Requests for comment/Global ban for Won1017

This is a subpage; for more information, see the Requests for comments page.

---

Opening statement

---

Won1017 is currently globally locked and is indefinitely blocked on 5 Wikimedia projects, on just their main account alone. They have continued to make countless number of sock accounts and continued to threaten the integrity of the Korean Wikipedia project by influencing on-wiki discussions and have harassed several users both on- and off-wiki.

---

Won1017's behaviour

• Won1017 (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date ^(alt) • CA • gblock • ST • lwcheckuser)

Early activities

This user have been blocked on the Korean Wikipedia indefinitely following several creation of false historical figures and changing DOBs on existing articles and sockpupettry. After which, the user have continued to make sockpuppet accounts to continue their vandalism and also began harassing several users bringing great distress to the Korean Wikimedia community.

Further blocks on other projects

enwikipedia

Blocked indefintely for en:WP:NOT.

jawikipedia

Blocked indefinitely for abuse and inappropriate use of account.

kowikisource

Blocked indefinitely for sockpuppetry.

zhwikipedia

Blocked indefinitely for vandalism-only account.

On- and Off-wiki Behaviours

As appparent from the blog [1], Won1017 has made it obvious that he was planning a "Wiki-revolution" on the Korean Wikipedia project. This behaviour is not merely a joke, but has had several detrimental impacts on the Wikipedia community. Out of all their activities, I have selected several of the most devastating activities.

Such behaviours included harassment and impersonation of other users. For example, they have claimed they were ko:User:Nike787, an inactive adminsitrator, and have requested that the administrator rights be removed and transferred to the new account (Won1017's sock) [2]. Nike787's user rights were not removed, but without a clear policy on lost administrator accoutns on the Korean Wikipedia, users have assumed good faith and the results could have been devastating have the impersonation be successful (e.g. blocking).

This month, the user has created a sock account to instigate a checkuser on ko:User:괌, evading his block. After 괌's block, created a sock account to write in their talk page seriously disturbing messages, such as to "kiss my butt" [3] and that "[your] existance itself is a problem" [4].

Other activities include harassment of former Korean Wikipedia administrator User:Whitetiger, who has been in previous altercations with Won1017. After their resignation, Won1017 has again visited with a sock and posted mocking comments such as "why did you leave" and "I do not actually hate you" [5], and have also denied Whitetiger's requests to remove the disturbing blog posts regarding them [6], calling them a "dictator" [7].

Please note that the internet archive is not working right now. This information may be deleted.

List of sockpuppets

---

• ko:분류:Won1017의_다중_계정

Formalities

---

Criteria confirmation

• The user demonstrates an ongoing pattern of cross-wiki abuse that is not merely vandalism or spam.

  Not vandalism:  Yes

  Nor spam:  Yes

• The user has been carefully informed about appropriate participation in the projects and has had fair opportunity to rectify any problems.

  Warnings from admins:  Countless

  Time given to change: Since July 16, 2023 on Initial Block.

• The user is indefinitely blocked or banned on two or more projects.

  See above

Requirements

• Required steps
  • Confirm that the user satisfies all criteria for global bans:  Confirmed
  • File a new request for comment on Meta:  Filed
  • Inform the user about the discussion on all wikis where they are active:
    Done Notified on Korean Wikipedia and Meta-Wiki.
  • Inform the community on all wikis where the user has edited:
    Done for the wikis User:Won1017 account has edited.

• Nominator requirements:  All passed See my CentralAuth.
  • have a Wikimedia account
  • be registered for more than six months before making the request
  • have at least 500 edits globally (on all Wikimedia wikis)

Statements by other users

Please create new h3 sections below this line.

---

Whitetiger

for non-Korean users: Please understand that I am writing my opinion in Korean because I am concerned that the meaning may not be clear to Korean speakers if machine translation is used. Using Korean in this discussion is allowed(see Global bans#Multilingualism in discussion). Please use translator if you want to understand my statements below. Thanks!

오랜만입니다. 백호입니다. 이번 전역 추방에 대한 의견 요청이 올라온 것에 대해 제가 언급된 부분도 있고, 몇 가지 이해가 되지 않는 부분이 있어 탈퇴를 했지만 부득이하게 의견을 남깁니다.

1. 전역 추방의 의미?

