Stop financially supporting Wikipedia!Edit
I have certainly found it ironic that the English Wikipedia includes an article about the expression "useful idiots" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_Idiots) because it is essentially the status which the founders and management of Wikipedia (located mostly in Tampa, Florida) now have in the eyes of users of most East European language versions of their very own website. Please note that this is not name-calling, but merely a technically accurate description. After all, I am a polite guy.
The Wikipedia, in its English form, was founded under the naive impression that other language versions will be managed under the same civilized rules as the original one. Wrong assumption...
According to my research and various sources (who prefer to remain anonymous) only the English version of the Wikipedia can be described as relatively civilized and unbiased. Unfortunately this is not the case in most local language versions in countries with little or no history of democracy or western civilization. I am unable to read Chinese to verify it, but I am getting second-hand reports that Chinese Wikipedia does not include any historical information about atrocities commited by communists and that all articles must be from the official "Beijing point of view" - thus not NPOV (Neutral Point of View). I can't stop wondering why such a travesty of human decency is being tolerated by and supported with American resources. Seems to me that Google with its "Marxist version of the Google search engine" is not alone in its kissing up to Chinese communists. Well well well...
The situation is very similar in all East European language versions - where I do not need any translators and I can personally confirm it. It is bad on Slovak, Polish and Russian Wikipedias but the situation on the Czech Wikipedia is far and away the worst. In case you are not aware of it, the Czech Republic (a democracy in name only) is ruled by neo-communists - though they offically call themselves "socialists". Czech students, who are the main fodder-contributors to the Czech Wikipedia are saturated to their eyeballs with Marxism. They could not be any redder.
Thus it is only logical that the contents and daily life of the Czech Wikipedia looks and behaves accordingly. The sysops and admins of the Czech Wiki rule with an iron fist and they've created the very first Wiki-tyranny. Dissent or any democratic expression of a different (while still NEUTRAL) opinion is impossible and is immediately punished by extreme blocking (ranging from a few days to nine months) to prevent editing of said or any article. This is only for Wikipedians who do not goose step with the official party line - everybody agrees that vandalism is not to be tolerated anywhere and should be punished accordingly. Wiki-stalking of suspected wiki-dissidents is the rule not the exception and is a part of a Czech Wikipedia sysops basic duties. The Czech Wikipedia has been virtually hijacked by marxist Wiki-terrorists. Best of all, they have nothing to worry about because nobody in Tampa speaks Czech and they can always lie their way out - they have many willing accomplices among Czech students studying in the United States that will cover their backs.
As a result, thousands of articles on Czech history and society are severely biased and twisted to comply with the current political propaganda and prevailing sentiments in society. For example Czechs generally dislike Czech expatriates of the Cold-war era, and so articles about them reflect only one point of view. There are hundreds of examples like this. Discussion of these issues is not allowed and those who object are immediately accused by sysops of "disrupting" and repeatedly blocked until they leave the Wikipedia altogether. Basically, unless the article is about stones or flowers or other scientific things, only the communist and marxist point of view is allowed and only it is considered to be "neutral". All opposing viewpoints are thus banned.
The admins are also using technical means to further their goals: automatically blocking thousands of IP addresses, which are allegedly "proxies" (and they are not) and refusing to install software which would allow transparent reading of Czech words with or without Czech diacritics. That last trick effectively blocks thousands of potential Wiki visitors from abroad, who do not have diacritics on their keyboards - aka those hated Czech expatriates.
If somebody from the Czech Wikipedia attempts to seek remedy or justice at the English Wikipedia or META Wikipedia (there is such a guy, a Czech lawyer named Vit Zvanovec), he is quickly located and a "death squad" of Czech (but English-speaking) sysops from the Czech Wikipedia moves to discredit, dismiss him as a crackpot and neutralize him. In that effort they are getting very effective help from local American "useful idiots" (again, no name-calling, just a technical description) who would patronize, discourage and generally put down the "complainer" - like for example a Wikipedian named Dan, who wrote to Zvanovec as follows at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_permissions#Desysopping_of_cs:Wikipedista:Egg
"To request the removal of sysop access from another user, please gain consensus on this on your own wiki first. All discussion must be kept on your local wiki." This is not the place to propose a user's desysopping. Please make a request here only after you have obtained consensus among the cs.wikipedia community. Dan"
Seems that "Dan" can not wrap his mind around the fact that any such action on the Czech Wikipedia is not possible, because such person would be immediately blocked (and Zvanovec in fact was) and a Czech "death squad" would quickly show up (as they did) and proclaim Zvanovec a known troublemaker with a history of "disrupting", who should not be taken seriously. Case closed.
