Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Vintagekits

User:Vintagekits

 * 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.


 * Suspected sockpuppeteer

(see: Requests for checkuser/Case/Vintagekits)
 * Suspected sockpuppets

 Eliminator JR Talk  23:56, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Report submission by

Rockpock e  t  05:53, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

This was prompted by a revert war on this very heated AfD in which a user insinuated that User:Coeur-sang's edit history looked suspicious in that it had few edits, but those on AfDs all agreed with User:Vintagekits. I reported the edit war to WP:ANI, but then looked a little closer at the edit history and had to agree that they did indeed suggest something dubious. The alarm bells really went off, though, when I looked at another user - User:Maplecelt who commented on the same AfD, and had a very similar pattern of editing - very few edits, then a burst of commenting on AfDs. Of the four AfDs that Maplecelt commented on, three of them were the same one as Coeur-sang. Now, of course, there is the possibility that Coeur-sang and Maplecelt are sock/meat puppets of each other, and nothing to do with Vintagekits, but there are further links...
 * Evidence

User:Maplecelt was registered in December 2006 and made only 6 edits up until 26 Apr 2007. Between then and today, they then commented on 5 AfDs, 4 of which were started by Vintagekits and agreeing with his delete !vote  , and one agreeing with his Keep vote in the AfD mentioned above. . They also made an edit to Talk:Falklands War, another pet favourite of Vintagekits, and again agreeing with his POV.

User:Coeur-sang meanwhile, was registered on 27 April, the day after Maplecelt started commenting on AfDs, and commented on 3 AfDs - two of them the same ones as Maplecelt  - plus another Arbuthnott AfD not started by Vintagekits, but on which he'd !voted and agreeing with him, before then also pitching in with a keep on the heated Bhoys from Seville AfD mentioned above.

Some further evidence has been brought to my attention by a concerned editor that appears to explain what is going on here. Therefore I'm going to reproduce it below to allow the community to decide.
 * Further evidence
 * VintageKits is SligoBhoy67 at www.celticminded.com. Celticminded.com is a web forum about Celtic F.C., the subject of the AfD that sparked this report. Sligobhoy67 (hereafter abbreviated to SB67) edits there regularly. Over a period of time, SB67 has made threads at Celticminded asking if other members of the board use Wikipedia. Examples of the thread titles include Any wikipedia users on?, has anyone got an account on wikipedia and Anyone have a history of editing on wiki? The forum itself requires registration so I provide screen dumps for convenience  (The red dots indicate the Wikipedia specific threads). Now, I don't know for sure but I strongly suspect Vintagekits is from Sligo (see here and here). Moreover, he and SB67 share a number of interests including boxing, Irish republicanism and, of course, Celtic. In fact, there appears to be a  who edits here at Wikipedia, a look at his contributions shows an almost complete crossover in editing space with Vintagekits. As interesting as all of this is, it is mere conjecture except they are the same individual. Except SB67, in response to a question on Celticminded about Martin Savage, replied it is indeed a chara - infact i wrote an article about him on wikipedia.  The creator and major editor of that article is, of course, Vintagekits.
 * SligoBhoy67/Vintagekits admits intent to vote stack with meatpuppets. In the thread entitled Any wikipedia users on?, SB67 notes, If you have used wiki then let my [sic] know or just reply here and I will contact you. I need help with a bit of voterigging!
 * Coeur-sang responds to SligoBhoy67/Vintagekits request to votestack. A member of Celticminded responds to SB67's request for meatpuppets. This member is called Coeur-sang. . Note that this request was posted on Celticminded on 26-04-07. Coeur-sang's first contribution to Wikipedia was a delete vote on that day, in an AfD proposed by Vintagekits. Note also the date of another of SB67's requests on that forum: 12-06-7, this date is co-incident with Coeur-sang's fifth  and sixth  edits, again to an AfD of Vintagekit's. When asked (below) if he had received communications from another Wikipedians about votestacking, Coeur-sang is explicit in his denial. I would ask him to consider whether he may like to reconsider that answer in light of this evidence.
 * Are Maplecelt and TamB also meatpuppets? I could find no direct evidence linking TamB and Maplecelt to requests for assistance in votestacking. However, Maplecelt certainly contributes to a number of Celtic fora, including Huddlehound and Kerrydale St, therefore considering the strong evidence of using such fora for vote stacking purposes, it is not unreasonable to expect he was recruited in the same manner. I have no evidence for TamB, except the co-incidental posting on the same Kerrydale thread as Maplecelt, a member by the name of Tam Ball...
 * a thread asking for help on this site would be deleted instantly on KDS, as it would be against the rules. They are extremely strict on what can and cannot be posted.65.95.129.159 14:13, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Meatpuppetry is in violation of policy. WP:SOCK states It is considered highly inappropriate to advertise Wikipedia articles in order to attract users with known views in an attempt to strengthen one side of a debate. It is also considered inappropriate to ask friends or family members to create accounts for the purpose of giving additional support. Advertising or soliciting meatpuppet activity is not an acceptable practice on Wikipedia. I propose Vintagekits is clearly in violation of this. While this behaviour is unacceptable, it should also be noted that there appears to be a similar meatpuppetry going on by editors who are in perpetual conflict with Vintagekits. This does not excuse his behaviour, but it perhaps explains it. I would endorse a similar report into the behaviour of those editors also. Finally, while Coeur-sang's denials (below) now appear to be highly suspect, those who were asked to be meatpuppets are not usually sanctioned. I would suggest this is a good opportunity for all those individuals listed above to consider being honest about the circumstances in which they found themselves !voting at Vintagekits AfD's, and use it to make a fresh start and put the meatpuppetry behind them. Rockpock  e  t  05:53, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

