Requests for comment/Ongoing issues at Chinese Wikipedia/Previous discussion

The following request for comments is closed. The request was successfully resolved.

I am a user in Chinese Wikipedia (See here). 守望者爱孟 was blocked in Chinese Wikipedia due to non-compliance of the Civility in Chinese Wikipedia. However, after a permanent block lifted at July, there were multiple blocks and unblocks done in a short period of time since 28 September (See Here). This had led to a block and unblock war which, in both sides (Admin for Block and unblock), claim to be right and the opposite side to be wrong. This problem actually started after the dissolution of the unrecognized chapter of Wikimedians in Qingdao due to non-compliance of the PRC law. This problem has now escalated to a point where Administrators who support 守望者爱孟 now opposing those who want to permanently block him. As this problem is now uncontrollable in Chinese Wikipedia, I would request for a comment on this issue.

The problem starts when User:AddisWang was accused by 守望者爱孟 at 2012 2013 of using funds from the foundation but only provides soofed proof of those meetings taken place at. When this was proved wrong, 守望者爱孟 still continued to spread this fake news with some admins supporting him. He was then banned until 2017, when another admin used a reason of speech made outside of Wikimedia projects would not be banned inside the projects.

Since then, the problem had escalated into an edit war about related user groups, foundations when this page in Chinese Wikipedia was abruptly edited by 守望者爱孟 to promote his proposed unrecognized user group and remove the Chinese User Group which was recognized by the foundation. This had thus escalated to a ban war about 守望者爱孟. Thus, I would request for a comment about this issue.

Issue brought by 1233 | Questions?| This message is left by him at 09:49, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments edit

