Requests for comment/Global ban for Musée Annam

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
?

The following request for comments is closed. The request for comment has been resolved by enacting a global ban.


Opening statement


Hi, I'm NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh, a somewhat trusted user on viwiki and patroller elsewhere. I, among others, have been cleaning up this user's mess for a while and personally think he deserves a global ban for harassing, spamming fake files and tendentious editing. I'm not a good writer, so pardon my English.

Attribution for this RfC

Musée Annam's behaviour

Some other pseudonyms

Uploading fake files and spamming

This section needs expansion.

Tendentious editing

Being a Chauvinist, he edits largely for promoting Vietnam history and Vietnam in general, violating projects' NPOV policies. For example, among a handful of normal edits, this edit on Wikidata contains nothing but a sentence that says "Xóa đường lưỡi bò, bảo vệ Tổ Quốc" ("黄沙、長沙、的越南!反對中國侵略東海!" in the next one). On occasions, he even violate copyright law by pasting a lengthy text, as seen here. He is also known for abusing a very old way of writing that can be seen pretty clear via this instance: "Kênh truyền-thông đại-chúng Việt-Nam" For your information, this alias were written with three Sino-Vietnamese words in which syllables are connected by hyphens. This is a very old way of writing that cannot be found in any modern Vietnamese books and are generally no longer used, even by the elders; he chose this strange way just for promoting the so-called "magnanimous history of Vietnam". In some other edits, he added content that were originally made up by his own, as seen here. These include fake files he uploaded to Commons using multiple accounts listed below and their global usage.

Harassing

Lệ Xuân, Donald Trung and Băng Tỏa are, among others, three of his favourite harassing targets. In my opinion, they were targetted for two reasons:

  • They nominated his files for deletion, reverted or fixed some of his tendentious edits, or reported him to sysops (main reason);
  • They are of Vietnamese descendants, but live in another country (overseas Vietnamese);

Most of his edits were suppressed or (revision) deleted, but those with advance permissions can still see some of them at (most, if not all, are in Vietnamese, I suppose):

...and some other tens of small wikis.

Outing

He has been attempting to out Lệ Xuân for a while now. For example here (only stewards or vi admins can see it).

Feather-core-list.svg (Dynamic) List of sockpuppets


Accounts

These accounts were taken from c:Category:Sockpuppets of Đăng Đàn Cung and linked ones. For stewards: When closing this RfC as successful, please go to Vandal.

Extended content

...

In short, he was blocked at least 90 times on 12 wikis (commons, data, dawiki, dewiki, enwiki, idwiki, nlwiki, plwiki, svwiki, viwiki, viwikt, zhwiki) and locked globally 29 times in over 15 years, mostly for sockpuppetry, harassing/incivility, vandalism, spreading hoaxes and sometimes faking VTRS permissions, yet we see no sign of good editing (see #Behaviour above).

IPs

He is also suspected to use these IPs:

Extended content

...

On Dec 23 2021, there are 6 active range blocks that affects 2405:4802::/ IPs, and all are related to his behaviour or editing pattern:

Feather-core-check-square.svg Formalities


Criteria confirmation

  • The user demonstrates an ongoing pattern of cross-wiki abuse that is not merely vandalism or spam.
    Not vandalism:  Yes
    Nor spam:  Yes
  • The user has been carefully informed about appropriate participation in the projects and has had fair opportunity to rectify any problems.
    Warnings from admins:  Countless
    Time given to change: He got his first blocked on Mar 18 2007 for vandalising articles after warning(s). Two of his edits back then were replacing all content with defamation: "'''ĐỒ NGỐC ! KHÔNG Ở VIỆT NAM THÌ BIẾT GÌ ?'''" (463545) and "<math>'''BỌN NGỐC !'''</math>" (467055). Recently, on Dec 25 2021 (after nearly 15 years), he insults Lệ Xuân on cawiki (see here if deleted). It is clearly that he have not changed any better, only worse.
  • The user is indefinitely blocked or banned on two or more projects.
    See above (at least 90 indef blocks on 12 wikis)

Requirements

  • Required steps
    • Confirm that the user satisfies all criteria for global bans:  Confirmed
    • File a new request for comment on Meta:  Filed
    • Inform the user about the discussion on all wikis where they are active:  Done by 1234qwer1234qwer4
    • Inform the community on all wikis where the user has edited:  Done by 1234qwer1234qwer4
  • Nominator requirements:  All passed See my CentralAuth.
    • have a Wikimedia account
    • be registered for more than six months before making the request
    • have at least 500 edits globally (on all Wikimedia wikis)

Feather-core-users.svg Other users' statements

Please create new h3 sections below this line.