'' Rockpock  e  t  07:02, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * One more thing to wrap up any dispute that SB67 is Vintagekits:
 * A SB67 post at Celticminded ''"To follow on for from the Antoine MacGiolla Bhrighde that a bunch of huns tried to get deleted off wiki, they are now trying to get the article for Martin McCaughey deleted. Can I ask you to do two things. 1. Go and vote to keep the article 2. if you have any more info on Martin please add it to the article or tell me where it is and I will do it. As usual REMEMBER - BEFORE you edit you have to register a name, NOT TOO FENIAN OR PROVO EITHER, I am called "VINTAGEKITS" on the site, Once registered THEN EDIT a number of pages such as your local town, GAA club anything JUST MAKE A NUMBER OF EDITS, THEN AFTER A NUMBER OF DAYS PLOUGH INTO THE FENIAN STUFF - BE SUBTLE - THE KEY IS BE COOL, BE SUBTLE! If you need ANY help just ask. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_McCaughey"
 * That ties in Maplecelt quite well, whose editing pattern shows exactly that - a few edits on random and local items, before ploughing into the AfDs.  Eliminator JR Talk  07:57, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * except that I've never been on Celticminded in my life.Maplecelt 13:55, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I should add that on those threads at celticminded, at least two other members indicated that they had contributed to the AfDs a manner that SB67 has requested. There are no obvious link between those individuals names at Celticminded and the individuals names listed here, but it would suggest that there were at least three meatpuppets recruited from celticminded... Rockpock  e  t  17:01, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * One slight problem with that argument, where are the sock/meatpuppets on the Martin McCaughey AfD? That's actually a rhetorical question, as I already know the answer. Checkuser says El chulito, Jill Teed, Inthegloaming and Conrad Falk were all from the same person, who voted "delete". That plus the usual suspects who vote delete on any AfD about Irish republicans.... One Night In Hackney  303  17:10, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * How is that a problem? I don't think there is much doubt that there was votestacking to delete the article also, are you suggesting that validates VK's votestacking as a measure of response? Rockpock  e  t  17:20, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Not in the slightest. Someone mentioned the McCaughey AfD as evidence of sockpuppetry, I was happy to provide evidence that was indeed the case. One Night In Hackney  303  17:22, 15 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Checkuser finds it is "likely" that Vintagekits is Sligobhoy67. See Requests for checkuser/Case/Vintagekits. Rockpock  e  t  01:01, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * should probably be considered too per his/her history of AfD comments, I've added this user to the list of suspects. Rockpock  e  t  00:14, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Oddly enough TamB appears exclusively at the same AfD's as those mentioned above, but occasionally !votes against the other three. Strange. Perhaps this is simply coincidence, or else there is a meatpuppet who is a not quite towing the party line, or there is some seriously sophisticated sockpuppetry going on. Rockpock  e  t  01:04, 14 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Comments

