Requests for comment/Abuse on

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

The following request for comments is closed. Solved --WizardOfOz talk 18:51, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User name abuse by sysop on[edit]


It might have seemed a great idea to have one's user name reserved on a multitude of Wikimedia projects. Nevertheless, this has caused havoc on at which Wikipedia I had never contributed. Someone found it necessary to create my user discussion page there. Obviously, I do not understand that WP's language and it makes no sense to have my own discussion page. I had blanked out the apparent 'Welcome' box and left a note (of course in English) on the creator's own talk page:

Descusión usuario:SomeHuman

You created a user discussion page for a on this here "Biquipedia" non-existing user name, which happens to be mine on several other Wikipedias. Please delete, or at the contrary: also create the user page and put a link (behind a simple explaning text in your language that should specify that I hardly understand Spanish or its regional languages), to the corresponding user page and to the user talk page on the English language Wikipedia — en:User:SomeHuman en:User_talk:SomeHuman 01:15 25 set 2011 (UTC)

Another user, an:Usuario:Cembo123, found it necessary to undo the blanking of "my" user discussion page — thus ridiculously again "welcoming" me.

Instead of writing the very simple text in the WP's language with the link(s) that I showed, the creator of "my" user discussion page found it necessary to add a section on "my" user discussion page with a political statement about the nature of the 'aragonés' dialect, language or whatever it might be. (You might be aware of the phrase "A language is a dialect with an army and navy".) That creator had apparently understood my English but made the statement in this 'an' that I had declared not to understand.

The only solution for me, was to create a 'redirect' to my :en:User talk:SomeHuman, since I can not provide an explanation in the WP's 'an'.

The creator then re-inserted the political statement and added some more 'an' in which I spotted "creyata automaticament", apparently indicating that my user discussion page had been created automatically. In fact, it had been created by an:Usario:Manuel_Trujillo_Berges:

13:29, 22 September 2011 (diff | hist) N Descusión usuario:SomeHuman (Pachina creyada con '{{bienplegata}}')
in a series of such user discussion page creations at a rate of about 4 per minute.

I can't understand the statements properly, let alone answer these. I don't want comments on "my" talk page that I can not reply to, and I do not want my user name to be abusively represented by appearing insensitive to attempts to discuss: Other users can not assume that I never worked at that WP and I can't explain it to them: many might not understand English. Hence, I did the best I could and replaced everything on "my" discussion page with:

in which the red baulk actually attempts to take the remaining page height, to discourage a user to add something. At the bottom of the source text, I added the hidden comment:
<!-- NOTHING HERE !!! -->

But to no avail: underneath that, the aforementioned an:Usuario:Cembo123 again put the earlier deleted unintelligible comments and added some more.

Sorry, but this is antagonizingly stupid. I undid his latest edit with my capitalized edit summary "NO COMMENTS HERE! USE YOUR OWN TALK PAGE IF YOU LIKE."

The original creator then reverted my revert.

And I was blocked for a day.

There are three options:

  • My user page and my user discussion page on are utterly destroyed, though it would remain best not to allow creation of a user with my pseudonym.
  • My user discussion page becomes reinstated as I had last edited, without any further addition, and it becomes permanently edit-protected: It is unacceptable that my pseudonym can be addressed on a Wikimedia forum in a language I can not comprehend, in which I can not make a statement, and on which forum I can't even figure out how to ask for advice (e.g. 'Rfc' is not a term in 'aragonés').
  • A template is created on the, which politely makes an NPOV statement in 'aragonés' like:
Descusión usuario → This user does not usually or not ever work on this here Wikiproject, and may hardly or not at all understand Aragonés. If you wish to contact this user, please consult the user page on his/her main Wikiproject (linked) where you might find which language(s) are welcomed on the user's discussion page at that Wikiproject. (linked)

A call to such template can replace everything on my 'an' discussion page. It might become handy for many other users on most other projects. And it would no longer entice users to go and look for user discussion page changes by automated e-mails as had been the cause of my finding out its creation (and modifications). The template should be 'automatically' put on user discussion pages of all Wikiprojects with no (or only extremely few) edits by the user.

As it stands now, I would have to go along all projects and one-by-one find my 'preferences' (on pages in Chinese, Korean, Arab, ...) and figure out how to cancel sending an e-mail. It's simply impossible. And it would still appear as if I were a 'regular' user on each project, who does not at all attend to messages dropped on his talk page. This insults me.

Regardless the chosen option, all traces of that block have to disappear even for the eyes of sysops from all Wikimedia projects.