首先,我认为这样的讨论对于不习惯使用英文的在下不公平,其次,2012年我没有开始编辑(本人注册维基账号是在2013年2月9日),而且也不存在散布假消息的可能性,如果有谁说我散布假消息,请给出我在Wikipedia任何地方散布这种“假消息”(证明我撒谎)的证据。第三,中国大陆维基事业,希望有人可以坚持下去(如果我被封的话,请踏着我的尸体坚持下去)。谢谢!至于封禁,我无所谓,你们想封就封吧,我也不会再编辑了。守望者爱孟 (talk) 11:21, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Translation by 1233:
First of all, he thinks that this type of conversation is not fair to those who does not use English (he uses Chinese). He states that he did not edit on 2012 as he started editing at Wikipedia at 2013, and thus it was impossible to spread fake news. He wants proof of the fake news in Wikipedia. He hopes somebody who can help develop Wikimedia, and he is "neutral" (Per his chat between me recently, he has been almost desperated. --WQL (talk) 14:44, 7 October 2017 (UTC)) for him being banned as he does not want to edit anymore. Translated by1233 | Questions?| This message is left by him at 11:44, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Just a comment: This was a mistake by me.--1233 | Questions?| This message is left by him at 11:44, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
2013年,我也没有散布此类消息,就您的说法,此类消息2012年就有了,显然和我无关。不要再来打扰我,反正你们觉得开心就好,想封就封。我又不是在元维基上做过什么,你本地不讨论,跑这里。。。还特意宣告“只能英文讨论”,是欺负别人英文不好咯,呵呵。守望者爱孟 (talk) 11:48, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comments of 守望者愛孟 above: I didn't spread such informations in 2013, as you said, such information is here since 2012, and is not related to me. It's okay as long as you're pleased, ban me if you wish. I haven't done much on Meta, and you come there without local discussions... and explicitly announce that "the discussion should be in English", so as to tease everyone with low proficiency in English. --Spring Roll Conan ( Teahouse | Contributions ) 11:58, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Translation: Inability to read English doesn't mean for disqualification to comment. WMF or international community would find ways to know more, if they want to.--Spring Roll Conan ( Teahouse | Contributions ) 11:58, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
此事起源来自一个本不应该出现的用户封禁时长,(永久禁止该用户编辑)。而这项决定并未在社群达成共识,当其他管理员做出解封的决定时,做出永久封禁决定的管理员却在不断进行车轮战封禁,对其他几位做出解封决定的管理员提出的沟通置之不理。很明显多次做出永久封禁决定的管理员不合适再担任该职务,本人认为其应该受到正确的处理。水可煮粥,亦可赛艇 听取蛙声一片 人生经验 12:04, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Translation by WQL (talk): User:鱼头炮 claims that the source of the incident is an unreasonable decision of permanent block on User:守望者爱孟, which, however, has never reach an agreement in the Chinese Wikipedia community. When some of the System Operators tried to unblock him, SysOps who had made the decision just did the wheel-war blocking and refuse to discuss with the community and other SysOps who unblocks him. He thinks that it's very clear that these SysOps who had made too many pernament blocks (which has never reach an agreement in the community) do not meet the requirements and (should be punished) correctly.
  • 中文:令所有中国大陆维基人惊讶的是,试图解封“守望者爱孟”的管理员“雾岛聖”竟然被那群管理员永久封禁(后被第三方管理员Manchiu解封),管理员给出的理由竟然是“雾岛聖是爱孟的‘傀儡’!”——这显然是谣言。更加令人震惊的是,他们还诉诸于威胁,声称如果有欲解封爱孟者,将上报WMF请求全域永封!我们显然知道,几年以来,一系列滥用管理员权限的事件在中文维基百科不断发生。因此,事实已经明确,我支持用户“鱼头炮”的观点。我坚信滥用权限者必遭应有的惩罚!
    英文:To the surprise of all editors from Mainland China, one of the Sysops (霧島聖) who tried to unblock 守望者爱孟 was blocked by them permanentally (霧島聖 was unblocked after a while by a third-party SysOp, Manchiu). Their reason to block 霧島聖 was an so-said "fact" that 霧島聖 is a sock-puppet of 守望者爱孟, which is an easy-to-see rumor. What is even shocking that they have resorted to a threat that they would like to report to WMF for a request for an global block on who would unblock 守望者爱孟! Obviously, these actions, which consist of an series of serious abuses of SysOp rights, been going on in the chinese Wikipedia for several years! Thus, the fact is so clear that I am for User:鱼头炮. I firmly believe that who abuses their rights deserves serious punishment. --WQL (talk) 13:54, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    霧島聖 has a track record of unblocking users he is associated with without either sound reason or discussion. (zh:Wikipedia:互助客栈/其他/存档/2016年8月#霧島聖管理員「即時解封」之理由, zh:Wikipedia:互助客栈/其他/存档/2016年9月#關於卸任案:封禁車輪戰這件事情,認為有必要提出卸任案的盡可能在此提出理由, zh:Wikipedia:互助客栈/其他/存档/2017年2月#RFC:请社群评判User:霧島聖多次解封User:Galaxyharrylion的行为). He either has a very soft spot for his friends at best, or is a meat puppet at worst. If you have any evidence of the admins listed above seeking a "global block", list them here. The same applies to the so called abuses from the User Group. Back up your claim before you repeat what you have been told. -Mys_721tx (talk) 14:47, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
人家说东你指西,要翻旧账不是在这里翻。看清楚现在讨论的问题,是爱孟被车轮战封禁。就你这么扯更加没结果,还想着帮人神之间打掩护,转移话题。水可煮粥,亦可赛艇 听取蛙声一片 人生经验 15:22, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There would not be a wheel war if the block to prevent uncivil behavior were enforced. 霧島聖 and his fellows undermining policies is the direct cause of this problem.-Mys_721tx (talk) 15:31, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
