat sheet.

Cases filed under the name of a sock

Despite our best efforts in the instructions, many users incorrectly file cases under the name of a newly discovered sockpuppet, instead of correctly filing under the name of the master (the oldest account).

In such cases, clerks must switch the case to the correct master. The procedure depends on whether a prior case has been filed for the true master account.

First, the correct name should be determined. This is usually the username of the oldest account, but several exceptions apply: a different username can be chosen if the oldest username is offensive, or if the case is more well-known under the other name.

If the target case title does not exist yet, using spihelper's "Move/merge full case" option after selecting "All sections" should suffice. If the target case title exists, determine whether a histmerge is appropriate. If the current case being moved from has never had an open case at the same time as the target case title had an open case (there never were non-archived cases present for both cases at the same time), then a histmerge should be performed. This is the same as using the "Move/merge full case" option above, but spihelper will now perform a histmerge. Note that you can only perform a histmerge if you are a sysop.

If a histmerge is inappropriate, manual cut-and-paste merges should be performed. Manually copy the open and archived cases yourself to the target title. Add the following line to the moved cases and archives, with Example being the username of the case being merged from:

* {{checkuser|Example}} ({{clerk note}} Originally opened under this user)

Cases where sockpuppetry has been found, but the listed master is unrelated

Merge the case into the case page named after the oldest sock in the confirmed list.

Clerk notes

Clerks are called upon to make procedural notes, along with constructive observations. Some types of notes that clerks are asked to make are:

If the reporting party failed to sign the request (using ~~~~) clerks, for transparency reasons, should note who filed the request.
Clerks should always note the reason why they are endorsing unless it's a well known sock.
If the case requires more evidence (i.e. diffs), note it and request the filing party provides more evidence. This can be done using {{MoreInfo}} followed by a custom explanation, or {{DiffsNeeded|cu=no}} to provide a more detailed description of what is required.
Clerks are also asked to watch cases closely, and if needed ensure the case remains focused and on track. Discussions here should be relevant to the topic at hand. Off topic comments may be collapsed or removed. If this is done, a note should be left on the case page, along with contacting the party whose comment(s) the clerk removed.
If a patrolling admin has blocked a sockpuppet, note that on the case page.
Clerks can add notes to the case page under the section Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments. {{clerknote}} is a template clerks can use.
Clerks should not archive a case they closed. Another clerk or member of the SPI team should do so.

Closing a request

A case should be closed when there is no further action needed. Examples include requests that have been dealt with by a checkuser, checkuser requests that have been declined by a clerk, and requests in which the involved parties have been blocked or cleared of sockpuppetry.

Please make a note of the action taken (or not taken) in the section Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments.
Replace the {{SPI case status}} parameter to close and make any additional comments in the clerks' section. For example, if a CheckUser has uncovered and listed several accounts, they will need blocking and tagging, so adding {{admin-note}}--All blocked and tagged comment would be a useful indicator.
If you are reviewing a close requested by someone else, clerks can accept the close by archiving using the script. If clerks do not accept the close request, they can simply set the {{SPI case status}} template to open.