Kind regards,
SomeHuman 00:50, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Man... you should have simply ignored the whole deal. Who cares what people write to you in a language you don't understand? happens all the time. Just forget about it. Seb az86556 02:20, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
On the face of it, this does seem problematic. Blocking somebody for blanking their own user talk page seems ridiculous at best. PeterSymonds (talk) 07:28, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
True. But there's some over-reaction from both sides. "Insulted" because some nut might think you are unwilling to respond? Meh. So what? Let them think or cook up other theories.
If you want to get that template on all userpages, Pathoschild can run the bot for you; problem solved. I don't think making this a general feature for everybody will be welcome. Seb az86556 08:12, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This user has been welcomed by Biquipedia be recorded in the Aragon. It's a simple matter of education on our part. Who has requested to be erased your page, this has been done. But this user adds words derogatory language Wikipedia repeatedly and certainly behaves rude, so it was necessary to block a day. It must be remembered that he was not called to the Biquipedia, but he has entered by his own will, as is shown in the user registry: here. (Machine translation). --Manuel Trujillo Berges 09:00, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I can not be educated in a language I do not understand. There is nothing derogatory about "I hardly understand Spanish or its regional languages" on his talk page. And that was not even repeated. I certainly never put anything derogatory or otherwise questionable on my talk page. No request to erase "has been done", not then (while my own blanking and my deletes of lecturers' texts were undone), and not now. The rudeness was only in the admin's insisting on uninvited "education" that he already knew I can not understand, and his further behaviour. I became invited by the email that is caused by the admin's edit on the discussion page of 'my' account, which I had not created on that WP. Please, check the course of events. The de facto edit warring on "my" user discussion page, between that admin an:Usuario:Manuel Trujillo Berges and myself, being concluded solely by that same admin enforcing his version (as supported by non-admin an:Usuario:Cembo123 who might not understand English) and then blocking me, was a clear abuse of admin powers.
The insult might be caused by "some nut" as Seb az86556 calls the admin (or in this case by two 'nuts'), but it would be other readers who can not possibly guess that the 'nut(s)' had been talking to someone who neither contributed to the Wikiproject nor understands what these most decent, intelligent, and wise others plainly read. They can not guess why there is no reaction. That casts a shadow over my username, entirely uninvited — which is insulting. Insisting on this behaviour clearly against the wish of the user, and even blocking the user who tries to prevent it by an appropriate replacer message... problematic indeed. Note that in case an:Usuario:Cembo123 does not understand English, he is assumed to be a such decent, intelligent, and wise other, and the insult would be proven.
The template call needs to be auto-inserted on each Wikiproject at which the creation of a user discussion page is not caused by the user's first edit anywhere at the project (which already correctly auto-inserts a template call for a 'welcome' message): Apart from saving a lot of time, users may not know that a 'welcome' message that they can't even understand was placed (not everyone's preferences are set to receive an email), nor will they know about the more appropriate template's existence. For each Wikiproject the template text needs to be in the project's language, which needs the assistance by each project. The in my sample red links should point to the user's main Wikiproject (at which one sees a 'home' logo by 'Preferences'|'View global user info' in the Method column, but is perhaps not automatically retrievable by a template) while the template derives the user name from the user discussion page name (a technically very simple matter already applied in many templates). Pathoschild's bot assistance can only come at a much later stage, after the new templates having become (semi-)automatically inserted on newly created user discussion pages: on each Wikiproject, the bot might be able to search user discussion pages that have only a 'welcome' while the user has zero edits at the project, and then replace that 'welcome' template call by one for the new template. Note that the email a user (who opted for it) receives, already distincts between creation and modification of a user page. The creation email might provide one more link, to a help page on the user's main Wikiproject that explains e.g. the purpose of the new template (which may become the personal choice even to replace a 'welcome' caused by a simple corrective first edit by the user who does not intend to do more work there).
Meanwhile, the second option of my above Rfc needs to be applied. And the block has to be lifted, before it expires as if it had been admissible and would stay like that in the block log.
SomeHuman 10:34-12:33, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just as anote: there are much projects where blanking of the users talk is not alowed. So make a archive, and than just redirect your page where ever you want. And about the block: who cares if you don´t want to contribute there?!? --WizardOfOz talk 16:16, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
...and how would one know that blanking one's page is not allowed? Say, someone tells you in Mongolian that it's not allowed, would you know what the hell is going on?
@SomeHuman: intelligent people will be able to quickly find out how your block came about and will plainly see that it is a junk-block. It will actually reflect more on Manuel than on you. Seb az86556 16:37, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
@WizardOfOz: I do. It is my username. Readers/editors there may know me on other projects. It goes with the whole idea of a multi-project user account.