若你想追根溯源,那么接下去的讨论将会更加偏离原本的问题,将会牵扯进来更加多的用户,你执意带偏话题则更应该回本地社群进行讨论。元维基上并不应该讨论这种在本地社群就被可以处理的问题。毕竟这里对中文使用者并不够友善,某些人将发言翻译成英文的都能篡改用词,以及偷工减料。水可煮粥,亦可赛艇 听取蛙声一片 人生经验 16:19, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If more users are involved in a discussion, do they not form a consensus that will not be swayed by a few? Framing this as a isolated incident is not constructive toward its resolution, as Wong128hk has pointed out below that this is the symptom of on-going issue since 2013. It cannot be resolved locally. Lastly, No one is preventing you from correcting translations.-Mys_721tx (talk) 16:34, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
我这里说的被牵扯进来的用户不是指来参于讨论的用户,而是指各种当初涉及社群纠纷事情的更多用户会被拿出来一再提及。2013年来涉及的用户人数之广你应该清楚。你如何让元维基的各个不熟悉中文维基的编者对这些纷繁复杂的事情以及用户做出正确的判断?最后,我为何要帮水平不够,或者篡改用词,以及偷工减料的翻译来擦屁股,本来这种翻译就不应该出现。水可煮粥,亦可赛艇 听取蛙声一片 人生经验 16:57, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Again, how is the number of users involved a problem? On the contrary, the large number of users involved shows how deeply the problem runs. If you worry that people will not be able to make the call, present your case here in whatever language you choose. An external oversight certainly will facilitate a healthy discussion.-Mys_721tx (talk) 18:30, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
你只一再的强调用户多更好,但麻烦你看清楚我说话的重点:“你如何让元维基的各个不熟悉中文维基的编者对这些纷繁复杂的事情以及用户做出正确的判断?”这事情拿到元维基上来讨论并没有任何帮助以及实际效果。水可煮粥,亦可赛艇 听取蛙声一片 人生经验 01:45, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You wanted the admins involved to be held accountable ("本人认为其应该受到正确的处理"). I certainly hope the same. I think a closer scrutiny on their behaviors will benefit both sides. So you may want to bring your case here for all the community to see. If your accusation holds, an external oversight is hardly useless and will only vindicate you.-Mys_721tx (talk) 02:20, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please kindly explain why you delete the fellow accusation"[o]bviously, these actions, which consist of an series of serious abuses of SysOp rights, taken by AddisWang, 人神之间, Mys 721tx, Jasonzhuocn, 乌拉跨氪, Kegns, Jimmy Xu, etc., most of them are from Wikimedia User Group China, has been going on in the chinese Wikipedia for several years", in this diff.-Mys_721tx (talk) 15:00, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
请恕我使用中文:我发现我的这一点名指责与主题完全无关,因此移除以防止偏题;但是我不否认我表达了这一点。--WQL (talk) 15:39, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Then why would you remove the accusation that Jasonzhuocn made up rumors in this diff? He is directly involved in the blocking action. Is he not relevant in the case you brought? -Mys_721tx (talk) 15:52, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
提出“上报基金会”的是Jason,而声称其为傀儡的是另一个管理员。我发现错误之后必须立刻修正以正视听,是我要对自己的言论负责的需要,这没有可以指责的地方。--WQL (talk) 15:57, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If you are striving for the accuracy of your case, please list the events in chronological order. -Mys_721tx (talk) 16:04, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, User:1233 should check the page history. The person who made the link of WMCN removed was not 守望者爱孟. I cannot guess the reason why has User:1233 coined such a rumor. Please check the page (w:zh:Special:Diff/46462706) for details.WQL (talk) 14:41, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Is that so?-Mys_721tx (talk) 14:49, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As explained by Mys 721tx , that is also my reply on your question.--1233 | Questions?| This message is left by him at 15:10, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
中文:我赞同鱼头炮的观点。爱孟并未违规。对他的封禁是一种滥权行为。在中文维基,一些管理员蓄意针对大陆维基社群,对来自上海地区的维基编辑尤甚。另外要指出的是,1233在为爱孟的翻译中,存在一些错误。爱孟对被封禁无能为力。我们都知道,在维基如果被封禁,是无权编辑的。爱孟被迫放弃了他的这些权益。这之间的因果关系不应在1233的翻译中被颠倒。我不擅长英语,但我依然可以看到这些错误。显然,1233很擅长英语。我可以认为这错误并非过失吗?如果有人希望为爱孟的话提供翻译,请完整准确,谢谢。-- 782Talk14:27, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
About the problem raised by @Irc782 , I would want a clarification about that. All of these made by me is not paid, and I do accept improvements on translation as no one is perfect, which, at the same time, the lack of communication channels between me and User:守望者爱孟 may also lead to inaccuracy in translation. I pay my deepest apology if my translation were deemed not accurate enough.--1233 | Questions?| This message is left by him at 15:16, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • As a relatively new user who has never been involved in the drama that happened before 2017, all I witnessed after he’s unbanned in August 2017 is that he has been repetitively unfriendly in the discussions I am active (Article for Deletions), with a bit hate speech and violations of assuming good faith towards a group of people, typically geologically tagged. No comments on other aspects. 燃灯 (talk) 14:43, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why on Meta? edit

