The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Nimbley6 (3rd)

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppeteer

Nimbley6 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Report submission by

Kevin Forsyth (talk) 14:58, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence

As previously shown in WP:Suspected sock puppets/Nimbley6 (2nd), this user — also known to administrators as User:Bennet556 — keeps coming back to make low-quality edits to Kilmarnock and its environs, as well as add information about himself. In this case he has created User:Kristopher James Owen Nimbley and made his user page look like an article about an actor.

Comments

Look at the username! It is definitely a sockpuppet, I should know! StewieGriffin! • Talk 17:11, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I checked the contribs of the accounts but not the IP addresses. They seem to match what we already know about Nimbley. I think it's reasonable to block these guys, deleted the userpage of Kristopher James Owen Nimbley, and semiprotect Kilmarnock for a while. For future reference, please do not reveal the real names of contributors if you can avoid it (although simply saying that the username is identical to the real name is okay). Shalom (Hello • Peace) 03:44, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. My (misguided) intent was to call this user out, but naming him undoubtedly plays into his desire for self-aggrandisement. That said, can someone please put these blocks in place? He's back again, and creating new accounts as quickly as we can identify them. Kevin Forsyth (talk) 20:57, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another user with a similar username and an identical user page to one already listed here: Kristopher J Nimbley (talk · contribs) [1]. --Snigbrook ^(talk) 22:10, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And another: Kris (Quiz K) (talk · contribs) -- Kevin Forsyth (talk) 22:31, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And another: Robert5564 (talk · contribs). Different style username, but created 109 Bluevale street (East End), which I believe was already created by another of the socks and subsquently deleted. --Schcambo^{aon scéal?} 17:46, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another anonymous: 78.148.71.24 (talk · contribs). Attempting to reintroduce many of the same edits to Kilmarnock. Kevin Forsyth (talk) 14:28, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Add another anon: 78.150.157.91 (talk · contribs). Seriously, this is becoming a bit of a joke at this stage. The kid has a couple dozen socks. Can a range block please be placed? Thanks. --Schcambo^{aon scéal?} 19:13, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another possible, but not yet 100% certain: Doorspiteweekscrazy (talk · contribs). Typical inappropriate cut-and-paste additions from other pages ([2]), and the usual fascination with Kilmarnock ([3]). Kevin Forsyth (talk) 16:33, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another: Music4545 (talk · contribs) More cut-and-paste additions from other pages ([4], [5]), heavy typos and the same subjects in Kilmarnock edits [6]. Kevin Forsyth (talk) 00:28, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

All named accounts blocked indef and tagged. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:31, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]