Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kalki/Archive

Evidence submitted by Cirt
Thank you for your time. -- Cirt (talk) 16:08, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Local site info
 * 1) Guy Fox = Edits to insert link to Wikiquote
 * 2) I of the Storm = Checkuser block by Shell Kinney, with edit summary: (checkuserblock: sleeper account)
 * 3) Eye of the Storm = Checkuser block by Shell Kinney =
 * 4) Rorschach X = edits to Vertigo (DC Comics), and the sockmaster account has also edited at that article and a recent AFD on the same subject
 * Evidence of sockfarm building, over 200 socks across multiple sites
 * 1) Evidence compiled by FloNight =
 * 2) Desysopped at Wikiquote for misusing and creating over 200 socks =
 * 3) Listed socks by local checkuser from Wikiquote =
 * Note regarding on-wikipedia process, checkuser info
 * 1) Some of the accounts above have been previously checked here, some have not.
 * 2) Groups of them have already been suspected socks, and identified, at en.wikiquote.
 * 3) It is useful to have an on-wikipedia process, by which to identify the socks and establish a pattern both of behavioral, and of technical evidence.
 * 4) There are at least the socks, some of which are already ✅ by checkuser, in the above list and diffs. But at other projects, the sockmaster has amassed over 200 socks, see for example
 * 5) It is therefore a good idea to check to make sure this process is not also occurring, here at English Wikipedia.

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Note that most if not all of these are not suspected but already confirmed by CU from information exchanged on the Checkuser mailing list. FloNight&#9829;&#9829;&#9829;&#9829; 16:28, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Since the socks are blocked and tagged, and Kalki has not challenged the findings that they are associated with his account, I think that we are done with this for now. FloNight&#9829;&#9829;&#9829;&#9829; 16:56, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * - As Flo stated above, this matter has been discussed in some length on the CheckUser mailing list. Tiptoety  talk 16:46, 25 October 2010 (UTC)


 * The following are ✅ socks of :


 * Additionally, the following are technically ✅, but many do not have any contributions (meaning they may just need to be watched) :


 * is highly.
 * is . Tiptoety  talk 17:15, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Tagged and blocked the sleepers. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 18:55, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I've blocked Kalki for sockpuppetry. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 21:33, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * All have been blocked -- DQ  (t)  (e)  19:56, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

17 December 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Thank you for your time. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:22, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Sockmaster tied to massive cross-wiki projects sock farms, see sockfarm ✅ in archives of this case page, at Sockpuppet_investigations/Kalki/Archive.
 * 2) Above socks are all already ✅ by Checkuser across multiple different wikis, including en.wikiquote and commons, and by checks by Stewards on the 200-plus sockfarms cross-wikis.
 * 3) Compare userpage on en.wiki locally for user with presence of both images on user subpage by the sockmaster, at wikiquote:User:Kalki/imago. See also  and  for use of those images at en.wikiquote.
 * 4) Summary of relevant chronology at wikiquote:User:Kalki/Restrictions.
 * 5) Administrator confirmed the socking and listed some of the above accounts at wikiquote:User:FloNight/Kalki.
 * 6) Some of the above may be sleeper accounts, but as with prior action at Sockpuppet_investigations/Kalki/Archive &mdash; all should be blocked and tagged accordingly.

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Given the various CheckUsers that have been done on the above accounts, and Cirt's statements regarding the technical results of said checks I went ahead and blocked all of the accounts (should be noted I did not use CU in this case as all the accounts are not stale). If someone wants to tag them, that would be fine. Tiptoety  talk 06:03, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you, and tagging is now ✅. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 12:39, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

31 March 2013
n/a
 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

Kalki was indefblocked on English Wikipedia several years ago for sockpuppetry. During that time, Kalki has continued to contribute positively to Wikiquote (where he was desysopped, but not banned) leading me to propose that he be unblocked here. As a condition of that proposal, Kalki has agreed to a Checkuser review to confirm that he has not engaged in sockpuppetry, on Wikipedia or on Wikiquote. Here is my Proposal to unblock User:Kalki, and Kalki's agreement to Checkuser review. Cheers! bd2412 T 14:18, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Without commenting one way or the other on the question of Kalki's reinstatement, I must note that the English Wikipedia's checkuser policy prohibits doing a CU at the request of a user who wants proof that they are not engaging in sockpuppetry. The CU tool is not considered reliable as a means of  dis proving sockpuppetry. — Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 17:17, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
 * - Per above; using CU under these circumstances is contrary to enwiki policy. — Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 17:17, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Since no socks are suspected here, and since CU can't be used as requested, there isn't anything to be done here at SPI. — Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 17:19, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

03 April 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility


 * 1) Sockmaster main account,, blocked on en.wikipedia for socking with over 200 sockfarm ✅ accounts.
 * 2) See comment at WP:AN by Beyond My Ken about this: "Note that DanielTom's account dates from last October, and he has 214 edits, and yet he knows that Kalki is "one of the earliest and most precious editor we as a community have" and is "one of the most knowledgeable and capable users in existence...whose positive contributions to said projects have been much greater than I could ever express here". This, I think, is called "damning with great praise." If I didn't have gobs of AGF all the way down to my bones, I would be a might suspicious"
 * 3) = uses very same style of language and diction as.
 * 4) Both and  include long run-on sentences in their comments.
 * 5) Both and  include walls-of-text comments with use of CAPS in their comments diff.
 * 6) Both and  use phrases like "I must leave now, but...", protesting they must go and will be back later to add more walls-of-text comments diff. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:29, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''


 * Comment: Hi there, I'm Daniel Tomé. Please do the check. I am very willing to collaborate with the investigation. I already presented some evidence that I am not Kalki, but if more is needed please do contact me, and I will do anything required to make it absolutely clear that I am not Kalki, and that in fact the only account that I have ever used is the "Daniel Tomé" account (recently renamed to "DanielTom"). I am even willing to send pictures of my BI and Passport showing that I am Daniel Tomé, a 19 year-old Portuguese college student. Please do feel free to contact me by email or by any other means if you have any questions. The quicker this investigation is completed the better. Thanks. ~ DanielTom (talk) 22:51, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
 * P.S. By the way, I should have made the point that although I have no idea where Kalki lives (USA? maybe?), I don't believe he knows how to even say anything in Portuguese at all, let alone write in Portuguese like a native, but I myself have made many edits in Portuguese, even translated several pages at Meta to Portuguese, which is very easy for me to do because I'm obviously Portuguese, and I would submit that that shows I am not Kalki. I think it should be rather easy to prove that because if you check the IPs behind every one of my edits, you will find that they were all made in Portugal, near Porto (where I live), and I expect that none of Kalki's were made from anywhere near Portugal. There should be many other ways to conclusively show that I am who I say I am, and certainly not Kalki, so I await any suggestion or question so that we can put this travesty to rest. Thanks again. ~ DanielTom (talk) 23:12, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * This case has been discussed in mailing lists, and Kalki and DanielTom were found to be ❌. And this was based on the findings of three checkusers checking accounts across multiple projects. The consensus is that there is almost no possibility these two are the same editor. Someguy1221 (talk) 23:19, 3 April 2013 (UTC)