Requests for comment/Maybe, abuse of power by admin Nguyentrongphu on ViWikipedia
The following request for comments is closed. U4C case now resolved. //shb (t • c) 08:43, 8 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Vietnamese Wikipedia administrator Nguyentrongphu implemented a permanent block against me (Sheminghui.WU) without providing any clear reason (only giving a "roi") and without reverting any of my edits. He simultaneously blocked my right to edit my own user talk page (I don’t even have a user talk page; viwiki doesn’t even have a welcome bot) and my right to send emails (probably all rights), leaving me unable to even speak. For months, I have been unable to appeal.
I discovered this incidentally while idly using the voting eligibility check tool during the U4C vote(I think). I was completely surprised. At first, I thought it might be due to IP blocks targeting mainland China or similar issues. After seeing clearly, I assumed it was a mistaken block (because I had no activity in the months before the block, and my edit count is low). But I couldn’t speak. So I left two messages on Mr. Nguyentrongphu’s user talk page on Chinese Wikipedia (my primary place of activity) and sent him an email a few days ago. However, he completely ignored me and did not respond to my inquiries.
I always emphasize etiquette and Wiki rules. I absolutely believe I have committed no obvious violations, especially since I only have a few dozen edits on viwiki (though I am a translator). You are welcome to review every edit I made; it won’t take long.
I have participated in the Wikimedia movement for several years but paid little attention to block-related rules. My main activities on Wm involve reading and voting-related activities, so I was unaware of this appeal channel. I was reminded by a Chinese Wikipedia user and found my way here. I thank him here.
He also reminded me that I don’t even have a user talk page, yet was blocked from editing my own talk page. This requires no further explanation—it must be abuse of power. If this rule also applies on viwiki, I personally believe this case is extremely clear-cut; there must be facts of abuse of power. I have contacted this administrator three times at different intervals, which I believe rules out accidental operation (but of course, I hope this is an unlikely misunderstanding too). After multiple unsuccessful communications, I see no need to speak to him again. I personally strongly condemn his behavior and believe his actions show contempt for Wiki rules and community members, also affecting communication between different language Wikipedias. His abuse of power has tangibly impacted my editing—for example, a long Vietnamese article I translated needs updating, and several concepts are difficult to source, yet I cannot communicate normally with the original Vietnamese authors.
I also harbor some biased suspicion that his block against me might be somewhat politically related. After all, my last edit (months before the block) was about Nguyễn Phú Trọng, leader of Vietnam’s legitimate government, while his user page prominently displays a waving American flag. As an administrator, he has simultaneously blocked many users and silenced them. His enwp user page has already been cleaned and protected due to frequent appeals (fortunately zhwiki has not). Perhaps he is a serious cleaner who has blocked countless vandals, but I wouldn’t know. I hope that if this abuse of power allegation is substantiated, his past conduct can also be reviewed. I hope you handle this case according to the rules. Thank you. (Hopefully the issue can be resolved soon so I can get my editing work back on track as soon as possible.)
Brief summary: Vietnamese Wikipedia administrator Nguyentrongphu permanently blocked me without providing a clear reason and simultaneously blocked all my rights (probably), including my right to edit my own user page (even though my user page was never created). A Wikipedia editor reminded me this is barefaced abuse of power and recommended I come to GRFC. Thank you. Even though I'm Aussie, my English writing skills may not be that ideal.
