Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/NajiimP

If you are creating a new request about this user, please add it to the top of the page, above this notice. Don't forget to add
{{Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/NajiimP}}
to the checkuser page here. Previous requests (shown below), and this box, will be automatically hidden on Requests for checkuser (but will still appear here).

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a Request for checkuser. Please do not modify it.

NajiimP

request links: main • edit • links • history • watch
Filed: 03:20, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

NajiimP (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Code Letter:E

Supporting evidence:

User:JBsupreme has a long history of placing fact tags and making contentious deletions based on lack of citations, as may be seen on his talk page. Today, he deleted a list of cultural references in the article Bowler hat which was 60% of the article, saying, in effect, we other editors didn't know the WP rules. I reverted this, saying it harms content, and is not really permitted in WP:RS for a non-BLP article. At this point, a user with only 2 previous edits to WP, no userpage, and (at that time) no talkpage, user:NajiimP, stepped in to revert me, saying I had no proof. NajiimP's only previous edits to WP had been to place a {fact tag} and move a paragraph to an article on Nintendo stores, back in September. Two edits total, then nothing. Now, today, suddenly, he's here with this third WP-edit ever [1], backing up user:JBsupreme in a very controversial mass deletion of most of an article.

At this point, I put the first-ever note on NajiimP's brandnew talk page, telling him the if he's a sock, he'd better stop. I reverted again, leaving a detailed message on the Bowler hat TALK page, explaining why WP:RS does not apply to primary source material such as who wears a Bowler hat (It's obvious by inspection of primary photos for many of these WP bio articles); and that, in any case, some other ways are possible to fix this problem. No sooner is this done than I'm reverted again by user:NajiimP, with the very-JBsupreme-like language I don't know the WP rules. This from a person now with a total of 6 edits (I have about 12,000 by now). So this guy's a sock of somebody; the only question is who. He's doing it to evade 3R along with JBsupreme in a very WP:LAME edit war, but I can think of no other way to stop him, but see who he is. S B H arris 03:20, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed NajiimP (talk · contribs) = JacobPowers (talk · contribs) = MajorJAckalOpe (talk · contribs)

Confirmed JBsupreme (talk · contribs) = Urgblame (talk · contribs) = FAILBAIT (talk · contribs) = GARBAGEWOMB (talk · contribs) = Mariececi (talk · contribs)

Inconclusive as to if the JBsupreme group = the NajiimP group. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:32, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Rlevse. I presume the right bracketts were left off user:FAILBAIT? I've added them. S B H arris 02:03, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, thanks. Clerks pls handle confirmed users as appropriate. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:17, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk note: All blocked and tagged wit the exception of GARAGEWOMB. There's no such user, please double check the spelling. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 04:22, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The correct user is GARBAGEWOMB (talk · contribs). Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 07:03, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Here User:Nishkid64 confirmed the checkuser results and commented on the edits of the users. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:05, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: JBsupreme (talk · contribs) has sense been unblocked. Tiptoety ^talk 06:13, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He still hasn't explained why CU returns positive results. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 19:21, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the Request for checkuser. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent requests related to this user should be made above, in a new section.