It seems that there is no way to get a message through up the chain of command. Tampa is turning a deaf ear. Any such attempt ends up either being ignored or with the really illogical recommendation of placing a complaint with the very people against who you are complaining. Not even Joe Stalin could set up a smarter system.
But maybe there is a way and one which always gets attention and results. Wikipedia depends on donations. Simply stop sending any money to the Wikipedia Foundation, stop your contributions, stop your PayPal accounts - it will get noticed sooner or later. It will also force all the distinguished thinkers at Wikipedia Offices in Tampa, Florida to climb down out of their ivory towers and start dealing with real problems. I have no doubts that the absolute majority of donations to Wikipedia Foundation comes from the U.S., I do not think that contributions from the People's Republic of China or the Czech Republic matter too much. Therefore I believe that American money should not support intellectual brainwashing anywhere (be it in China or Eastern Europe) and that the founders and managers of this great idea - a free Internet encyclopedia - should decisively step in and use all means at their disposal to stop abuse of their own project by some marxist intellectual vermin of world. Situation is bad. And nothing short of immediate, resolute action to make it better is acceptable.
Ross Hedvicek Florida, USA
I am available to discuss details (in preferably civilized way) and offer more details.
Ross.Hedvicek 18:18, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
- Board was not taking action againt blatant abuse of principles (on EN and CS) on which this project was founded. I will let my voice be heard about that - and I am generally the quiet type. Ross.Hedvicek 12:39, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
- I suppose now is the right time for you to reveal which particular Wiki principles have been blatantly abused by the board? Let your voice be heard! And what exactly would you improve in the board's operation, if you were elected? Anyway, Ross, have you any previous board or generally corporation management experince? --Oneliner 13:55, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
- To Oneliner: Answer is in the article above. If you refuse to do the right thing - you are doing the wrong thing. And yes, I have board and corporate management experience. :-) I am far from being young and inexperienced. Ross.Hedvicek 19:03, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
You have indicated that you wish to accept my offer to post your statement in Wikizine. (Wikizine/election 2006). But until now I have not received you statement. Please post in on my talk page (max +/- 300 words please) or remove your name form that list or at least inform me. I need to know what your intentions are for the planing of the publication of those statements.
Greetings, Walter 21:57, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
- I posted my statement on your page. Thanks. Ross.Hedvicek 18:58, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Board of Trustees electionsEdit
The Wikipedia Signpost, a community-newspaper in the English Wikipedia, is covering the Board of Trustees elections and will be featuring each of the candidates in next week's issue. As such, we would appreciate it if you would take some time to answer a few interview questions. Each candidate will be asked the same questions; by no means, though, feel obligated to answer any (or even) all of them, though we would greatly appreciate it if you did.
Some of the questions may be a bit redundant to the candidate information you have filled out already. This is both for convenience and for giving you the opportunity to expand on some of them a bit. However, we ask that you keep all responses brief, limiting them to no more than one or two paragraphs each.
You may leave replies to my English Wikipedia talk page, my meta talk page, or email them to me. I would appreciate it if responses are in on or before this Saturday, August 26; please have them in at the latest on Sunday the 27th in order for them to be included in Monday's issue.
As always, the Signpost reserves the right to re-distribute the questions and replies, shorten any responses if necessary, and take any other editorial action deemed appropriate.
- Your name:
- Your username most commonly used:
Ross.Hedvicek or Rosta
- Your current geographic location, along with your age:
Florida, USA, age: over 50
- Projects with significant contributions (please both name the language and project, and link to your contributions)
- Do you have any rights (i.e. admin, bureaucrat) or positions (i.e. dispute resolution, CheckUser, etc.) on any of those projects? If so, which ones? When did you get elected or promoted for each one?
- Do you hold any universal rights (i.e. steward, etc.) for Wikimedia Projects? If so, since when?
- When did you first start contributing to Wikimedia projects? Why and how did you initially join?
