Requests for comments/The regulation on Vietnamese Wikipedia opposed Checkuser policy of Wikimedia Foundation

Dialog-information on.svgThis is a subpage; for more information, see the Requests for comments page.

Statement of the issueEdit

I am a Wikipedian on Vietnamese Wikipedia. Some members on Vietnamese Wikipedia including ThiênĐế98 (talk · contribs), CVQT (talk · contribs), Thienhau2003 (talk · contribs) created a regulation named “Voting regulation on Vietnamese Wikipedia” which is contradictory to Checkuser policy of Wikimedia Foundation on Vietnamese Wikipedia. The Article 20 of this rule holds that after the election for approving local CheckUsers, Administrators, Bureaucrats close and 15 extended days the candidate is elected by pro/con rate without considering the required total number of votes. This means that CheckUsers is approved if there are 5 votes therein 4 supports and 1 oppose while the CheckUser policy of Wikimedian Foundation presents that “On a wiki without an Arbitration Committee that meets the criterion above, or in a project where there is a preference for independent elections, the community may approve local CheckUsers (stewards not counting as local CheckUsers) per consensus. The CheckUser candidate status must request it within the local community and advertise this request properly (village pump, mailing list when available, special request page, etc.). The candidate must be familiar with the privacy policy. After gaining consensus (at least 70%–80% in pro/con voting or the highest number of votes in multiple choice elections) in the local community, and with at least 25–30 editors' approval”. This Article also holds that after 10 extended days from closing date of voting, the regulation is approved without considering the required total number of votes. This means that a regulation is appointed with only one support. The format of “Voting regulation on Vietnamese Wikipedia” looks like a legal document of Vietnam Government. It uses the template of Vietnamese legal document. There are only 15 members participate in the voting about this regulation therein 5 members support the Article 20 while we have more than 1200 members with voting right. After ThiênĐế98 (talk · contribs) declared the regulation was approved by community, we opposed him by showing the CheckUser policy of Wikimedian Foundation but his partner Thienhau2003 (talk · contribs) created the official regulation bypass our opposing. Besides, the article 21 allows sockpuppets to vote for sysop, bureaucrat and CheckUsers. Before the voting about this regulation there was a Vietnamese Wikipedian has been threatened that he will be arrested by police because of writing on Wikipedia. We are afraid this is an attempt of Vietnam Government to take control of Vietnamese Wikipedia. We are in danger. Everyone feels Vietnamese Wikipedia is not a safe place now. Please help us. Michel9090 (talk) 13:35, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

There are some important content in “Voting regulation on Vietnamese Wikipedia”:

Ghi chú 1: Đối với các biểu quyết chọn Kiểm định viên (CheckUser) thì cần với mức độ cao hơn, xem thêm Wikipedia:Biểu quyết chọn kiểm định viên.

Điều 20. Kết quả biểu quyết

- Riêng bầu chọn kiểm định viên phải có tối thiểu 20 phiếu. Hoặc có ít nhất 80% số người tham gia biểu quyết đồng ý.[11]

[11] Khoản quy chế này đang gây tranh cãi trong cộng đồng, do có nội dung trái với quy định CheckUser Policy của Wikipedia Foundation.

- Đối với biểu quyết về nhân sự, sau thời gian gia hạn thêm khoảng thời gian 15 ngày mà chưa hội tụ đủ số phiếu, bỏ qua quy tắc số phiếu tối thiểu, ứng viên đắc cử tính theo tỷ lệ ủng hộ.

- Đối với biểu quyết khác (các biểu quyết trừ bầu chọn và đánh giá bài viết), có thể gia hạn tối đa 10 ngày nếu không hội đủ số phiếu cần thiết. Quá thời gian này, đóng biểu quyết tính theo tỷ lệ ủng hộ trong biểu quyết.

Điều 21. Xử lý kết quả biểu quyết

3. Đối với các trường hợp phát hiện rối tham gia biểu quyết sau khi biểu quyết kết thúc, cần đếm lại tổng số phiếu tham gia của cuộc biểu quyết và kết luận lại các biểu quyết trên. Biểu quyết không đủ số phiếu sẽ bị tuyên bố không có giá trị, trừ các biểu quyết phong cấp, bất tín nhiệm vì nó liên quan đến vấn đề nhân sự.