Feather-communication-voicemail.svg Response from Musée Annam


Feather-communication-message-square.svg Comments


Support

  • Support I support this ban. The problem has been persisting for too long; this is the only effective way. Lệ Xuân (her second account) has been his main target for 1-2 years now. He has been harassing her in dozens of wikis (maybe close to a hundred wikis) for 1-2 years. Most of his insults toward Lệ Xuân are sexual in nature. This sexual obsession needs to stop! He is making her want to quit Wikipedia. He is chasing away one of the most prolific editors in Wikipedia Vi. This reason alone would justify his ban. Nguyentrongphu (talk) 03:52, 27 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Additional info: I was once his victim last year. He attempted to harass me for months with his usual depravity in Vietnamese Wiktionary. His depravity words include incest among other unspeakable topics. I ignored it all, so he eventually gave up and found other targets (sadly). Nguyentrongphu (talk) 05:26, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support All of sexual harassments on Wikipedia are unforgivable. Ihsikuyr (talk) 09:20, 27 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support 我同意. --岭南江湖社团 (talk) 10:56, 27 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support There are enough evidences that blocked on two wikis aren't enough for protecting civility environment on every projects, so a global ban is very needed. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:44, 27 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh: Apologize for my early-bird notification on Commons, I didn't see that you already requested global MassMessage when I did so. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:46, 27 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thank you for your notification at c:COM:ANU. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 11:59, 27 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support I support the ban because C/Đăng Đàn Cung/Musée Annam is dangerous, not only in rubbish contents but also in thrashing behavior of C in viwiki/commonswiki/wikidata, attacking Lệ Xuân/Donald Trung (I was new to WP and not very aware of this problem, but he is a 10-year long-term abuse). Thingofme (talk) 13:31, 27 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support I support the ban! Oesjaar (talk) 14:26, 27 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support per Oesjaar.-- LATICAACID 🌀@PPM!🌀 14:28, 27 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support - The user’s abusive and disrupting behaviour takes time from us all. —Pugilist (talk) 14:41, 27 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support - Considering all the arguments presented above. All of us have a lot of tasks to do, and a vandal just seeking for attention by destroying our work is one of the worst things we can see. Best regards and Happy New Year to all the serious editors of Wikipedias! Joao Xavier (talk) 14:48, 27 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment Comment Can someone (preferably mother-tongue language translator) translates above texts into English? This would make cross-wiki checking a lot easier; but I wouldn't risk with GT translation in such important example. Thanks.--A09090091 (talk) 14:50, 27 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    A09090091 Most of it are too inappropriate to translate. For example, on this and this, he is saying she is a who** and accusing her of doing sexual acts with other men (including black men). He is also insulting her ancestors and outing her. There are also some really depravity materials such as necrophilia and treason. The level of depravity is quite shocking to be honest. This is just "one example" out of so many to count in 1-2 years. P/S: he is writing in a very informal way, so GG translation fails hard in translating whole meaning. However, key words still show up. Nguyentrongphu (talk) 01:29, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Nguyentrongphu: Thank you very much for your translation. Your P/S makes sense now, GT responded with trash that wasn't even inappropriate. However per your answer, I still stand that every personal attack or harrasment must be disciplinary punished. A09090091 (talk) 10:07, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support - Making sexual comments towards other users because of their gender is unforgivable. Golden (talk) 14:52, 27 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support Abusive, unacceptable and terrible behaviour. Nigos (talk c) 15:20, 27 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support IMHO it is only viable thing: Le Xuan targeted also on slwiki ([1]).--A09090091 (talk) 15:40, 27 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support I support the ban. I think it is necessary to ban the person. Mehediabedin (talk)
  • Support Support Such behavior cannot be tolerated. (As a sidenote, I'd also think that the username (French for "Museum of Vietnam", right?) would get this guy blocked in the English-language Wikipedia all by itself.) --Orange Mike (talk) 18:26, 27 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support --Ameisenigel (talk) 19:07, 27 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support --Holder (talk) 19:28, 27 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support -- "he was blocked at least 90 times on 12 wikis" -- Marcus Cyron (talk) 19:47, 27 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support * Pppery * it has begun 20:18, 27 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support. -- Jeff G. ツ (please ping or talk to me) 20:54, 27 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support Chaddy (talk) 21:00, 27 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support Absolutely unacceptable behaviour. Absolutely appropriate consequence. --Björn Hagemann (talk) 21:59, 27 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • sounds to be OK, Support Support -jkb- 23:11, 27 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support --Morten Haan (talk) 23:45, 27 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support Johnuniq (talk) 23:47, 27 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment Comment The main known user is Musée Annam, C and Đăng Đàn Cung. Why don't you choose another user (in viwiki it was known for the name "C", in commonswiki it was known for the name "Đăng Đàn Cung")? Thingofme (talk) 00:22, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment Comment I have no first-hand information on this case, nor the ability to verify the claims above. Assuming the claims about cross-wiki sexual harassment are correct, then I Support Support this ban. I also want to mention that User:NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh sent a message on fawiki (which is how I found my way here) and Musée_Annam doesn't even have an account on fawiki (that I know of). I wonder if the notifications went to unrelated projects, bordering canvassing. Huji (talk) 02:46, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Huji: I checked all of his 72 accounts manually, so if a wiki was listed, it means that he had made at least one contribution to that wiki, and in this case, using 南文會館 and Fataobstant. I know 2 edits is not much, but our policy explicitly stated that the RfC nominator must "[i]nform the community on all wikis where the user has edited". Thank you for your understanding. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 10:03, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Okay, fair enough. Huji (talk) 13:07, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Strong support Strong support unbelievably egregious harassment going far beyond the pale. Someone may also want to email WMF T&S given the extent of the abuse. This type of abuse has no place on Wikimedia. JavaHurricane 03:26, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support As someone who checks RC often, I have seen some of those attacks on de-WP, though I had to use Google Translate to understand the texts. This behaviour cannot be tolerated. -- O.Koslowski (talk) 05:23, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support Keo010122 (talk) 06:11, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Strong support Strong support As Vietnamese Bureaucrats, I've seen a lot of reports about this user and sometimes have to help report at Commons, especially about fake flags of Vietnam and neighbor countries in history (which usually he just "imagine"). He is a long-term abuse account and has a lot of accounts for cross wiki vadalism. His first account-"C", created in 2006-15 years ago! His "experience" can pass almost every sysop in Vietnamese Wikipedia. This user should be banned a long time ago, his fake flags go everywhere and destroy our history. A lot of people see and trust those fake flags. This abuse must be stopped!ThiênĐế98 (talk) 06:14, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support AlgoritX3 (talk) 06:24, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support I've done revision deletion of some of his edits in deWP, clear support for this global ban. --Johannnes89 (talk) 10:04, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support es lamentable e inaceptable el comportamiento de ese usuario. MiguelAlanCS (talk) 10:51, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support clear case groetjes --Neozoon (talk) 12:36, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support -- MdsShakil (talk) 13:29, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support. Per Nguyentrongphu, Ihsikuyr, and Golden. – Xena the Rebel Girl (talk♡) 13:32, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I'm not entirely sure about the name choice: Why "Musée Annam" of all the socks? That said, the behavior displayed in the currently-public links [2], [3], [4] and [5] is sufficient to justify a global ban for whoever sent the messages. ToBeFree (talk) 14:58, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Three of his most famous socks are C, Musée Annam and Đăng Đàn Cung. Đăng Đàn Cung is a Vietnamese word, which is hard for most people to type, while C may cause some ambiguity due to its shortness. Therefore, Musée Annam (a French word) seemed to be the best choice for me. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 15:14, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Ah, okay, thanks. ToBeFree (talk) 15:53, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    However, the sign in French is hard to type, and also C is easier to type Thingofme (talk) 01:37, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Strong support Strong support. C (with sockpuppets) harassed many people on the Vietnamese Wikipedia and other wikis, which I think should have consequences. Alfa-ketosav (talk) 15:26, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support I don't think I'd encountered this user until just now, but I'm horrified by what I've seen of their behavior. I would think the office would ban for this as well. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:21, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support What concerns me most is his constantly aggressive and vulgar language towards other users. Non-Vietnamese speakers may not be able to understand how severe these offenses are. But the truth is that they should never be accepted in any Wikimedia project. Greenknight dv (talk) 04:07, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support Easily to vote yes. --AltesHasenhaus (talk) 05:04, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment Comment I strictly oppose and reject the harassments displayed in the diff links, and if they really originate from the same person I support any efficient measures against that. But this person, if I understand correctly, uses various accounts and IP addresses, so how can this ban be enforced? How can admins at non-Vietnamese wikis verify if contributions originate from that banned person? --Dealerofsalvation (talk) 06:16, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    The IP address problem is a serious one. Accounts are easy to lock indefinitely, but IPs - you can't globally block indefinite IPs. IPs are usually blocked for 6 months-3 years, the most serious one can be 10+ years of IP block. On the other hand, rangeblocks can affect multiple people, so mostly they are blocked until it's thought that this address can't be assigned into the same user. Thingofme (talk) 07:07, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    That's the problem with many other LTAs too. Considering that most of his IPs start with 2405:4802: (a Hanoi IP range of which most edits are in viwiki, I believe), it is possible to block the range globally and then viwiki can whitelist it locally. Another sign is his targets: Lệ Xuân, Donald Trung, and Băng Tỏa. Should you ever find an IP that vandal their talk page, just go ahead and report them to admins. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 10:49, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    The way he talks and his depravity materials (also level of depravity) are unique. It's very easy to tell actually. Nguyentrongphu (talk) 01:43, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    OK, I've taken the above mentioned dewiki talk pages of the persons frequently targeted on my watchlist to do a little contribution of faster identifying, reverting and blocking the offender. If not desired, please tell me. And if you need another formal support, here it is. Support Support. --Dealerofsalvation (talk) 07:00, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Strong support Strong support Horrific long-term harassment on many wikis, not even limited to the many listed in the opening statement. --Ferien (talk) 14:51, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support --Lymantria (talk) 16:17, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support --Doc.Heintz (talk) 16:52, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:40, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support Evidence and behavior as clear as above, cannot be accepted.--Kateru Zakuro (talk) 11:49, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support This is unacceptable behavior. — Soul Train (talk) 12:00, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support C has used sockpuppets for a long time (nearly 15 years?). Useful changes mixed with harmful changes. Should ban him from wikipedia. Caruri (talk) 13:11, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support as per all of the above comment. Let's keep Wikimedia projects safe. Em-mustapha talk 13:21, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support Jianhui67 talkcontribs 16:03, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support --Daniuu (talk) 22:17, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support. Although I don't understand Vietnamese, user-provided translations and Google Translate demonstrate horrible harassment — over a long period of time — and I think this is enough for a global ban. Tol (talk | contribs) @ 20:36, 31 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support--Lanwi1(talk) 02:25, 1 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support Per nom. Sadko (talk) 12:09, 1 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support More than enough! -- Ra'ike (talk) 19:00, 1 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support This is without a doubt one of the worst cases of harassment and insulting that I have ever seen, especially with it spanning multiple wikis as well as targeting people based on their nationality over a significantly long period of time, and per my support comment regarding similar issues at the James Salsman global ban RfC, it is something that is totally inexcusable. I would also Support Support a referral of the user concerned to the Wikimedia Foundation Trust and Safety team if that route is being taken, as this case would probably also qualify for a global ban from the WMF. Hx7 (talk) 19:11, 1 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support Either the harassment or the sockpuppetry would be enough for the ban. I haven't reviewed the history of the harassment and will rely on the word of many editors, and there is also the sockpuppetry. Too much is too much. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:21, 2 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support C has been engaging in extreme harassment for years. Even if this ban is merely a formality I still think it is worthwhile to make others aware so they can be more quickly dealt with. Hemiauchenia (talk) 07:42, 2 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support --Coffins (talk) 19:32, 2 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support --BrunoBoehmler (talk) 23:22, 2 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support — Sexual harassment is a big no-no. — Aca (talk) 17:10, 3 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support --RacoonyRE Message meContributions 18:20, 4 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support --Homo ergaster (talk) 20:44, 4 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support --Hulged (talk) 04:51, 5 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support --Ghilt (talk) 14:42, 5 January 2022 (UTC) [6]Reply[reply]
  • Support Support --Itti (talk) 11:25, 7 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support Conduct just unacceptable. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs) 03:32, 8 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support --Eschenmoser (talk) 09:44, 8 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 13:34, 12 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support Anyone who so persistently violates the rules of our project and sexually harasses other fellow authors must be consequently excluded from further collaboration. There is no place for such behavior in WP. --Unendlicheweiten (talk) 01:46, 17 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support --Funkruf (talk) 21:42, 19 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Support --Bwbuz (talk) 12:54, 21 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose

  • Oppose Oppose I can not check anything. And this applies to almost all others as well. And yet the support section is automatically fills up. An oppose section wasn't even set up. Real harassment is almost always the other way round: the crowd against individual, against outsiders. In classic reversal, scapegoats are slaughtered for one's own behavior. In the German Wikipedia this can be studied using the example of the systematic hunt of the (originally) good-willed User:Avoided. The formal end of the story was also here, see my German comment. Who have hunted him? Right, the righteous, self-proclaimed humanists, best honoraded users, users, which have everytime the right opinion, who always know the right section... --Trollflöjtenαω 13:02, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I did not create any only-support section. There was only one h2 section for both support, oppose and/or neutral comments. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 13:56, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Some of the links are publicly viewable. ToBeFree (talk) 14:34, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I get that it's not great that a lot of users can't see a lot of the links. I looked at all of the ones I could access, most of them are this user screaming weird threats and personal attacks, in Vietnamese regardless of what project they were on. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:18, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Most of all, they are attack contents in Vietnamese that are impossible to translate in English. And so, because of the destructive and unpleasing behavior of C-related sockpuppets, most of the contents are revision-deleted or suppressed (oversight) because of inappropriate content. Thingofme (talk) 01:34, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Only impossible for Google to translate. Nguyentrongphu (talk) 04:30, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @User:NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh: Yes, i only saw it after i had wrote (offline) my post, should have changed it immediately, sorry.--Trollflöjtenαω 11:14, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Oppose. I am against the death penalty--1Goldberg2 (talk) 08:27, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @1Goldberg2 Don't you think, that By Next Insulting Nominators, Insulting the Foundation (e.g. here), and Insulting yourself as how you're Insulting other peoples, you may very likely to be WMF Global Banned™? You're already got a 4im warn by UCoC members, and your recent comments suggest at least me to refrain from wasting time to AGF you, better to strike your "death penalty"-like against. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 05:45, 31 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I am against GB for this user. What you don't like I can't catch. I see that some attempt on my talk page was reverted by its author--1Goldberg2 (talk) 05:54, 31 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Interested in day-dreaming? The reason why I undid my warn action is lack of proper warn template on meta for your matters, not "hey you don't have problems so I don't need to warn you". Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 05:57, 31 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @1Goldberg2 You forget that you are being requested for a global ban for your behaviour, and this RfC had about 85 support votes, only waiting you to be banned by the community. (Fortunately for you, it hasn't been closed yet) Thingofme (talk) 07:50, 31 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Does it mean that I have no right to vote right now? Or maybe I must vote only in full accordance of lefts-n-greens agenda? Let's Go Brandon... We re not welcome here any more.--1Goldberg2 (talk) 09:15, 31 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Yep, because by this way, your comments will only lead every trusted users to believe that you're meatpuppet Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 05:06, 4 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Thingofme: May I mind you, they are either blocked, locked or banned yet, and therefore retain the privileges to participate in any discussions. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 11:35, 31 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @„vote only in full accordance of lefts-n-greens agenda“: My oppose vote here and in your proceedings is expression of left thinking: rehabilitation instead of ever harsher punishments: human rights are inalienable (unveräußerlich), human dignity (w:Dignity#Germany) is equal to all, the same in quality and quantity, regardless of whether it`s the worst offender or the most unfortunate victim. Punishing someone is only permitted, if it`s necessary to protect greater values, maybe it is the case here, but I can not verifying it and the users will be banned in any case. – I hope you can understand my text, such things I can only in German think reasonably well.--Trollflöjtenαω 13:23, 1 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I understand text and agree with ideas you described.--1Goldberg2 (talk) 20:22, 1 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Fine, --Trollflöjtenαω 11:02, 2 January 2022 (UTC) PS: similar in GermanReply[reply]
    Fine even their behaviors match every WMF banned ones? As such, I decided to report to ca(_AT_)wikimedia.org for their behaviors. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 05:03, 4 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    1Goldberg2's now globally locked. SHB2000 (talk | contribs) 03:38, 8 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    So should we remove the vote, as the person is globally banned? Thingofme (talk) 11:20, 8 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thingofme: No, in my view. It was made when they were a normal user without any restriction. So, I would recommend to do nothing. Hulged (talk) 11:40, 8 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    ┌───────────────────────┘
    I agree with Hulged: this Oppose Oppose should be kept. We should never apply the global ban policy retrospectively. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 11:58, 8 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Oppose A Tet Offensive i will never support. Give me liberty or give me wikihate... --Jack User (talk) 23:53, 10 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Neutral