Frankly I'm insulted the EliminatorJR accused me of being a sock puppet i'm a real person currently living in Sarnia, Ontario, Canada. I have a degree in History and Political Science from the UNiversity of Western Ontario so I think my opinions are as valid as anyone elses. I was born in Scotland of Irish Catholic background why would I not have an interest in these topics. Also since between December and April 30th I was in school its a little hard to have the time take part in this site. Maplecelt 03:30, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * What you mean the Falklands war as for me it was your edit there that smacks of sockpup[petry just because Vintage's belief is so unusual and so obviously politically motivated in an anti Brit way, SqueakBox 03:40, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

I fail to see what the issue is with what I wrote about the name of the falklands war. I don't think its anti british I think to call it just the falklands is a pro-british view. I think you may be talking it to hard because you are a british. Maplecelt 03:49, 14 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't say any of these are sockpuppets, especially not Maplecelt. This is only looking at one half of the AfDs in question anyway. A group of British editors interested in the monarchy and peerage (that information needs updating with additional editors, AfDs and canvassing also) have been votestacking and attempting to subvert consensus in AfDs for months now including the use of glaringly obvious sock/meatpuppets such as, it stands to reason that accounts from "the other side" will appear to vote on the AfDs in question. I suggested a proposed solution to allow any contentious AfDs to be discussed by neutral parties which didn't happen for one reason or another, and have stayed almost totally clear of any such AfDs since because it's practically a waste of time trying to get any articles deleted with the votestacking and canvassing that goes on. One Night In Hackney  303  03:32, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately concluding that Vintage's opponents use socks doesnt help his case one bit, indeed it could explain his motivations, SqueakBox 03:35, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * No, but considering you're one of the meatpuppets it explains your motivations for shouting "sockpuppet" without any evidence. One Night In Hackney  303  03:51, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Meatpuppet? If you are being serious please stop making silly accusations, I have been on wikipedia longer than pretty much anyone else involved in this issue, SqueakBox 03:53, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * And your point is? It doesn't stop you being a meatpuppet in the AfDs in question. One Night In Hackney  303  03:55, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

How so. You mean just expressing similar opinions to someonme else makes someone a meatpuppet? Like you and Vintage? Codex and I? Those who oppose thew Brandt article and those who support it (2 massive armies of meatpuppets). As I say please stop making silly suggestions, SqueakBox 03:56, 14 June 2007 (UTC)


 * To be fair I'm being accused of being a sockpuppet for having an opinionMaplecelt 04:03, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

For having several opinions that concur with Vintage's and expressed in a way that would help Vintage push his POV in afds and other disputes, its all quite convincing, SqueakBox 04:05, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

so two people can't share the same view on an issue if you don't their position? I'm tired of this some of us have a job to get up for.Maplecelt 04:07, 14 June 2007 (UTC)


 * The issue is that you had very few edits and the ones you did tended to help Vintage's POV in a number of cases, and its not as simple as just having agreed with him, SqueakBox 04:08, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * how is it not that simple? its amazing this site has as many people if when the want to start making contributions they are attacked because people don't like others points of view.  sort of defeats the purpose.  I'm going to bed before I say something I shouldn'tMaplecelt 04:15, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

More comments from nom A clarification - you don't get suspected as a sock/meatpuppet just for agreeing with someone's opinions, and I definitely try to assume good faith at all times. However, there is definitely an odd pattern here.
 * Example: this AfD was opened by VK at 15:43, and Coeur-sang, who'd made 1 edit in the previous month, commented at 16.26, followed by Maplecelt, who hadn't edited for two weeks, an hour later. They then both immediately commented on this AfD.

However, to be fair, I did note this; Coeur-sang was welcomed to Wikipedia by Vintagekits. However, looking more closely, this was well after Coeur-sang registered, but only 10 minutes after s/he had commented on an AfD Vintagekits was watching. I would be tempted to look at that as vindication that Vintagekits did not know Coeur-sang before that, although I suppose you could argue it could be an extremely clever ruse. In the end, I see it like this, either  Eliminator JR Talk  08:20, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * a) none of the accounts have anything to do with each other (unlikely given the diffs)
 * b) they are sock/meatpuppets of VK
 * c) They are sock/meatpuppets of someone else
 * d) the suspected sockpuppets are linked to each other with no puppetmaster, or
 * e) they are different people but there is off-wiki communication, which means this is votestacking rather than meatpuppetry.