This issue is best dealt locally. --Artix Kreiger (Message Wall) 15:08, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think so. This is an issue about Chinese Wikipedia, it would be better to be discussed on local wiki instead of meta wiki. --dqwyy (talk) from zhWiki 01:54, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to ask the proposer @1233, what makes you think of this incident could NOT be solved in Chinese Wikipedia locally rather than ask for further comments on Meta? --TechyanTalk15:17, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Artix Kreiger and Techyan, there are numerous reasons for this to be impossibly dealt locally. There are a few major problems for this if dealt locally:
  1. This incident is not a short term incident. The involvement in the incident and the length of this long-term problem would mean that there were no local user who would be capable of handling this problem.
  2. This incident would need some clarification from both sides. However, this would be impossible to cool down once this was done in local page (as it will eventually escalate to a larger, harder to handle problem)
  3. I would say that as both parties includes more than 2 sysop, admin, and other users with admin privileges, this would be impossible to be handled locally.
  4. There were rumors saying that there were chapter / user group involvement in this matter.
Thus, the best solution would be done here rather than being dealt locally.--1233 | Questions?| This message is left by him at 15:23, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I shall request that all of these comments should be moved to the WP:VP of Chinese wikipedia, since this is not a cross-site issue and should be discussed in the Chinese wikipedia community, though the issue seems complicated. --WQL (talk) 15:44, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Let me ask you another question: what are you expecting for after this debate? You want the community to impeach one of the admins get involved in? You want all admins who blocked and unblocked him explain why they do so? Or you want bureaucrats and others on Meta tell you which side is right and the other side is wrong? If there are no significant differences between debating locally or globally, go local. --TechyanTalk15:56, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I would say it is rather not possible to be solved locally. It involves several parties of which having at least one admin having strong opinions. It can be foreseen that the discussions at the local village pump will eventually be escalated into a "war" that full of attacks, accusations, and uncivil behaviors. Therefore, requesting the global community to take part is an option here.--J.Wong 15:57, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
目前来看,争端尚能得到控制。我们暂时还应该假定双方有足够的理智来解决此问题。此外,元维基并不是中文维基百科用户的主要讨论场所。我依然建议在中文维基百科互助客栈进行理智的讨论,以示公平。--WQL (talk) 16:01, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@1233:英语并不是大部分中文维基百科人的第一语言,水平参差不齐在,这对于很多用户不公平,例如守望者爱孟。此外,之前你的翻译已经有人质疑是否偷工减料以窜改意义(虽然我知道你不会)。此外,如果您认为中文维基百科不能平心静气坐下来谈(因为某管理员声称要上报),那么元维基也不能保证所有人都是平心静气的正常讨论。--WQL (talk) 16:29, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The significant difference is the tone used in discussion. That is why it was brought here, rather than anywhere as this would be actually the most appropriate place to start a civilized discussion free of attacks, threats, unjudged accusations and other behavior, which would be a foreseen problem when this problem is discussed locally as stated by Wong128hk. @WQL: The problem were unsolvable in my opinion after Jason Zhuo threats to submit a report to the foundation about the problem --1233 | Questions?| This message is left by him at 16:08, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@1233: So you mean that the only reason you brought this debate to Meta, is that you believe when you force a bunch of Chinese native speakers using English to debate, everyone could stay calm and come to a consensus? --TechyanTalk16:20, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Techyan: It is not the best solution but it is the only viable option left for me to choose to solve this problem (or notify meta about this ongoing issue).--1233 | Questions?| This message is left by him at 16:23, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a way to notify the entire community to come here for input? --Artix Kreiger (Message Wall) 16:12, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure it is the most suitable method but CentralNotice comes to mind.-Mys_721tx (talk) 16:14, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
See also Steward requests/Permissions/2017-09#PhiLiP@zhwiki. --Mewaqua (talk) 16:17, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Since Sept 2013, this conflict is sustained for more than four years. It is more than enough. It should put a full stop here anyway.--J.Wong 16:18, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
99% of Meta RFCs regarding local project issues are never resolved. If you want to have this problem solved, I would recommend a few steps:
  1. Make every effort to resolve this issue through a local discussion. Meta should not be the place to resolve conflicts on big wikis, except as an absolute last resort.
  2. Re-format this RfC so it has a clear statement of the problem, a complete and concise background to the problem, a list of local attempts to resolve the issue, and then a proposal for what to do. This last part is key - without a proposed course of action, it is very likely that nothing will happen here.
  3. Invite the local users involved to Meta to give their statements and perspectives.
I have to stress that all that Meta can do is facilitate a discussion that could lead to an outcome. Stewards are not empowered to arbitrarily de-sysop individuals or revert actions that local admins have taken. We can only take such action when a consensus exists, either here or on the local wiki, for that action to be taken. And if this discussion does not involve the relevant members of the zhwiki community, then it will be very hard to gain any sort of consensus on the way forward. – Ajraddatz (talk) 16:41, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The following statement by WQL has been proven to be false. Sorry to these words. --WQL (talk) 03:10, 8 October 2017 (UTC) [reply]

