Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kils/Archive

Evidence submitted by Fences and windows
These users had the initial appearance of being meatpuppets, i.e. colleagues of User:Kils recruited to pack the AfDs Articles for deletion/Uwe Kils (2nd nomination) and Articles for deletion/Uhse elite university. But the connections between the accounts and behavioural and language similarities make me strongly suspect that these are simply sockpuppets of User:Kils.


 * Some of the accounts, User:Oceanographer, User:Freydis, User:Viking, and User:Vikings, were active in 2005 at the same time and then were dormant until very recently, which is unlikely for real users.
 * User:Oceanographer replaced the talk page of User:Vikings,.
 * User:Kils created the userpage for User:Viking in 2005 as a self-declared shared account, and frequently edited the userpage of User:Vikings in 2003:
 * User:Sylvia klein has admitted to being connected to User:Viking (which I already blocked as a self-declared shared account).
 * User:Freydis has used an image in their signature, as has User:Kils (see User talk:Kils). This is unusual, the images are called Herringmini and Vikingshipmini, and both are said to be made by Uwe Kils on their description pages.
 * User:Katharina r edited User:Kils' userpage.
 * Admission that User:Kils was using User:Sylvia klein and User:Viking:

Look at the runs of voting on the AfD for Uwe Kils:
 * 14:06, 1 December 2009 Sylvia klein (12,774 bytes) (at the age of 18 he studied informatics, at 19 he wrote three image programs, one for realtors, one for stockbrokers, one for physicians. he advertised them in manhattan and dubai. they sold over 200)
 * 1 December 2009 Kils (11,441 bytes) (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/40/Tomopteriskils.jpg)
 * 1 December 2009 Vikings (8,264 bytes) ([[Salmon fry hatching - the larva has grown around the remains of the yolk - visible are the arteries spinning around the yolk and little oildrops, also)
 * 1 December 2009 Vikings (8,030 bytes) (you can click on "credentials" and "studenten Bewertung" (student evaluation". the original files you can get fron RUTGERS UNIVERSITY) on http://de.wikiversity.org/wiki/Kurs:Biologie_der_Antarktis, fo)


 * 13:52, 2 December 2009 Katharina r (24,361 bytes) (i graduated from professor)
 * 10:59, 2 December 2009 Mikki joergensen (16,210 bytes)
 * 10:58, 2 December 2009 Mikki joergensen (16,192 bytes)
 * 10:42, 2 December 2009 Freydis (15,200 bytes) (His students love him: "The teacher was excellent, funny + entertaining as well as informative + intellectual - the computer [http://de.wikiversity.org/wiki/Oz)
 * 09:43, 2 December 2009 Oceanographer m (13,541 bytes) (*strong Keep)

What a coincidence of timing and edit summaries! Only User:Viking didn't !vote on that AfD.
 * 10:48, 4 December 2009 Sylvia klein (21,557 bytes) (shorten)
 * 09:13, 4 December 2009 Katharina r (21,347 bytes) (shorten)
 * 09:04, 4 December 2009 Vikings (29,264 bytes) (shorten)
 * 08:43, 4 December 2009 Kils (31,364 bytes)

The language similarities are also compelling, mainly the lack of correct use of capitals, which is idiosyncratic and unlikely across several individuals. All the accounts have praised Uwe Kils using hyperbole. They also share some catchphrases: "make only additions, try some rearrangements of existing content and do some voting".; "best way to contact me is via email" or similar. Also calling editors they don't like "noname".

The impression given has been of shared accounts and secretaries communicating via the accounts - which would be bad enough - but I think this is all just one person running a sockfarm and using the accounts abusively in AfD debates. I think that all of these accounts should be indefinitely blocked.

Fences &amp;  Windows  16:00, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users
I am watching this report with great interest. Checkuser should be able to provide light because at least a few of the account have edited recently. Jehochman Talk 20:16, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I did leave him a note in his talk page, in order to persuade him to change his signature - and from the evidence above, he seems to have used them on one of his socks. Boeing7107isdelicious 02:39, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

What is the proper block length for the master account? They have been using socks in cynical ways, to subvert consensus, to vote stack, and to deceive the community. Conflict of interest editing is an aggrevating factor. What do the rest of you think? Jehochman Talk 05:29, 7 December 2009 (UTC)


 * And what the heck is this edit about? Something is not right here. Jehochman Talk 06:40, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

CheckUser requests
Requested by Fences  &amp;  Windows  16:00, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

MuZemike 19:32, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 * ✅ all, plus and .  Same IP and same computer. Thatcher 22:18, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Conclusions
I am closing this case as follows, considering that User:Kils has a long tenure at Wikipedia and has made numerous worthwhile contributions.