 * If its not a vote how can it be vote stacking?. Second question I understand what a sockpuppet is now, but can I get a meatpuppet definition? Maplecelt 13:09, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, you're quite right, it isn't a vote, but it's the phrase used for 'fixing' an AfD by getting a number of editors to !vote whose opinions on a subject are known - see WP:CANVASS. A meatpuppet is a real person who acts as a sockpuppet - see WP:MEAT.  Eliminator JR  Talk  13:40, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * As a relatively new member I have no idea what you are talking about re sockpuppets and meat puppets but not so dumb that I can't work out for myself the intended insult. I was not pre warned that I was only allowed to work in areas where there was no prior interest by other members! I DO NOT know these people to whom you refer. I also understand now that your attitude towards new members is designed to keep your numbers low and therefore your power high. Is it any wonder you are not increasing your membership? So when will you let me know the results of this witch hunt. After all thats exactly what it is. If I edit I'm a witch and if I don't... well burn her anywayCoeur-sang 13:50, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Coeur-sang, can you confirm therefore, that you have not received a communication, on or off wiki, from another editor asking you to !vote in one of the AfD's you have commented on? Rockpock  e  t  17:29, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The first communication I recieved from a wiki person was this accusation. I don't know anyone who has any involvement here. I have no interest in getting into this as I feel it is a complete waste of my time to answer charges that I'm not even sure I know the meaning of!Coeur-sang 19:48, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * With respect, sir madam (my apologies), I propose to you that is not entirely true. I would ask you to digest the further evidence above and consider if it might not the the time to reconsider your answer. Rockpock  e  t  06:00, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Sir??? - I would advise caution as to gender - consider the phrase above "If I edit I'm a witch and if I don't... well burn her anyway" - people are jumping to too many conclusions here - I suspect that their style of writing is not the only diference between Vintagekits style and Coeur-sang. Giano 06:21, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Then I suggest you too read the further evidence. The difference between them is no longer in question. Rockpock  e  t  06:30, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * You are rather missing the point - half of Wikipedia's business is conducted off wiki on IRC. Mailing another editor is not a wiki-crime. Why do you think the email facility is there, and for what reason - for editors to discuss the weather with each other? I think you need to be realistic. Coeur-sang like any other editor is to be credited with an independent brain, and also to be believed. If Coeur-sang says she had not been emailed that is fine - if she has been emailed that is equally fine. You are trying to build a case that you will never manage to prove. In fact you risk damaging the reputation of valuable editors without the grounds for doing so. Giano 08:17, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * No one is suggestion mailing another editor is a crime. However, recruiting meatpuppets for the purposes of votestacking is against policy. I asked Coeur-sang is she has received a communication asking her to do that and she said she hadn't. I believe the evidence above shows that is not true. If you choose not to believe that evidence it is your choice, but I personally find it compelling. Rockpock  e  t  17:10, 15 June 2007 (UTC)


 * My one and only comment, I have stayed off this attack page for a reason - that reason is that editors are putting 2&2 together and getting 55! I am not going to justify myself to the whrilling dervishes on here but if the closing admin wishes to contact me via email (for privacy reasons) I can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that these people are neither my sock or meatpuppets.--Vintagekits 16:17, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Reply Er, hang on a second - attack page? If you look through my contribs you'll see that I've generally been on your side at AfD   - indeed I've even started Arbuthnot AfDs myself (like this one).  Can we assume good faith please? Vintagekits, you know quite well that if you'd seen evidence like this against an "opposition player" on AfD, you'd have come here too.  Eliminator JR  Talk  17:37, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * For my part, I have nothing against you and my !votes on AfD's you have taken part in tend to be 50/50 in support. I also find the behaviour of those in perpetual opposition to you abhorrant, so please don't paint this as some sort of partisan attack on you. The information above was provided to me as an admin, with a request for help in submitting it. After checking its validity, I provided it for the community to decide. To supress it would have been a serious abuse of the trust put in admin. If you can prove "beyond a shadow of a doubt that these people are neither my sock or meatpuppets" then I suggest you do so publically and we can all go back to something more productive. Rockpock  e  t  17:50, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

A few thoughts: TamB doesn't necessarily stand for "Tam Ball". Moreover, a "Tam Ball" is a legitimate product and therefore it is possible that there are numerous people who use that term or a variation (e.g. TamBall20, TamBallBoy) as a username. In fact, that forum you link to lists that "Tam Ball" as being located in England whereas here is a different "Tam Ball" located in Scotland.

