Jump to content

Requests for comment/Concerns Regarding Cross-Wiki Conduct and Tone by Administrator Bedivere

Add links
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

The following request for comments is closed. Not the scope of Meta-Wiki RfCs; this is the jurisdiction of the U4C. //shb (t • c) 14:09, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am a blocked user on Wikimedia Commons, having been blocked three times — the most recent being an indefinite block. I fully acknowledge the issues with my past behavior, especially involving conversations that were perceived as inappropriate or intrusive. I sincerely regret those mistakes and have since taken a break to reflect on them and work toward better behavior.

After that, I resumed contributing on other Wikimedia projects, focusing mostly on maintenance-oriented tasks such as suggesting vector file replacements on protected pages. These requests were always factual, transparent, and rooted in my desire to improve visual consistency across projects — not to disrupt or circumvent my Commons block.

Recently, however, a Commons administrator, User:Bedivere, has followed many of my cross-wiki contributions and publicly accused me of meatpuppetry, repeatedly warning that I may be globally blocked. These warnings concern me deeply, as:

  • I have not asked anyone to act disruptively or speak on my behalf.
  • My maintenance requests have been transparent, specific, and policy-aligned.
  • No local communities I engaged with flagged my actions as violations.
  • Several of my requests were well-received or completed in good faith.

Examples of warnings issued by Bedivere on various wikis include:

In one case, regarding gender identity on a Turkish article, I now realize my understanding may have been flawed. I fully accept correction. But rather than a collaborative discussion or explanation, the situation led to yet another public threat of a global block, which now makes me hesitant to participate in even basic tasks — for fear of further escalation.

I am not submitting this RfC to challenge my Commons block or retaliate against any administrator. I simply ask for community input on these broader issues:

  • Is it appropriate for a single administrator to issue public warnings across unrelated wikis, especially if the user in question is not breaking local policy?
  • What constitutes "meatpuppetry" in cross-wiki maintenance, and how can it be distinguished from transparent, good-faith collaboration?
  • How should the Wikimedia community support users who acknowledge past mistakes and are trying to contribute positively elsewhere?

I am open to feedback and willing to learn. I do not wish to cause trouble — only to contribute and grow. All I ask is for clarity, fairness, and a chance to move forward in a constructive way. Thank you for your time. OperationSakura6144 (talk) 09:42, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting speedy closure of this RFC per this comment in SRG. 〈興華街〉📅❓ 05:32, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, it shouldn't. I think there is an actual problem here, that Bedivere was (or could reasonably be believed to be) harassing OperationSakura6144, and that request shouldn't get dismissed out of hand because OperationSakura6144 decided to stop editing (in part due to that alleged harassment). * Pppery * it has begun 21:10, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The user was constantly harassing random users on Commons and other wikis. I kept an eye on them and shouted at them as they attempted to have other Wikipedia users edit Commons for them in an obvious attempt at meatpuppeeting. I don't think that is harassment. If anybody thinks it is harassment I apologize for it. Bedivere (talk) 20:08, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Bedivere @Pppery Will notify the VP tomorrow morning for this discussion. 〈興華街〉📅❓ 13:29, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is definitely nothing that requires a global RfC. Blocking and declining the unblock request was not okay. I would suggest to restore talk page access on Commons for User:OperationSakura6144 and give a second chance to make a unblock request that will then be decided by another Commons admin. GPSLeo (talk) 12:40, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't mind a talk page unblock but keep in mind that Operation was blocked after continuously harassing @ReneeWrites, same behaviour that showed in other wikis by harassing random users (see my report asking for a global lock). The user did not show respect for them and tried to insult admins' intelligence with their unacceptable request for unblock. It's been some time since then and it's up to you to eventually unblock Operation, but I wouldn't do that. Bedivere (talk) 18:04, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For context, this is what resulted in the initial block on Commons: The messages on my talk page, the message at the Village Pump (near the bottom of the page), the discussion at ANU.
I'm incredibly grateful for the admins who stepped in to deal with that situation, Jmabel for taking it to ANU and Bedivere for taking appropriate action. While the initial block was indefinite, it was possible to appeal - which OperationSakura6144 did several hours after being blocked. The appeal was denied, which resulted in talk page access being revoked as well (I assume so he wouldn't be able to ping people from his talk page). He was informed he could appeal again in three months, which seems entirely reasonable under the circumstances.
I had not kept up with him after this, but if he then went around on other projects to get people to edit files on Commons on his behalf, that's clearly not what's supposed to happen; it's a textbook case of block evasion (as he did not get in trouble for merely editing on other projects while blocked on Commons). What Bedivere was doing was keeping an eye on a user with problematic behaviour and found that he continued to exhibit problematic behaviour, as well as repeatedly warning him that what he was doing was wrong and could lead to the block extending to other projects as well. That's not harassment, that's responsible oversight, and exactly what's expected of someone in that role. ReneeWrites (talk) 19:09, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@GPSLeo: did you follow the interaction between Sakura and ReneeWrites? I'd have supported indef-blocking any user for what Sakura did there; I would oppose virtually any appeal of such a block and certainly any appeal within five years (and the time limit only because people change). Talk page access was blocked because even after having been told not to do anything at all that constituted further interaction with ReneeWrites his "appeal" linked her account half a dozen times. I would certainly not undo that block of talk page access. - Jmabel (talk) 18:25, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I also do not know what could be in the unblock request that would make me supporting an unblock, but a new decline decision would be needed to make the decision formally correct. GPSLeo (talk) 18:32, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Pppery I think the discussions are done and I request that this RfC should be speedily closed. I commented with the reason here. 〈興華街〉📅❓ 10:25, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is a ridiculous RFC and should be closed immediately. OperationSakura6144 has been engaging in harassment and other inappropriate actions across multiple wikis, and is now targeting Bedivere rather than taking responsibility for their actions. The removal of TPA on Commons was a perfect example: OperationSakura6144 was blocked for harassing ReneeWrites, then pinged them 4 times in the unblock request. That is wildly unacceptable and grounds for an immediate revocation of TPA. I would have done myself if Bedivere hadn't beat me to it. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:37, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Totally agree with everyone else. If anything the user should be globally blocked for sexual harassment. Whatever cross wiki actions Bedivere has taken is totally justified given their pattern of clearly bad behavior though. --Adamant1 (talk) 21:43, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Requests_for_comment/Concerns_Regarding_Cross-Wiki_Conduct_and_Tone_by_Administrator_Bedivere&oldid=28872125"