Translate to English:

Note 1: For voting about CheckUser, it is necessary to a higher level, read Wikipedia: Voting about CheckUser.

Article 20. Voting result

- Particularly for approval CheckUser, there must be at least 20 votes. Or at least 80% of the participants agree.[11]

[11] This point is controversial in the community, because it contradicts Wikipedia Foundation's CheckUser Policy.

- For voting about personnel, after the extended 15 days without full of required number of votes, ignoring the rule of required minimum number of votes, the candidate are elected according to the support rate.

- For other voting (except for voting and rating articles), a maximum of 10 days may be extended if the required votes are not met. Past this time, voting is closed according to the percentage of support in voting.

Article 21. Handling voting results

3. For cases of sockpuppets participate the vote, it is necessary to recalculate the total number of votes participated in the vote and conclude the voting result. The votes with insufficient number of votes will be declared invalid, except for voting about personnel appointment and problem because it relates to personnel.

Michel9090 (talk) 03:08, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

There are other proofs that make us believe ThiênĐế98 (talk · contribs) is an agent of Vietnam Government who is trying to take control of Vietnamese Wikipedia. He wants to execute censorship of the Wikipedia content by proposing a regulation allow him ban any member he alleges sockpuppet. With this regulation Administrators don't need Chekuser tool to determine a member is sockpuppet or not. They can ban anyone anytime without hard evidences. They can ban any member if they suspect he is a sockpuppet. Administrator DHN (talk · contribs) protested him so ThiênĐế98 couldn't make his proposal became an official regulation. ThiênĐế98 deleted content of many articles [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10] that made these articles degrade. After that ThiênĐế98 reverted and locked many sensitive articles such as Corruption in Vietnam, Vietnamese nationalism, Academic freedom, Animal Farm, Command economy in Vietnam to prevent them develop. ThiênĐế98 created a regulation to allow sockpuppets to vote for sysops, bureaucrats and CheckUsers while he ruined many sensitive articles and prevented them develop with the reason anti sockpuppets.

Vietnamese Wikipedia states that "the community does not necessarily have to follow the majority's vote in the vote if there is not a large majority" but we have not defined what a large majority is. This has been used by some members to appoint a regulation contrary to the Wikimedia Foundation's CheckUser Policy with just a few votes. Only a few members together can appoint any regulation in Vietnamese Wikipedia. I think the Wikipedia Foundation should make it clear in the Vietnamese Wikipedia how many votes is the large majority, the percentage of support for the total number of votes is the large majority to avoid this issue repeats again.Michel9090 (talk) 02:19, 30 December 2019 (UTC)


  • Preliminary opinion based on the statement: Issues regarding the compliance of local CheckUser or Oversight policies with the global ones is now a task for the Ombudsman commission. In any case, stewards will not appoint anyone to checkuser or oversight status if the candidate does not meet the requirements laid out at CheckUser_policy#Appointing_local_Checkusers. The wikis may set stricter criteria than the global one (e.g.: requiring more % of support, or more voters, or both), but never a softer one. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:16, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
  • I cited and translated to English some important content in the "Voting regulation on Vietnamese Wikipedia". You can use Google Translate to translate by yourself. Can i report this issue at here ?Michel9090 (talk) 03:18, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Is there proof that the user claiming to be from the police Security Services who is threatening editors with arrest is actually a government official or not? EllenCT (talk) 01:15, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
We don't know the user claiming to be from the police Security Services who is threatening editors with arrest is actually a government official or not. That makes us stay in fear because we don't have enough information. Everything I reported at here is the truth. You can confirm with honest and neutral Administrators of Vietnamese Wikipedia such as DHN (talk · contribs), Alphama (talk · contribs). They know everything because they monitored and joined the voting also the discussion.Michel9090 (talk) 02:09, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
@Mxn and Cheers!: What's your opinion on this topic? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 07:55, 25 December 2019 (UTC)