(The following statement by WQL has been proven to be false. The user involved is TEntEn4279 not 1233. Sorry to these words. --WQL (talk) 03:11, 8 October 2017 (UTC))I have metioned that User:1233 had tried to use his socket-puppet account to imitate a blocked user and was banned for a week for violating WP:PUPPET policy. It seems that users in the community may not trust him. --WQL (talk) 00:00, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You do realize that the block log is public, yes?-Mys_721tx (talk) 00:07, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
So what? --WQL (talk) 00:17, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I shall state that if you Taiwan and Hong Kong users are still insisting on discussing THIS issue here, we Chinese Mainland users will not able to accompany with you any more. Please move it to WP:VPO in zhwiki. It is an ultimatum. --WQL (talk) 00:06, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

说到底就是在中文区没道理,滥权被质疑,现在就来元维基要全域封禁,请监管员注意,我在中文区外无活动,但如果领导们认为全域封禁可以让他们开心,那就封,我无所谓,反正三年多了,都是在我被滥权封锁的情况下,我努力发展中国大陆维基社群,谁是谁非,一望而知。如果我被因此封,只能说明维基无药可救。守望者爱孟 (talk) 23:40, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(Translated by PhiLiP) After all, they were not rationale/logical (没道理) and were questioned for abusing of power on Chinese Wikipedia. Therefore they are now seeking to global block (me) on Wikimedia Meta. I'd like to remind the stewards that I had no activity on other Wikis other than the Chinese Wikipedia. However if the leaders thought that a global block will amuse them, please do it. I don't care. It has been three years that I was blocked by misconducted admins but I still put my efforts to develop the Wikimedia community of Mainland China. It's so obvious to tell who is right. If I got blocked because of this, then Wikipedia is incorrigible. (User's Signature)
看样子还特意在翻译里夹带私货,把我说的原意弄错,呵呵,行吧,我还是那句话,要封赶紧,你们开心就好。守望者爱孟 (talk) 23:46, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(Translated by PhiLiP) It seems some personal views were smuggled into the translation, which twisted my words. Well, okay. I'll make the same comment: please do hurry to block me, just for your amusement. (User's Signature)
现在我反问一句:对我那么多指控,你们有证据吗?你们指控“守望者爱孟无证据声称某组织敛财(贪污)”,请问,我在哪个维基页面说了这句话?看起来,你们无证据指控更严重。行了行了,我知道多说无益,浪费时间,全域维基页面,这也是最后一次回应!希望大家继续坚持中国大陆维基事业,不要气馁,我被封无所谓的。守望者爱孟 (talk) 23:51, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(Translated by PhiLiP) I want to ask back this question: do you have evidence for so many accusation against me? You accused "守望者爱孟 claimed that certain organization amassing wealth (corruption) without evidence". Please answer this, on which Wikipedia page I said that? It seems that you have more serious of problems of accusing others without evidence. Okay okay, I know repeating myself will not do any good and it was a waste of time. This is my last response on the global Wiki page! I hope everyone will carry on my career of developing Chinese Wiki community. Do not be discouraged, It doesn't matter if I got blocked. (User's Signature)