  • Neutral Neutral Musée Annam's Anti-fan club has many members. I'm just curious why we need another global ban for a member who "was blocked at least 90 times on 12 wikis and locked globally 29 times in over 15 years". Leemyongpak (talk) 06:06, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    To raise awareness among different communities, I believe. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 10:50, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Global ban, I think is to like formally address the block as being blocked by the community, so the stewards can globally lock immediately after checking or seeing the sights of sockpuppet. Also, global blocks can be used for ban editing for all the accounts/sockpuppets of the users. I think with the severity of the socks, I think global autoblocks should be used to combat vandalism and more easily controlled. Thingofme (talk) 11:22, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Because apparently, being blocked 90 times is not enough for him to stop. Nguyentrongphu (talk) 01:41, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Sure. But 40 Support votes vs 1 Oppose vote above is enough for an approval, so I won't change my Neutral vote. As User:Dealerofsalvation and the request opener comments above, I doubt that even a global ban is still not enough for him to stop either. Leemyongpak (talk) 02:18, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    The so-called C-style is very popular in speaking culture of some regions. I wish he would feel enough to stop bring it into writing culture here himself in the new year. Leemyongpak (talk) 02:45, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Neutral Neutral It is difficult for me to express any opinions on this rfc.--夏雪若 (talk) 05:23, 2 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Neutral Neutral --Bernd Bergmann (talk) 20:19, 3 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Neutral Neutral. The initiator of this discussion has widely canvassed many Wikimedia projects, including many projects where Musée Annam and the sockpuppets has never made any edits. I agree with Leemyongpak's concerns above. I'm concerned that this might spin out from its original scope of stopping harassment and become a cross-wiki witch hunt against a particular editorial point of view that the banned editor used to represent. Deryck C. 15:29, 6 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Deryck Chan: Can you please specify which project(s) I added to mailing list by mistake? NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 15:53, 6 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Cantonese Wikipedia, for example.[7] Deryck C. 16:03, 6 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Deryck Chan: Please see w:zh-yue:Special:Contribs/Cotonkin. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 17:02, 6 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    And there are 5 of them, not just one. These are the other four: FC12P, Grendill, 南文會館 and 安南風化. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 17:04, 6 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thanks. I've reviewed the edits. They have only made 1 edit each, all back in 2017. Some accounts' edits are blatant vandalism and others seem benign. Deryck C. 14:45, 7 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Der RfC nominator must "[i]nform the community on all wikis where the user has edited." Yes, one edit counts. It's not canvassing when the nominator follows the policy. It's not a witch hunt because the pov of his should not be allowed anywhere by anyone. Nguyentrongphu (talk) 21:50, 8 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    One edit counts because what they think they can "vandalise" in wikis. However, sometimes people that abuse a lot of accounts, and edited in a lot of wikis, we have to inform to a lot of times (116 wikis, 643 user talks) Thingofme (talk) 02:39, 9 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]