Blaming someone anywhere in any language of whatever one pleases, is not a right, in any country or on any Wikiproject. Blanking the user's talk page needs to be allowed unless it can be done through an Rfc, which is impossible if one does not know the language. Creating an archive in some exotic language... impossible, and misleading. It must be a right to blank (but not to selectively delete phrases) if one has not committed any (clearly disturbing) edits on the project. I only asked the creating admin to assist, and not in any way that could necessitate his lecturing me. An admin abusing his admin powers is much more serious than anything the admin (unjustly!) accuses me of. I get to keep the inadmissible block in a permanent log, he stays clean as a whistle. — That is not at all acceptable. I do assume good faith, I do not assume each and every user who detects a seemingly uncontested block, to go through a comprehensive investigation before (without my knowing) starting to make up his mind about me.
SomeHuman 16:44-16:54, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Come on just cool down, it´s a block of 24 hours. And if I´m honest, your comments in summary can also be seen as harsh. I would say that after your block expire, you should make a redirect there and just forget the whole thing. We are here on meta and this is not a kind of "great matter" it´s just a communication problem of a multilingual platform like our projects are. --WizardOfOz talk 17:10, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The so-called 'harsh' comments in summary came after consistent neglection of my very normal and polite summary comments and after my polite request at the admin's talk page. The summary (my only means) then needed to be formulated clearly (especially as a more polite phrasing in English might not have been understood, as my polite phrasings apparently had not been) and only my last revert's summary comment may appear 'harsh' but was not uncivil. If the block is allowed to simply 'expire' and I would be assumed to forget about it, I will no longer consider any Wikiproject to be a civil place, but instead the place to be for the most bullying administrators: much harsher on my discussion page, and then violating elementary rules on usage of admin powers.
SomeHuman 17:38-17:49, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just to explain you some things: not every Wikipedia is english wikipedia. As every project have his own community, they also have a culture of the speakers behind. Even if that was a welcoming message, it is a welcome to that project. If I don´t understand the language, and at least after the second revert I will ask why before I make the same edit again. If they don´t understand en, I would use a machine translator to ask. If the block is allowed to simply 'expire' and I would be assumed to forget about it, I will no longer consider any Wikiproject to be a civil place, but instead the place to be for the most bullying administrators. Looks like not assuming of good faith for me. Civility is different in different countries, somewhere thumb up will say "everything ok" but there also places where you will come in certain trubles if you show it. Once more, just coll down and forget the whole thing. This is not a matter to make such a scene of it. --WizardOfOz talk 17:56, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I assume elementary rules like not using WP admin powers to win an edit war, are cross-platform. Else, all non-abiding Wikiprojects to which users did not directly subscribe, must not remain linked for those users. Upon the first message arriving on my talk page, I had attempted to Google translate it: There is no translation from Aragonese, and choosing 'from Spanish' did not deliver anything understandable. The matter needs to be such a scene in case it is neglected while the admin's behaviour is nicely covered-up, or as long as "my" Aragonese user talk page remains unacceptable.
SomeHuman 17:38-18:11, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify something: this is meta. This is not the place for demands of what "must" be done on other projects. We can give you our points of view here, but that's about it. And again, that admin is a bit of a jackass, but you should get over it. You'll run into people like that all the time. Seb az86556 18:48, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So can we forget this now? -- talk 18:49, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I could, and perhaps should, go on... precisely because I "run into people like that all the time". Getting older is assumed to make one wiser but not necessarily more patient about all things. I had already noticed your attempt to solve the matter on the admin's discussion page, your archiving the disputed sections of 'my' Aragonese talk page, and restoring the version I preferred without leaving an undesired link to the archive. That's neat. Despite our different weighing of certain matters, it's really appreciated, WizardOfOz. The present situation is definitely much better than an hour ago, so... ;-)
SomeHuman 19:14, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I´m allways happy if i can help. So we can close this RfC as solved? --WizardOfOz talk 19:19, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Can you move the admin to have him lift the block by reason, e.g.: "Meta wiki: solución para todos los"? It still has not expired (nor 2 blocks that handle my dynamical IPs), and I prefer it being lifted as acceptance of our settlement. You may express my gratitude for a gentlemenly agreement with the admin. I won't be editing there today (and probably not quickly or perhaps ever thereafter), if my user talk page remains as you set it. Thanks again.
SomeHuman 19:41, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Probably i can, but if I´m honest i don´t want to. I would say let your talk page as it is now and the block expire, and the whole thing is done (you have your page as you want and he has his block for the day and everyone is happy). --WizardOfOz talk 19:56, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Tout va bien au Meta. Please, close this Rfc.
SomeHuman 16:52, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.