Chinese version:
越语维基的管理员Nguyentrongphu在未给出任何明确理由（只给出了个“roi”）和未回退我任何编辑的情况下对我（Sheminghui.WU）实施了永久封锁，并且一并封锁了我编辑自己用户讨论页（我甚至还没有用户讨论页，viwiki上连欢迎机器人都没有）和发送邮件的权利（应该是全部权利了），导致我连句话都说不出，几月以来一直无法申诉。
我是在为U4C（我记得是）投票的时候闲的没事使用投票资格检测工具发现这件事的，我完全没想到，一开始以为是由于中国大陆的IP封锁之类的事情，看清楚后就以为是误封（因为我在被封禁的前几个月根本没有活动，我的编辑数也不多），但我说不出话来，于是就在中文维基百科（我主要活动的地方）Nguyentrongphu先生的用户讨论页上留了两个言，前几天又发送了一封邮件给他。但是他完全无视，没有对我的疑问作出任何回复。
我一向注重礼仪和维基规则，我绝对相信自己没有任何明显的违规，特别是我在viwiki上只有几十笔编辑（不过我是一位翻译者），你们可以随意去查看我的每笔编辑，用不了多久。
我加入维基媒体运动已有几年，可是不太关注封禁规则有关事宜，在Wm上的主要活动也是阅读与投票有关的活动，所以不太清楚有这个申诉渠道。是经一位中文维基百科用户提醒才找到这里，在这里感谢他。
他同时提醒我说，我压根就没有用户讨论页，却被封了编辑自己讨论页的权限，这啥也不用说了，一定是滥权。如果他说的这条规则在viwiki也适用，那么我个人认为本案非常清晰明了，一定是有滥权事实。我也在不同时间联系过这位管理员三次，相信也能排除误操作嫌疑（当然，我也希望这是个美丽的误会）。多次沟通未果，我想也没有必要再次和他说话。我个人强烈谴责他的行为，并认为他的行为藐视维基规则和社群成员，对不同语种维基百科的交流也造成了影响。
我还带有一些偏见的怀疑他对我的封禁可能多少和政治因素有关，毕竟我最后一笔编辑（在被封禁的数月以前）是关于越南合法政府的领袖阮富仲，而他的用户页里又有着飘扬的美国国旗。作为管理员，他同时封禁了很多用户，并堵住了这些用户的嘴，他的enwp用户页已经因经常有申诉者而被清理和保护（好在zhwiki并没有）。也许他是一位严肃的清理者，封禁了无数破坏者，但我不得而知。我希望如果本案的滥权指控成立，也可以对他的既往行为进行一个检查。我希望你们按规则办理此案件。感谢。
简而言之的摘要：越南语维基百科管理员Nguyentrongphu在未给出明确理由的情况下将我永久封禁并同时封了我的一切权利（大概是吧），包括我编辑自己用户页的权利（尽管我的用户页甚至尚未创建）。一位维基百科编辑提醒我这是赤裸裸的滥权，并推荐我来找GRFC。感谢。希望能尽快解决问题以使我的编辑工作尽快回到正轨。
- @Nguyentrongphu: You can send an email to info-vi@wikimedia.org to contact the viwiki VRT team (which includes local administrators and experienced users) and appeal your block. Since the local community is self-governing, it is strongly recommended that you follow the local procedure first. Thank you. --SCP-2000 14:55, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry for the mistake. This comment was a reply to the initiator User:Sheminghui.WU. SCP-2000 15:02, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- ？~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 02:52, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I didn’t find any provisions for the VR team to deal with administrator abuse of power. There are not many provisions in Vietnamese, and other languages (such as Chinese) mostly deal with the handling of vandalism and personal attacks, but that’s where it stops. ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 09:56, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Please see vi:Trợ_giúp:Tôi_bị_cấm#Tôi_phải_làm_gì_bây_giờ?. I don't think the global community can intervene in the local community's decision, unless there's a failure of communication with the local community. Thanks. SCP-2000 11:46, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I couldn't use my talk page either, and viwiki Ủy ban Trọng tài is unactive. But I will send a email even through... and wait for another few days. ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 01:38, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- @SCP-2000 & @Sheminghui.WU Rối means sockpuppet (see vi:Wikipedia:Tài khoản con rối), however I couldn't see anything regarding your relationships with any other users, only saw that you started this discussion thread: vi:Thảo_luận:Nguyễn_Phú_Trọng#Đánh_giá,_Nên_thêm:_Điện/thư_chia_buồn_của_Đảng_Cộng_sản_Trung_Quốc_và_Nhân_dân_Trung_Quốc, @Mr.Love 2112 and Eightcirclestheorem: Are there any connections between you both and Sheminghui.Wu which lead adminships consider a sock case? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:02, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- (apologize from my Deepl machine translated): @DHN and Mxn: Có bất kỳ kết quả CU nào cho thấy Sheminghui.WU là Rối của ai đó khác không? Tôi không thể thấy bất cứ điều gì liên quan bằng cách tìm kiếm [1]. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:19, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- @Liuxinyu970226 CU is performed very sparingly at vi.wiki and most of the admin's blocking actions were from claimed duck tests. DHN (talk) 10:33, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Why🤔 Maybe you should consider introducing this thing ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 12:14, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- As a viwiki user (albeit with only a few dozen edits so far), I wonder what some of the difficulties are in not importing this technology and conventions? ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 23:23, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- @Liuxinyu970226 CU is performed very sparingly at vi.wiki and most of the admin's blocking actions were from claimed duck tests. DHN (talk) 10:33, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- This is so weird. I have absolutely nothing to do with these two individuals. I would never be mentally split to the point of debating myself across time and space in two languages. I just checked their profile pages, and there's zero resemblance to me whatsoever. If Eightcirclestheorem's user page had featured a photo with Xijinping and Nguyễn Phú Trọng, such suspicion might have made some sense (no still no actually)—but instead, they posted a photo of President Trump and Nguyễn Phú Trọng. Anyway, I'm sure these two can prove they are humanbeings themselves. ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 12:07, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Is it merely because one of us speaks English and the other speaks Vietnamese, we hold different views, and we appeared in the same discussion that such suspicion led to account suspension? ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 12:13, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Or is it because one of us has a message on our user page saying “Comrade Nguyen Phu Trong will live forever!” and the other has a photo of Comrade Nguyen Phu Trong and Trump, is it simply because we both reember His Excellency Nguyen Phu Trong? Sheminghui.WU (talk) 12:18, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I mean, how did he make this judgement when there is no connection between us anyway? ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 23:23, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Or is it because one of us has a message on our user page saying “Comrade Nguyen Phu Trong will live forever!” and the other has a photo of Comrade Nguyen Phu Trong and Trump, is it simply because we both reember His Excellency Nguyen Phu Trong? Sheminghui.WU (talk) 12:18, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Is it merely because one of us speaks English and the other speaks Vietnamese, we hold different views, and we appeared in the same discussion that such suspicion led to account suspension? ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 12:13, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- The point is, I just checked and I'm the only one among these three people whose account was blocked. Hhh。 ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 23:33, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Ok fine, Mr.Love 2112 was also banned. But I was the one debating with him, I never thought the administrator thought I was his puppet... This is too strange ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 23:36, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- @Sheminghui.WU I think you can see what that user replied to me: User_talk:Liuxinyu970226#Sheminghui.WU Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 16:29, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Absurd! Thank you for your kindness, but I hope the administrator realizes that this is an unfounded and wrongful ban. I'm not that anxious. Anyway, I've been very busy in real life recently, and I've also put some of my energy into Wikinews affairs. I couldn't get involved in viwiki work when I wanted to, and now I can't do it for a while, so it doesn't matter. ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 12:55, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Is it normal that a wrongful ban must be "vouched" by a "seemingly well-respected" member before it can be lifted? ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 13:00, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I have no intention of condemning this administrator, nor do I have the right to do so. He has made significant contributions to our ViWiki community over the years. But what is the basis for his recent ban, which is so severe? Wasn't it a mistake? Shouldn't mistakes be corrected unconditionally? Furthermore, I don't want you to "vouch" for me, lest I suddenly develop a serious illness and do something bad, and implicate you. However, if you do intend to do so, I'd be grateful for your kind thought anyway. ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 13:03, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I am a "seemingly respectable" user on Chinese Wikinews and a "seemingly respectable" user on the Chinese Wikipedia Vietnam group. Could I vouch for myself? ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 13:13, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- and I'm not sure what happened to the other user who was banned, as I haven't investigated the matter. But if I was the only reason he was banned, shouldn't he also be unbanned? Does it mean that someone won't be unblocked just because they don't know they can appeal on Wikimedia and lack a 'respected member from another language website' to vouch for her? ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 13:09, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- @Sheminghui.WU Further talked with some other Vietnamese users offline, it looks like RFC might not be a good way for your matter, as there are several cases involved Australian-registered accounts being confirmed sockpuppets even though lack of enough contributions on vi.wiki, if you're still really sure you're not sockpuppet (despite the block rationale said so), probably you need helps by filing a U4C case. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 22:45, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for your suggestion. Since no one in the viwiki community has responded to me either, I will submit this matter to U4C. ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 05:13, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Universal Code of Conduct/Coordinating Committee/Cases/2025/Maybe, abuse of power by admin Nguyentrongphu on ViWikipedia ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 07:20, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- @Sheminghui.WU Further talked with some other Vietnamese users offline, it looks like RFC might not be a good way for your matter, as there are several cases involved Australian-registered accounts being confirmed sockpuppets even though lack of enough contributions on vi.wiki, if you're still really sure you're not sockpuppet (despite the block rationale said so), probably you need helps by filing a U4C case. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 22:45, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Absurd! Thank you for your kindness, but I hope the administrator realizes that this is an unfounded and wrongful ban. I'm not that anxious. Anyway, I've been very busy in real life recently, and I've also put some of my energy into Wikinews affairs. I couldn't get involved in viwiki work when I wanted to, and now I can't do it for a while, so it doesn't matter. ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 12:55, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- @Sheminghui.WU I think you can see what that user replied to me: User_talk:Liuxinyu970226#Sheminghui.WU Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 16:29, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Ok fine, Mr.Love 2112 was also banned. But I was the one debating with him, I never thought the administrator thought I was his puppet... This is too strange ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 23:36, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- (apologize from my Deepl machine translated): @DHN and Mxn: Có bất kỳ kết quả CU nào cho thấy Sheminghui.WU là Rối của ai đó khác không? Tôi không thể thấy bất cứ điều gì liên quan bằng cách tìm kiếm [1]. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:19, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- @SCP-2000 & @Sheminghui.WU Rối means sockpuppet (see vi:Wikipedia:Tài khoản con rối), however I couldn't see anything regarding your relationships with any other users, only saw that you started this discussion thread: vi:Thảo_luận:Nguyễn_Phú_Trọng#Đánh_giá,_Nên_thêm:_Điện/thư_chia_buồn_của_Đảng_Cộng_sản_Trung_Quốc_và_Nhân_dân_Trung_Quốc, @Mr.Love 2112 and Eightcirclestheorem: Are there any connections between you both and Sheminghui.Wu which lead adminships consider a sock case? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:02, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I regret to inform you and other colleagues that it has been over a week since I sent the email, and as I anticipated, it has remained unanswered. ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 05:12, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I couldn't use my talk page either, and viwiki Ủy ban Trọng tài is unactive. But I will send a email even through... and wait for another few days. ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 01:38, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- And not to mention that none of the stewards speak Vietnamese.
- I'm also a victim, blocked for the same alleged reason.
- And yes, I can't appeal either, nor can I edit my talk page. Nhatquangdinh (talk) 05:32, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Don't worry bro. Every single user will be accused as sock eventually. Only his admin gangs survive. If you dig further to the reason why he was pushed out of English wikipedia site, you may get a hint. Snowladen (talk) 10:50, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Friends, thank you for your concern about this matter. Justice and fairness must be upheld by person. If we are treated unfairly without any fault, we should appeal to the end. ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 10:53, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- "If you dig further to the reason why he was pushed out of English wikipedia site, you may get a hint."
- Please elaborate. Nhatquangdinh (talk) 15:28, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Don't worry bro. Every single user will be accused as sock eventually. Only his admin gangs survive. If you dig further to the reason why he was pushed out of English wikipedia site, you may get a hint. Snowladen (talk) 10:50, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Please see vi:Trợ_giúp:Tôi_bị_cấm#Tôi_phải_làm_gì_bây_giờ?. I don't think the global community can intervene in the local community's decision, unless there's a failure of communication with the local community. Thanks. SCP-2000 11:46, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- To everyone: The problem has been solved, see U4C of the same name for details. ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 23:41, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]