Ok, so a couple of days ago I was requesting another checkuser, and it was suggested that it might be a good thing to allow a couple of users to be able to check the IPs of users, and which users use an IP. We have gone further in this process, but we feel that it is needed to have a defined policy for when checkuser is and isn't to be used.

That's what this forum is for.

I honestly have no idea where, to start, so let's all pool ideas and see what we come up with. ajr 22:16, May 2, 2011 (UTC)

First of all, I had to read that a couple times (My brain is killing me today). I like the idea, the only instances I see it being used is if we have a spammer/more than one account user. But I can't see how a Checkuser would be needed, since when a user is blocked, isn't the IP blocked automatically? Or just the username? -Nerfblasterpro: Can you believe it's only been a year? 14:31, May 3, 2011 (UTC)

On Brickipedia, we quite often have a problem with people abusing multiple accounts. I remember that one of my first actions on Brickipedia was sorting out a sockpuppet investigation. Additionally, it is needed sometimes to find out which IPs are being used in a range so the range can be blocked, and to determine whether or not it is OK to block an IP to ensure that good people aren't affected. Answer your question?

Beyond that, the policy should have a few key points:

• Checkuser should only be used against suspected sockpuppets in cases in which there is prior strong supported evidence only. Basically, checkuser shouldn't be used on a random suspicion, but rather to confirm existing well-supported suspicions.
• IPs should never be publicly revealed - this is common sense.
• Checkusers should be able to be reviewed at any time, to ensure correct use of the tools. ajr 03:07, May 4, 2011 (UTC)

• I would support a checkuser- it saves us (ie pretty much you Ajr) from having to ask another check user to do what you so easily could. I'm assuming from "Checkusers should be able to be reviewed at any time, to ensure correct use of the tools" you mean we need at least two checkusers, so that the other check user can make sure that the rights aren't being abused, as only checkusers can see the logs. NightblazeSaber_(talk)  03:15, May 4, 2011 (UTC)

  Yes, and that is in fact one of Wikia's requirements for a wiki to have local checkusers. There must be at least two so that they can spy on eachother, and ensure that the tools are being used correctly. ajr 03:17, May 4, 2011 (UTC)

• Just looking around at this right now on Wikia- are we actually eligible for this? It says it's usually only available to staff, VSTF and helpers :S NightblazeSaber_(talk)  03:29, May 4, 2011 (UTC)

  After my last checkuser request, a staff person told me that we could go about requesting it since we tend to need it a few times a year. Anyways, some wikis do have access to it locally. ajr 03:35, May 4, 2011 (UTC)

  Ok, fair enough :) NightblazeSaber_(talk)  03:41, May 4, 2011 (UTC)

• "allow a couple of users" like myself? The Legend of Swipe Talk Alien Conquest!

• It seems Ajr can but up a good argument. Then again, I think I already knew that. xD Anyways, I think it makes sense if it is SERIOUSLY (and by that, I mean SERIOUSLY) moderated in use, and a policy is set up for its use. If we can get a good, safe policy for it, then you've got my Support. -Nerfblasterpro: Can you believe it's only been a year? 12:59, May 4, 2011 (UTC)

• Are there enough cases in which checkuser rights would need to be used? - nxt 15:41, May 4, 2011 (UTC)

  I have already answered this, and this forum is about deciding how it will be used it if Wikia does allow us local checkusers. ajr 18:05, May 4, 2011 (UTC)

• Per Nerfblasterpro. ...Half Way out of the Dark... 16:03, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
• So... what now? NightblazeSaber_(talk)  05:24, May 6, 2011 (UTC)
  • So now we sit back and let Ajr do his thang... :P -Nerfblasterpro: Always supplying the boomsauce... 13:27, May 6, 2011 (UTC)
    • I don't actually know what to do now O_o ajr 13:37, May 6, 2011 (UTC)
      • YOU SAY WHA?! O__O -Nerfblasterpro: Always supplying the boomsauce... 16:53, May 6, 2011 (UTC)

So, do we need another policy? As Ajr said above:

• Checkuser should only be used against suspected sockpuppets in cases in which there is prior strong supported evidence only. Basically, checkuser shouldn't be used on a random suspicion, but rather to confirm existing well-supported suspicions.
• IPs should never be publicly revealed - this is common sense.
• Checkusers should be able to be reviewed at any time, to ensure correct use of the tools.

Do we need anything else? Jag 19:40, May 6, 2011 (UTC)

That's about it, me thinks. ajr 22:20, May 9, 2011 (UTC)

• Look here, here, and here for more info. - nxt 15:49, May 10, 2011 (UTC)