 * 1) User:Kils is restricted to using a single account of his choice.
 * 2) Any editing by students or secretaries from his computer or office or otherwise under his control is considered editing by him.  He is assumed to be in control of the activities in his domain, and is responsible for them.
 * 3) Kils as well as students and secretaries (under his control) should avoid editing Uwe Kils, as well as any Wikipedia article about any of Kils projects, institutes or businesses, except to remove material potentially defamatory to a living person or to revert obvious vandalism. The users may however make suggestions via talk pages.
 * 4) Kils as well as students and secretaries should avoid participating in any article for deletion discussion related to the above articles, but may make comments on the talk page, for instance, to suggest additional sources.
 * 5) Any editing by other parties is to be done via their own accounts.  Kils is not to share any accounts with anybody else.
 * 6) The spirit of these conclusions is that Kils will follow best practices of WP:SOCK and WP:COI.

Should the above restrictions be violated, Kils may be blocked for suitable duration by any uninvolved administrator. Jehochman Talk 13:41, 7 December 2009 (UTC) [tweaked at 13:51, 11 December 2009 (UTC)] Cirt (talk) 17:25, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) It seems that the wording of the second point is unclear, and permits more than one individual to edit under the same account, in violation of WP:NOSHARE.
 * 2) The account should still receive a block, due to the ongoing nature of the violations of site policies.
 * I've added a point about WP:NOSHARE to eliminate doubt. As for a block, it is my judgment to avoid a block this time because I just blocked them about the role account business, and unblocked them when they pledged to follow policy.  Kils has provided many interesting photos to Wikipedia. Looking at their contributions, they've made a very small number of edits these last two years.  I think they may be seriously confused.  Given the low volume of editing, I doubt they can cause a lot of problems.  Jehochman Talk 17:34, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay great, thank you for that above addition. Has made a statement acknowledging the above restrictions? Cirt (talk) 17:37, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I notified, he responded, thus he has seen the restrictions at User_talk:Kils. As they say, actions speak louder than words.  Either he complies, or he doesn't. Jehochman Talk 18:16, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, sounds good for now. Cirt (talk) 19:25, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I have created and full protected User:Kils/Restriction, which is a copy of Jehochman's restriction above. NW ( Talk ) 19:52, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Cirt

 * Post to article Uwe Kils,
 * Note text in post "Professor Dr. habil". The account signs posts in a similar fashion

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

CheckUser requests
Requested by Cirt (talk) 23:19, 1 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Concern over possible avoiding scrutiny from Sockpuppet_investigations/Kils/Archive through use of IP instead of restricting Wikipedia contributions to the account . Cirt (talk) 23:19, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

–MuZemike 03:51, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 * 217.228.102.111 is ❌. The other doesn't seem to have done anything wrong, or that would be in violation of the user's restrictions. Dominic·t 09:37, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Conclusions
Closing per CU findings. –MuZemike 16:58, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Cirt

 * ''See also prior socking history (and imposed restriction from same), at Sockpuppet investigations/Kils/Archive.


 * -, ,
 * -
 * - ,

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Requested by Cirt (talk) 18:22, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Violations of community-based remedies at User:Kils/Restriction. Cirt (talk) 18:22, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Any reason why we can't just block on behavior? Tim Song (talk) 18:28, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I would say yes, based on violation of restrictions. However, I have been involved with this issue, perhaps too much so to act in an admin capacity and do a block myself. Therefore, I will refrain from doing so. :) Cirt (talk) 18:29, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm going to mark this as, just to make sure this is indeed Kils and not just someone trying to get him in trouble. NW ( Talk ) 19:04, 24 January 2010 (UTC)


 * ✅ - though the duck-test really applies here - A l is o n  ❤ 05:08, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Kils blocked 1 week for sock puppetry. He clearly violated said restrictions. –MuZemike 04:07, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Cirt

 * Using IP to post.
 * Note: This is in violation of community-based remedies at User:Kils/Restriction. Cirt (talk) 16:04, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
The IP geolocates to a city ~1 hour's drive from the location of the previous IP. See also, which seems to be related to File:Krill666.jpg, a file uploaded by Kils. On the other hand, the restrictions do not appear on its face to prohibit editing while logged out. It prohibits using more than one account, but does not seem to prohibit using no account at all. Nor has the IP done anything otherwise in violation of the restrictions. Did I miss anything? Tim Song (talk) 16:29, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
 * It is a violation of the restrictions to use multiple different IPs, as the sockmaster account has repeatedly done, both in this instance, and as noted on archives of this sock investigation page. Cirt (talk) 18:56, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

As the restrictions do not explicitly prohibit editing while logged out, I'm not convinced that a block is appropriate here, despite the user's obviously questionable level of clue. In lieu of block, I'm inclined to amend the restriction to include the following: "User:Kils is directed to edit only as User:Kils. He is not permitted to edit using any other account, nor without using an account (i.e., through an IP). Should he accidentally edit using an IP, he shall immediately log in and correct the error." Comments? Tim Song (talk) 02:02, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with that addition to the restrictions. -- Cirt (talk) 03:42, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Restrictions amended accordingly and Kils notified. Tim Song (talk) 04:03, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, agreed. -- Cirt (talk) 04:27, 13 March 2010 (UTC)