   해당 사용자는 이미 본계정을 비롯해 몇몇 중요 계정이 전역 잠금 처리되어 있습니다. 로그인이 불가능하다는 사실은 투표를 하신 분들이라면 이미 알고 있는 내용이리라 생각합니다. 그럼에도 불구하고 이미 셀 수 없이 많은 계정들을 생성하였으며, 기술적으로 다중 계정의 생성을 막는 것은 불가능에 가깝다는걸 공동체는 이미 인지하고 있습니다. 이런 상황속에서 전역 추방을 하는 것은 명목상의 추방이지, 실제로 유의미한 변화가 있을것이라 기대되진 않습니다. 당장 이전에 있었던 본계정의 전역 잠금에서도 이미 회의적인 얘기가 나왔던 만큼 더더욱 그런 생각이 듭니다.

2. 이제야?

   추방의 근거로 나온 내용은 전역 잠금 시점에도 이미 인지되는 내용이였고, 심지어 잠금 이후로 더 활발해졌습니다. 또 근거로 제 이야기가 나와서 하는 말이지만, 저와 맨 처음의 접촉이 있었던 시점부터 탈퇴하기 전까지 약 1년이 넘는 기간 동안 계속해서 이어져 온 괴롭힘은 제가 탈퇴함으로써 위키 내부에서 사라졌습니다. 이미 예전에 잠금을 함으로써 역효과가 일어났다는 선례가 있는데, 이럴거면 처음부터 바로 추방만 하지, 기술적으로도 별다른 조치가 없는걸 이제와서 해봤자 오히려 발악이 더 늘면 늘어나는데 좋은쪽으로 무슨 의미가 있나 싶습니다. 결국엔 근거로 나왔던 그 관리자는 사퇴하고 탈퇴했습니다. 다른 관리자나 사용자도 저처럼 되게 하고싶지 않으면 추방 조치보다는 더 나은 방향을 고려하는게 나을것 같은데요.

3. 왜?

   저를 제외하고도 이미 괴롭힘의 주 대상이였던 사용자들은 차단되거나(물론 그 사람들도 정상은 아니였지만요) 주원 사용자와 접점이 거의 없습니다. 그나마 있다면 지금 남아있는 관리자들이 주 표적일텐데, 여러분에 대한 괴롭힘은 위에서 말했듯이 추방을 한다고 해서 쉽게 해결되지 않습니다.

   전부터 든 생각이지만, 별 의미없는 시시콜콜한 ‘명목’에 너무 붙잡혀있다는 생각이 듭니다. 반달을 목적으로 깽판치는 차단회피자에게 명목상 공동체에서의 추방이 그리 중요할까요. 기술적으로 달라진 것도 없는데 관심이 늘어나니 더 많은 반달을 자행할 뿐입니다.

여러모로 딱히 찬성할 이유가 없다고 생각하는 편입니다. 오히려 애초에 이 글이 올라오지 않았으면 불필요한 관심도 주지 않을 수 있었을텐데 하는 생각도 듭니다. 요청자 분께서는 진심으로 ‘위키혁명’이라고 일컬어진 일련의 반달 행위에 직접적인 위협을 느끼셨던건지 궁금하네요. 이미 올라온 이상 반대는 하지 않지만, 여러모로 아쉽습니다. 별개로 지나가는 말이지만, 절 언급하실거면 따로 연락이라도 해주시지, 다른 분이 연락해주셔서 겨우 확인했네요. 사랑방에서도 아무 얘기도 안하시더니 아무 연락없이 여기서 이름 파는건 좀 서운합니다. --Whitetiger (talk) 10:52, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

언급이 언짢으셨다면 그것은 사과 드립니다. 떠나간 사람 불러서 언급하는 것에 대해서는 저도 회의감을 느꼈지만, 워낙 사건에 중대한 근거라 언급을 부득이하게 하였습니다.

"위협"을 느꼈냐는 것에는 방해 행위가 지속적이고, 상당히 악의적이라는 점을 들어 공동체에 상당한 악영향을 끼치는 바, 당연한 겁니다. 주 대상으로 떠나긴 했지만, 블로그에서 보듯이 "시작에 불과하다고" 하였고, 지금까지의 영향을 보면 더 이상의 묵인은 무책임하다고 생각했습니다.

여러모로 다시 위키 일에 불러서 송구스럽고, 미래 활동에 건승하시길 바랍니다. Takipoint123 (talk) 17:14, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

To add some context, I was unable to ask Whitetiger beforehand I thought it was inappropriate to contact them when they have declared that they have left the wiki already, in addition to some personal reasons. It was my mishap to not give prior notice. Nonetheless, I believe the other reasons set forth (harassment to other users and impersonation) in this RfC is more than enough to initiate the global ban process. Takipoint123 (talk) 22:15, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

@Takipoint123 답변해주셔서 감사드립니다. 그간 힘들어서 연락이 잘 되지 않았던 점 죄송하게 생각합니다. 또 이번 글에서 감정이 좀 실렸다는 점도 인정하고, 사과드립니다. 원하실때 개인적인 방법으로 연락을 주시면 받겠습니다.