It is also entirely possible that the "Sligobhoy67" on www.celticminded.com was simply taking credit for something he had nothing whatsoever to do with. People do occasionally lie on the internet :)

All that being said, the www.celticminded.com forum evidence is the strongest and it doesn't appear to bode well for Vintagekits. I do find it odd that while "Sligobhoy67" asked for voting assistance on www.celticminded.com the person with that username on Wikipedia hasn't voted on any AfDs. As I have only seen the screenshots provided, did "Sligobhoy67" ever declare himself "Vintagekits" on that forum? Did "Sligobhoy67" ever specify any particular AfDs for votestacking or was that a one time comment? IrishGuy talk 20:23, 15 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, you are absolutely correct with regards to TamB (and to a lesser extent, the evidence against maplecelt is also circumstantial). I mentioned the coincidence only in passing, and it would be wrong to read anything more into that. However, there is clear evidence that at least two other members of Celticminded responded to SB's request. I think that is stronger evidence that three meatpuppets were recruited, if you identify the possible meatpuppet accounts in those AfDs, you are left with the editors listed above. That said, I wouldn't endorse any movement to sanction these editors for past indiscretions, even if the evidence was stronger. Its the meatpuppeteer that is the problem, not really the meatpuppets, who may indeed turn into useful editors. However, it would be much better if they were upfront about their past circumstances, rather than peddling untruths.
 * As for the Wikipedia Sligobhoy67 anomaly. I would suggest the reason this has never been used in AfDs is made clear in SB67's request at Celticminded, "REMEMBER - BEFORE you edit you have to register a name, NOT TOO FENIAN OR PROVO EITHER, I am called "VINTAGEKITS" on the site". I would propose that Sligobhoy67 realised that having an overtly "fenian" name does not always help his cause. SligoBhoy67 registered here first and made a few edits, the last being in July 2006 to Carmel Gunning, he then disappeared for a while. On August 1st, Vintagekits registered, his first edit being to Carmel Gunning
 * Also, note this diff. Sligobhoy67 makes his next edit (indeed, his only edit in a 4 month window) to support an argument VK is having. I think taken together this strongly suggests Sligobhoy67 is a sock of Vintagekits, though I guess its possible that it is simply another meatpuppet. I might be worth requesting a checkuser to see if we can link SB67 with VK?
 * The specific AfD's coeur-sang replied about were never publically mentioned, though SB67 said he would "contact" the people who volunteered to help with details. However the time and date of the posts makes it pretty obvious what they correspond to . There are specific mentions of straw polls and debates on talkpages that SB urges others to votestack at, though. This includes, but is not limited to Martin McCaughey. Rockpock  e  t  21:06, 15 June 2007 (UTC)


