Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nerdybirdy23/Archive

Report date December 28 2009, 17:34 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets

[] Hell In A Bucket (talk) 17:34, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Evidence submitted by Hell In A Bucket (talk)

This is me, Nerdybirdy. I was using another account two years ago. Yes I admit it. I was banned from that account and two years, later wanted to make a clean slate. This is it. Please do not ban me again. User:FisherQueen said I was fine.--Nerdybirdy23 (talk) 17:40, 28 December 2009 (UTC) My real other account was User:anole23. --Nerdybirdy23 (talk) 17:47, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.

Thank you so much fisherqueen and you too hell in a bucket. --Nerdybirdy23 (talk) 17:52, 28 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by other users
 * This user has acknowledged having been blocked as a fifteen-year-old, and returning under a different username as a seventeen-year-old. Personally, I'm inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt and a chance to make useful edits. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 17:36, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Shouldn't this be under the other account? A ban would denote a community consensus. If it's a block I agree, providing they return to the previous account. It doesn't strike me as a good waqy to re-renter the community by breaking a policy (sockpuppetry) to evade your sanctions. Second chances are cool but is things changing all that much if you will break policy to get back in?Hell In A Bucket (talk) 17:38, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * He's mistaken; User:Anole has never been blocked, and nothing has been deleted from that account's talk or userpage. I have no idea what his real previous account was, and it looks like he's forgotten it as well. :)  He says 'ban' but I suspect he means 'block'; many newish users don't know that there's a difference between them. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 17:43, 28 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments


 * Conclusions
 * Closing this as "no violation"; two years seems like enough time to give a second chance. NW ( Talk ) 17:50, 28 December 2009 (UTC)