다음은 의견에 대한 내용입니다. 지금까지 진행된 일련의 (자칭)'혁명, 사건'은 분명히 장기적이였던 것은 맞지만 관리자를 제외한 대부분의 사용자에게는 큰 불편을 끼치진 않고 있습니다. 스크립트를 사용하여 복구하기도 쉬워졌고, 지금 이 상황에서 추방 조치가 이루어져도 기술적으론 다를게 없기에 여전히 다중계정을 생성할 가능성이 큽니다. 아래에 EPIC님이 달아주신 코멘트처럼, 훈장을 하나 더 달아주면 그만큼 더 기세등등해져 악영향을 주는 모양이 됩니다.

이미 의견 요청이 올라온 이상 추방이 되든 말든 자극이 되었음은 부정할 수 없습니다. 그렇기에 애써 반대를 하진 않겠습니다.

별개로 추방 얘기가 나올 정도로 지금까지 심각한 행동을 했다는 점에 동의합니다. 앞으로의 관리에도 힘써주시어 반달이 더 줄어들 수 있기를 기원하겠습니다. 감사합니다. --Whitetiger (talk) 01:24, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

의견 감사합니다. 연락은 편하실때 해주시면 기쁘게 받겠습니다.

어쩌면 추방이 훈장 하나 더 주는것일수도 있다는 점은 인정합니다. 다만 이번 사용자는 단순 반달이 아니라 ToS 위반에 가깝다 생각해서 추가 대처가 필요하겠다고 생각했습니다.

어찌되었든 Whitetiger님 힘드실때 다시 언급한건 죄송스럽게 생각합니다. 감사합니다. Takipoint123 (talk) 04:56, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Response from Won1017

---

hello. I'm Won1017(Park ju won). I apologize to the many people who were harmed by my actions. I'm putting on hold everything I had planned for this month. This account was created last April. The above mentioned 'kiss my axx' is not something I said. I will wait quietly until a good decision is made. thank you 주원101017 (talk) 01:40, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Comments