我也認為不應再在元維基討論下去。很多當事人的英文水平並不好;並且事情只涉及中文維基百科。--丁子君 (talk) 02:28, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(Translated by PhiLiP) I also agreed that we shouldn't continue this conversion on Wikimedia Meta. Many people who involved in this don't speak English well. And only the Chinese Wikipedia was involved in this problem. --(User's Signature)

中国人就该说汉语!(感谢菲姑的翻译,但愿你在处理这件事也能客观公正中立,你对我的话的翻译我会看的)中文维基的事,中文维基自己解决,犯不着麻烦外人,想走挟洋自重的老路?现在是新中国新世纪,不是晚清民国!某些人不为中文维基的壮大做贡献,反而尽全力排斥异己,违规封禁为中文维基真正做贡献的维基人,在此我就不点名了,大家都知道。话已至此,挑事的人好自为之吧。蘇州宇文宙武 (talk) 11:35, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Timeline edit

Can we start from the beginning? In order for help, from start time to now is the best. Thanks --Artix Kreiger (Message Wall) 16:28, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@AddisWang, Mys 721tx, PhiLiP, and Techyan:, @守望者爱孟, 鱼头炮, Irc782, and Walter Grassroot:@Wong128hk, 乌拉跨氪, and Zhxy 519:, Please give your own version of events. 請你們提供你們對此事件的時間線。我會盡量充當溝通/翻譯員。--1233 | Questions?| This message is left by him at 17:03, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
由于开始有人发出关于涉及其他事件描述的请求,而我认为该事件不应该被放在元维基上讨论。所以我决定将不再参与其中讨论,直到该事件被放回到中文维基社群中进行讨论为止。水可煮粥,亦可赛艇 听取蛙声一片 人生经验 01:56, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(Translated by PhiLiP) Since some people started making request of other events, I believe it is improperly that this situation should be discussed on Wikimedia Meta. Therefore I decide not to participate any discussion here until the discussion was moved back to Chinese Wikipedia. (User's Signature)

Note edit

This user has been global banned by the WMF office action from editing Wikimedia sites, due to issue of incivility bad behavior manner, please email to for any further questions want to inquire.


SA 13 Bro (talk) 00:40, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]