 * OK. I must have missed the screenshot of SB67 declaring that he was Vintagekits. That answers that question. Were any particular AfDs swayed one way or the other from these votes? IrishGuy talk 21:13, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Its hard to say. There appears to have been votestacking going on in the opposite direction also. I don't know who was behind that, but User:One Night In Hackney/Temp gives you some idea. Its unfortunate for VK that his contribution to the debacle has been revealed so fully, when there are others that have behaved just as poorly. Rockpock  e  t  21:35, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Nobody is stopping anybody investigating, and if there is evidence of bad behaviour on both sides I would recommend taking the case to arbcom and I think there is a case for not taking furhter action against Vintage until the other side of the case is more fully investigated, SqueakBox 22:56, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I have asked other admins to decide on what, if any, further action should be taken, as its not really fair for someone presenting the evidence to also act on it. The discussion is here, feel free to offer your opinion. My personal opinion is that I'm not particularly predisposed to cutting Vintagekits some slack while both he Coeur-sang appear to be continuing to deny any involvement in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. If the editors were to come clean with the entire truth, and give their assurance this sort of thing wouldn't happen again, then I'm not sure any further action need be taken. Rockpock  e  t  00:14, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Comment: I am mentioned on User:One Night In Hackney/Temp. For the record, I did not contact anyone else about any of the AFDs I participated in that are listed there, seeking support or otherwise; nor was I contacted by anyone. I have already indicated to ONiH that he left out any reference to keep votes I made on the republican pages listed there. (I also voted 'keep' when that particular page was nominated for deletion). Bastun BaStun not BaTsun 22:53, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Comment Given our history, I am not the proper person to close this, but I find the evidence compelling. I suggest that if we hear no more from Vintagekits about the matter in 24 hours or so, we consider his silence an admission of guilt. I have messaged him reminding him that this case isn't going to just go away. --John 17:44, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Comment. Likewise, I don't feel it is appropriate I close this, given I presented a significant amount of evidence. I am also left with little doubt about what went on here and have asked a few other admins to take a look, if they have to time, and form their own opinion. No takers yet. If we hear no more in the next 24hrs, I suggest we ask Will Beback (who commented at AN/I) if he would consider closing. Rockpock e  t  17:52, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment, the two of ye have come up with no evidence - 1. If Sligobhoy67 was me on here what abuse of policy would have been carried out? NONE! 2. Like I said I can prove beyond a shoadow of a doubt that I am not Sligobhoy67 and i have never asked him to post on any forums for or on behalf of me, I do not deny that there is a link between but we are not the same person. I suppose you would be happy if I could show that we both had edited wiki from different countries on the same day, that would shut the two of ye up wouldnt it! I have already provide much of this information to an admin who emailed me some days ago but like I said earlier I am not perpared to divulge the information here for privacy reasons. If someone comes forward and nominates themselves as a closing admin then I will be prepared to provide them with the exact information.--Vintagekits 19:57, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * If Sligobhoy67 is you, then giving the appearance of two different users in the same argument is an abusive use of socks. Do you have any explanation as to why someone calling themselves that name should say on a forum that he edits wikipedia as Vintagekits, rather than saying he edits by his own user name? Tyrenius 20:24, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Like I said I am happy to provide the close admin with the full information.--Vintagekits 20:33, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Its not difficult to edit from two different countries on the same day. There are things called airplanes that facilitate this. The checkuser compared the editing from both you and SB67, and came to the conclusion that it is "likely" that you and SB67 is the the same person. That means there is nothing about your editing pattern that could prove "beyond a shoadow of a doubt" that you are different people. Combine that with the fact that SB67 has twice said he is you, and that he was stacking votes for you, and I think there is a little more than "no evidence" he is your sock. However, lets for a moment say you are different people. If you can provide us with information about SB67's edit history and location, then you clearly have a relationship with him. Perhaps you could ask him to come online and tell us why he said he was you, and chose to stack votes for you without your knowledge? Rockpock  e  t  21:54, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * If you think that I would edit wiki in one country - fly to another and immediately edit wiki in another country just a year later I could make some point on wiki then you are deluded!--Vintagekits 21:57, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * There are other ways of editing in 2 different countries. Windows XP allows one user to control another's with the permission of the latter, and there are also free and pay softwares that do the same, SqueakBox 21:59, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, then, so if you are simply going to ignore my request that you ask SB67 to log on and explain his motivations (and, of course, It doesn't take a genius to work out why you might rather than not happen), then perhaps you could tell us which admin you provided your irrefutable evidence to. I'll ask him or her to close the case. Rockpock  e  t  00:13, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I have provided you with all the information I am prepared provide you with for privacy reason - I am not prepared to provide you with personal details just to satisfy your bloodthirst. The admin I have revealed information to is watching this discussion - if he wishes to be the closing admin on this then that is fine - but he may not wish to be the closing admin. This is my last comment to anyone who is not the closing admin because we are going around in circles, if you wish to "convict" me based purely on cirmcumstantial unverified evidence that can be explained away relavtively easily to a closing admin just satisfy your campaign then crack on - I am prepared to facilitate the closing admin with phonecalls, emails and any other proofs which they wish but I am not prepared to reveal private information on here for anyone.--Vintagekits 11:23, 19 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Conclusions
 * I have corresponded with Vintagekits who gave me additional information which did not, in my opinion, alter the evidence. Due to the pattern of editing, as well as off-Wiki forum postings, it is clear to me that these accounts are either sock puppets of VK or are meat puppets controlled by him. I will block these accounts indefinitely. VK has been blocked seven times since January, and also has a proven history of using sockpuppet accounts. The disposition of that account is best handled on AN/I. ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 04:48, 20 June 2007 (UTC)