---

Support

1.  Support per nomination --Takipoint123 (talk) 22:12, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
2.  Support, but I'm not sure what the point of this is since they've already been globally locked since June so it's not clear what a separate global ban would accomplish. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 23:28, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
3.  Support, per Pppery, but I don't find it a reason to oppose. - XXBlackburnXx (talk) 23:59, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
4.  Support Edit document damage mischief with my name. --Striker9498 (talk) 01:01, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
5.  Support --Skilsdhuo (talk) 01:29, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
6.  Support There is no option. --Twotwo2019 (talk) 01:53, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
7.  Support Showed no change of attitude despite countless warnings. I don't think anything will change. --Aspere (talk) 02:05, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
8.  Support What is certain is that this user is not worth accepting as a member of the Wikimedia community when he sees the action of inciting him from outside that he is a hero, that administers are villains, and recruiting vandalists through mobilization. ㅡ Joayong (Suggest) 04:09, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
9.  Support per nom--ginaan(T/C) 04:29, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
10.  Support Easy +1 for me. --LR0725 ( Talk / Contribs ) 05:07, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
11.  Support Being notified many times by users and admins, but still acting the same way - easy +1 for me. --David Osipov (talk) 05:28, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
12.  Support No reason discovered by which the request should not be approved, for me. --𝑬𝒖𝒆𝒓 𝐏𝐚𝐮𝐥𝐢 (talk) 06:00, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
13.  Support, five indefs and long term harassment is key to a global ban. ToadetteEdit (talk) 08:15, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
14.  Support Can't find no reason of opposition --YellowTurtle9 (talk) 16:40, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
15.  Support I agree. Won1017 has committed too many acts of vandalism. Also, Won1017 said that he would stop doing vandalism, but he could not keep his promise and there is a possibility that he could avoid being banned from Wikipedia and commit vandalism again, so I think it is right to ban him globally so that he can keep his promise and reduce the damage. do. I'm not good at English, so I used a translator. Sy1ve0n S2 (talk) 04:36, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
16.  Support I agree. He made so many sockpuppet accounts after he blocked permanently and vandalized many documents. I think his acts are similar as Unypoly. Also, I want to request for GLOBAL BAN for Unypoly. He stopped acting in wikipedia several years ago, but he might make a new sockpuppet account later — The preceding unsigned comment was added by 2001:2d8:ee9b:8470:b005:8a54:f04b:737a (talk) Time (UTC)
17.  Support I agree --DAEGUBUS (TALK) 10:37, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
18.  Support I've had enough of this sort of trolling on WP Korean. --Luminia2001 (talk) 14:21, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
19.  Weak support Per WHYGB criterion 4 and 5. Another Wiki User the 3rd (talk) 15:17, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
20.  Support It's over, Won. Ahri Boy (talk) 03:07, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
21.  Support per Pppery, but no harm in a global ban while we're at it. --SHB2000 (t • c) 02:40, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
22.  Support. I am not sure what their behavior would be like when this is over, and I don't have a reason to oppose, but at this point no more harassment. Codename Noreste 🤔 Talk 17:39, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
23.  Support. Every global ban request, under precise rationale, shall be supported by me.--Lemonaka (talk) 04:25, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
24.  Support Everyone told that so-called user to don't be a jerk, that user still think being a jerk is good for themselves, so far, we don't need to continue engraving that broken tree. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:14, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Weak oppose. I wasn't going to comment here, but I feel that it's best to do so since I see a global ban as counterproductive. As Whitetiger expressed in their statement above, my feeling is that a global ban would not do much more than what the global lock already does, and that it would instead result in a cobra effect and encourage their actions, since they may likely see it as a "badge of honor" rather than it being a helpful countermeasure. The only thing a global ban would really give in this case is an extra title, and such a measure isn't really meaningful. With that said, it's only a weak oppose on my part as I do take into account the behavior referred to in the statement. EPIC (talk) 11:54, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
2. On a second thought, if this user was primarily not troll-turning-into-LTA, I would have supported this. For example, if his problem was more of toxic behavior unfit for community. However what I see is precisely that of a new LTA, and I fail to find any reason to implement new sanctions beyond glock-on-sight. Also, this proposal is primarily based on kowiki activity without much xwiki behavior, this is kowiki problem not suitable for global ban. (For clarification, this is not endorsement of their behavior, of course. I just think global ban criteria is not met here.) — regards, Revi 20:55, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
3. Per Revi and Epic. We don't really need to start a global ban for every LTA. Just lock/block on sight would be enough. It's basically a waste of time.--BRP ^ever 13:59, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Neutral

• Neutral Unsure. --린눈라단 (talk) 22:52, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

  To be elaborate; I think their some behaviors are somewhat destructive, but I don't have an opinion on this article. --린눈라단 (talk) 14:43, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

• I think this ban doesn't do much for already-glock-able (turning into LTA) troll, but I also do not see any reason to oppose (nowadays I don't do 'weak' S/O stuff), so I'd rather say I have no opinion on this. — regards, Revi 12:42, 27 October 2024 (UTC)Changed my mind. — regards, Revi 20:55, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
• I don't think this will bring change to that individuals behaviour. (Especially LTA trolls) --*Youngjin (talk) 01:33, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Questions

Will a global ban do anything when a user is globally locked?

In a purely technical aspect, there is not much a global ban will do over a lock. However, a global ban reaffirms the community's position against breaches of Wikimedia Foundation Terms of Service, which serves several purposes: firstly, it is a show that a behaviour is condemned by the Wikimedia community and should be discontinued; and second, a global ban is a stronger censure than a global lock, which I believe continued breaches of a global lock should be met with a global ban. The latter is evident by the fact there has been several cases where already globally locked users have been moved by the community to be banned (See: Requests for comment/Global ban for Velimir Ivanovic). Hope this clears some of the reason why I have decided to move a global ban RfC. --Takipoint123 (talk) 02:20, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

I would like to add that a global ban, outside of symbolic measure necessitates a global lock of all discovered and new accounts. It cannot prevent new account formation, but considering that this user has had patterns of 'lurking' around the Korean Wikipedia before getting caught, the hassle of being unable to login is a deterrent. I do not necessarily agree that his will promote the behavior to vandalize; I believe that the reason why this user has been able to egrogiously bypass current mechanisms is the fact that the lock has only been sparingly used and a few of their accounts have been locked. All actions have a counter-action, we don't know until we try. Saying that the community should do nothing against such heinous harassment due to fear of encouraging it means we've lost to the vandal. We've tried everything we can, why not try something new. There's nothing to lose anymore.--Takipoint123 (talk) 16:58, 26 October 2024 (UTC)