- Briefly describe your career ("real-life"). How do you think this will help you be a successful Board member?
Briefly: 30+ years of management experience.
- Of all the candidates right now, why do you stand out from the field? What makes you the best candidate?
Experience and multi-language and multi-cultural knowledge.
- A knowledge of several languages has been cited as a key requirement for a Board member. Do you speak any other languages other than English? Why do you think language is or isn't critical to the Board?
Language is critical. Actually Board needs somebody who speaks Mandarin, but is not living in China.
- What do you expect to do while serving on the Board? What are your expectations?
I will help with whatever I will be asked to. I will do my share.
- What can you bring to the Board? What can you contribute to the Wikimedia Foundation?
- Describe the one issue that you think is most pressing and pertinent to the Foundation right now, and how you would approach the situation.
Complete anarchy on Wiki language branches in Eastern Europe and inability of Board to do anything about it (due mostly to language barrier).
- What is your vision of the Board in the Foundation heirarchy? How do you feel about the current leadership?
I have no suggestions for change as of now.
- As a Board member, you will be serving as a representative of the communities. Do you think you can represent the community and understand its concerns? Why?
- What do you think of the Wikimedia Foundation and its mission in general? If you could change one thing about the running of the Foundation, what would you change?
I would crack on abuse of power by admins and sysops.
- If elected, can and will you devote the appropriate time and other resources needed to serve on the Board?
Yes, otherwise I would not be submitting my candidacy.
- Have you ever attended Wikimania or any other meetup? What role do you think these meetups play?
- Please list (and link) any other pages where you have gotten questions and comments pertaining to the Board elections; we are compiling all of the questions and would appreciate this.
No other pages.
- What would you say to a potential voter who is undecided right now?
My election slogan is: The crap has to stop - vote for me - it is your chance for change. I have a reputation to uphold!
- Is there anything else you would like to mention?
Ross.Hedvicek 18:52, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi! The new Board member is expected to attend a Board meeting in Frankfurt 20-23 October, so you are highly expected to aim to keep these dates free or book time off work in case you are successful in your bid to be on the Board. Jon Harald Søby 14:54, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
- OK. Ross.Hedvicek 14:58, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Questions from DijxtraEdit
Hello, these are generic questions I decided to submit to every candidate. If you already answered the question in your application, skip it. If you consider any question to be to private for you to answer, feel free to state that and accept my apology for being to intrusive. I also ask you to pardon my English since spellcheckers don't check grammar :-) Here are the questions:
2. What is your opinion of WP:OFFICE? Do you think that:
- It is very good solution to bureaucratisation of Wikipedia, allowing a swift action in cases which need such action. We should widen the circle of people who have the power to use WP:OFFICE.
- It is very good solution to bureaucratisation of Wikipedia, allowing a swift action in cases which need such action. (And only Danny should use WP:OFFICE privilege)
- I don't like the thing, but we need it so we don't get sued.
- Community is above any user and we should think of WP:OFFICE as temporary measure until we find a way for the whole community to act swiftly in cases of libel accusations.
- We should move our servers to jurisdiction which makes it hard for people to sue us for libel.]
- I believe that servers are just fine where they are.
3. Have you ever been on a paylist of anybody/any organization/any firm connected to any current member of the board? Please understand this question in the broadest sense possible.
- I never been on paylist/or connected to any current member of the board.
Thank you for your time, Dijxtra 20:23, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Thank you. Ross.Hedvicek 16:38, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi, Ross. In light of the four discussions listed below, what course of action would you take with regard to the 9/11 Wikipedia if you were elected to the board?
Looking forward to your response. Thanks. Andreyi 17:37, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
- I am an American citizen and a such I am very PRO-American. :-)
Ross.Hedvicek 17:48, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
- Right. Could you explain what this might have to do with the question I asked, and could you perhaps answer it? Are you suggesting that you would have your political views override community consensus, by retaining the wiki as some kind of patriotic gesture? It's not clear from your cryptic answer what you think should be done. Andreyi 18:35, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
- My understanding is that Trustees are not dictators and that Wikipedia already has a system set up how the things are handled. I see no reason why to change it. If it would come to a vote, then I would definitely vote against anti-americanism of any kind. 9/11 is not a political issue, it a very human issue. Ross.Hedvicek 19:51, 13 September 2006 (UTC)