The following request for comments
is closed. The request was successfully resolved.
- Request for temp-sysop: 
- Request for removal1: 
- Request for removal2: 
I mentioned my opinion at here enough. See his RFA. He is mistrusted those many users. There are consensus, don't you know? --Ficell 14:07, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
- I confirm removal of sysop access for WonRyong. --Ficell 15:28, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Local administrator election (ko.Wikisource)
Removal of access vote, Local administrator election! --Albamhandae 13:03, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I'm HanDongSeong, an admin of ko.wikisource.
I got my admin status a couple of years ago, and couldn't participate actively for last one year due to some personal reasons. When I got back, I was informed that WonRyong got a temporary sysopship. I asked the deletion of his temporary sysopship since there is an admin who can actively participate now, but the answer from the stewards was "work together then." So I tried to do it, although I was worried about his long history of conflicts and blocks in ko.wikipedia: WonRyong once has been blocked for a week in ko.wikipedia due to his offense against other users, and blocked again due to his abusing of multiple accounts. Three of them were permanently blocked    and one of them was blocked for two weeks.  He was also charged with his constant copyright infringement and at least a year of block was suggested, which 17 users of ko.wikipedia supported. 
Anyways, I tried to cooperate, and we actually discussed about some issues like categorizing and worked together. However, I cast a dissenting vote in the poll about making his temporary sysopship permanent, since he kept his POV on making articles. For instance, Wikisource:컨센서스 made by him starts with an explicit POV, which could be translated as: "Decision should be made by consensus. [...] Actually there is no consensus, only poll exists. From prehistoric age to now, and to future, in every kind of society including communism or democracy, the principle and basis are polls."(모든 사회의 의사결정은 기본적으로 컨센서스에 의해 결정되는 것이 원칙입니다. [...] 실질적으로는, 컨센서스는 없으며, 투표만이 존재합니다. 역시, 원시시대 부터 지금까지, 미래에도, 공산주의건 민주주의건 어떤 공동체에서도, 그 원칙과 기본은 투표입니다.) Eight other users also cast dissenting votes.
Then WonRyong started a poll about deletion of my sysopship. According to him, I "didn't create any new article since September 2006" which deserves deletion of the sysopship. He also announced several new policies  which reads:
- No user without at least 10 valid creation of new article in main namespace can vote.
- Template:None (this is a template created by WonRyong) will be excluded.
- No edit such as minor edit, redirection, categorizing, and so on, will be counted.
- As contributors increase, the criterion would increase as well i.e. 50 new articles, 100 new articles, 150 new articles, and so on.
- Without no contribution, no one can interrupt the sysop installed by Wikimedia Foundation, for it is absolutely an attempt of project deactivation. It will be considered Vandalism.
- All objections can be made after 10 valid creation of new article in main namespace.
and started to use a template named "temporary policies" (see the template, and its Google Translation):
- This is a temporary policy of Korean Wikisource. This is written by temporary admin WonRyong, and all user must obey. Editing contents is forbidden. Objections or opinions should be made in Village pump.
for the record, these policies were established without any consent from any user.
Now I think I've described pretty much everything of the current situation in ko.wikisource. A user started a poll about deletion of WonRyong's temporary adminship  and I have no idea about how the result will be. I think this is something that meta would pay attention.
--HanDongSeong 19:59, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
It is simple case
- HanDongSeong became on 2006-09-23
- No active user from 2006-09-23 to today
- He do not any main article contributions from 2006-09-23 to today.
- For making a active site, WonRyong(=me) request temporary sysop status on 2008-05-14
- Steward Nick1915 approved it. period: from 2008-05-14 to 2008-10-14
- One active user, One active temporary sysop, WonRyong.
- WonRyong makes 100+ new main articles.
- WonRyong was maintenaning the site.
- HanDongSeong insist that he is active on 2008-05-14
- HanDongSeong start to attack and obstruct temporary sysop's efforts to active the site.
- WonRyong heard from a steward that inactive site is maintained by only temporary sysop. regualar sysop's status can be removed by consensus. If there is no active user, the most contributor's opinion is important. If anybody do not vote for 1 week, consensus is approved. regualar sysop's status will be removed by steward.
- But, I did not request to remove the HanDongSeong's sysop status. Becuase I think that his help is useful, effective.
- 2008-05-16, HanDongSeong request to remove my sysop status at meta. It is rejected.
- 2008-05-21, Ficell request to remove my sysop status at meta. It is rejected. Who is Ficell? He is also 0 contributor at ko.wikisource. He is sysop at ko.wikipedia.
- 2008-05-28, WonRyong request to remove HanDongSeong's sysop status at community. REASON: Obstruct temporary sysop's efforts to make a active site! He contribute 0 new main article from 2006-09-23 to today!
- 2008-05-29 HanDongSeong request to remove WonRyong's temporary sysop status at community.
- I didn't. s:ko:사용자:퇴프 did. (I supported his request, though) --HanDongSeong 07:35, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
- I will block HanDongSeong. or
- HanDongSeong will block me.
It is simple case. I think that HanDongSeong is attacking the site. He want to make inactive site.
Why he does not contribute any new main articles?
He is dong what? He is only attacking me, No.1 contributor and the temporary sysop.
I will block HanDongSeong at ko.wikisource.
Approve me, stewards.
It is apprent case. It is easy.
One people try to make active site.
And One people is attcaking and obstructing that trying. -- WonRyong 03:42, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
- Stewards can't approve or deny. Whatever you decide to do, it's your decission and you (and everybody else) are responsible for your own (their own) actions. It's not up to stewards to validate es:Drini 03:47, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Stewards can't approve or deny?
Then, Who can approve or deny?
Site is inactive. Nobody contribute a new main article.
I am only contribute new main articles now.
I can remove his sysop's status? no. Only steward can remove sysop's status.
Consensus? All voter is 0 contributor.s:ko:기여 I must approve that their vote is effective?
How to remove his sysop's status? I can? no. I can't.
Stewards must decide to remove one person's sysop status. I think.
Then, removed man will be blocked by remained sysop. -- WonRyong 04:10, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
- I don't understand the reason he keeps saying that I have no contribution at all, at the same time linking my contribution page (saying I have at least 200 contribution). Also I heard from stewards that contribution count doesn't mean anything about being an admin. Actually, there was a complaint about him generating too many blank pages. Quote: "Is this because you want to increase your contribution count?"  --HanDongSeong 07:58, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
History at ko.wikipedia
User:WonRyong/Defense -- WonRyong 04:27, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
- @this defense-site: please note, that it does not matter if someone has 100, 500, 1000 or 10000 contributions, everyone has 1 voice. Thanks, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 22:52, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Questions from MaxSem
WonRyong, could you clarify some points?
- Why did you unilaterarily set rules for RFAs?
- Some people commented that you threatened to block others who disagree with you.
MaxSem(Han shot first!) 11:48, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Today I have removed WonRyong's temporary sysop access, reason see this page.
Please, I would like to ask the ko.wikisource community not to exclude WonRyong, but to guide him to be a constructive part of the community, I think this could be done, best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 14:10, 31 May 2008 (UTC)