Requests for comment/Severe Problems in hewiki/Changing the Rules Ad Hoc
<< back to main Hewiki Problems RFC page
Chapter 2.2: Changing the Rules Ad Hoc and On the Fly
Since June 2024, bureaucrats have made several changes to Hebrew Wikipedia's established rules, without any discussion or poll, broadly interpreted existing rules to their convenience, and proposed vague policy changes without clear definitions. Most actions were justified by claims such as "existential threat to hewiki", "a state of emergency", or "temporary measures" (though no end date was specified).
2.2.1 Changing the Requirements for Voting Rights
editIn 2007, after a long discussion and poll, the parliament established the requirements for voting rights: one month since the user's first edit and 100 edits within 90 days prior to the poll's beginning. On June 9, along with announcing the second wave of blocks, the bureaucrats announced that the time needed since first edit will be increased from a month to a year. This major change in voting rights was made on a whim, without any poll or prior discussion. The voting right verification script was updated hours later by a non-privileged editor, and nine days later, the policy page was updated by another non-privileged editor.
2.2.2 Parliament Block
editHebrew Wikipedia rules require policy proposals to undergo an elaborate process of refinement and gaining support before they are subject to a special poll in "The Parliament" page. Only if a proposal received the majority vote in the Parliament, it is approved and is integrated as an official policy.
But on May 21st, 2024, after the bureaucrats introduced several changes to existing policies without any poll or discussion, they blocked the Parliament page while a vote was in progress. On July 2024, veteran editor "Ima Shel" proposed several policies to address Wikipedia's deep issues, including a community poll for updating the requirements for voting rights. Despite broad support from the community, and fulfilment of all the requirements for a Parliament poll, the bureaucrats prevented the poll from starting, and kept the Parliament page blocked, citing "emergency conditions" and inability to verify if voters were "recruited." When asked repeatedly, by various editors, to re-open the Parliament and let the approved poll begin, they refused. Just recently, the new bureaucrats declared the re-opening of the "Parliament", after a block of more than 7 months, but they stressed that this is a "closure, for the meanwhile" of the mass-blocks affair. "For the meanwhile" might mean that they reserve the option to block the Parliament once again. Until now, the vote for Ima Shell's policy proposal hasn't started, although it already received all the necessary approval from the community.
2.2.3 Easy Implementation of Permanent User Blocks
editDuring the years or self-coup and war in Gaza and Lebanon, the bureaucrats increasingly used permanent blocks, especially against editors who are perceived as liberals or "leftists." Users were permanently blocked for minor infractions, undefined violations, or actions that previously didn't warrant permanent blocks. Permanent blocking shifted from a protective tool which should be used rarely and with caution to a means of enforcement, punishment and threat.
2.2.4 Re-Definition of Terms Without Discussion
editBureaucrats broadly interpreted established definitions without public discussion or community involvement:
- "Recruitment" - Unlike English Wikipedia, hewiki had no official policy against canvassing. While generally regarded as undesirable, there was no formal definition of what canvassing actually means, or official sanctions against it. In a Village Pump discussion in 2023 we reached a consensus to add the phrase "Recruiting votes (=canvassing) goes against Wikipedia's values and is not acceptable" to hewiki's WP:Voting policy page. This wording usually describes an undesired action, a felony, but the editor who eventually added that phrase to the policy page changed it, on his own accord, from "not acceptable" to "forbidden", thus changing the definition from an undesired misdemeanor to a serious offense. This editor doesn't have any admin privileges but is a vocal supporter of the forceful policies of the bureaucrats. Despite not having an agreed definition of "recruiting votes" or a policy about sanctions for it, in early June 2024 dozens of editors were permanently blocked without warning with the accusation that they were "recruiting or being recruited" to vote. As some of the newer editors stated, they didn't even know what "recruiting" means, and didn't feel that they were "recruited" in any way or form - they simply participated in a poll and voted according to their own preference.
- "Troll" - is officially defined as someone who regularly inserts "incorrect, controversial, inflammatory, or annoying content." The declaration of anyone as a Troll leads to a permanent ban and specific orders to erase any edit they make, even if it is a legit contribution. Due to the extremity of the measures against trolls, the process of declaring a troll usually involves a discussion between checkusers and a bureaucrat, and a conclusion that there is no other way to handle this person. However, veteran editor Ithamareshpar was declared a troll without such discussion, after he sent a single angry message to an administrator and for receiving another user's password and pasting some messages in her name (upon her request, because she was facing some technical issues). Such actions, however unacceptable, were never considered a reason to give someone a Troll status before. This editor self-identified as a liberal and was a strong critic of the mass of unexplained blocks, which he was also a victim of, and it seems likely this expansion of the term "troll" was used to to shut him up. Several of the most veteran and respected editors wrote against this on several talk pages (e.g here and here, here by a former bureaucrat, but their words were either erased or ignored.
2.2.5 Ban on Editing on (Certain) Current Events
editCurrent events articles are challenging due to tension between staying current and "Wikipedia is not a newspaper". Hebrew Wikipedia never banned current events editing or defined what a "current event" is. Since 2023, the Bureaucrats took the authority to determine if an article is "political" and to sanction those who edit it, without clear definitions, appeal process, or community mandate. Even well-sourced edits of notable events led to blocks, usually on liberal editors, while nationalist and religious editors kept editing on political matters without any sanction or warning.
2.2.6 Block for Not Finding a Mentor
editThe bureaucrat Garfield imposed mandatory mentorship on liberal editor sofiblum for "constantly editing on current events" (see above). Ten days later, the bureaucrat Garfield blocked her completely from all namespaces, claiming it's "because she didn't find a mentor within ten days" - an unprecedented time frame which no one has ever faced. The standard procedure in hewiki is that an editor who receives mandatory mentorship is blocked only from the main namespace, and no timeframe is given (see this conservative editor who was given mandatory mentorship in March 2024, didn't find a mentor and is still blocked only from the main namespace). Sofiblum's severe block may be related to the fact that a few days after being given the mentorship she initiated a user conduct RFC against an editor who has been bullying her and many others for years, but is affiliated with the bureaucrats.
 Elimination of Opposition |
Changing the Rules Ad Hoc | Improper Procedures |