From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
< Stewards‎ | Confirm‎ | 2021

logs: rights, globalauth, gblblock, gblrights | translate: translation help, statement

  • Languages: ja, en-1
  • Personal info: Hello, Wikimedians, This is my third confirmation as a Wikimedia steward. Thanks for confirmation in last year. The last year is hard to me and that is might be every peoples. yeah, COVID-19 situation. That situation caused me a frustrated to some real life and internet communication. For this, I took my stupid judgement with home wiki local community. I had dispute with some home wiki users for my home wiki sysop position and Wikimedia global Steward position. That dispute summary is below:
    1. I had write a "resignation request" to the home wiki sysop as a one of a local community member as per Stewards policy, ToU and some related policies, guidelines in personally.
    2. I opened RfC for mine.
    3. Some part of a community member said "that is abuse of Steward position. That is (Steward) power harassment". e.g. w:ja:Special:Diff/77088277 (this comment is already withdwawn); Also some one said "resignation request should be passed community consensus before personally message".
    4. I can not agree these comments without pointing which policy or guidelines based. Then I report that comments to T&S team due to I think these comments are violate of ToU's declined item "harassment" as not comply with Stewards policy#Corollary as they are still ordinary editors and any other position(s) they hold, are entitled to freely voice their opinions, state their view and be heard by the community, just as any other user may..
    5. I disclosed to I had report to T&S team to a commented user.
    6. A some one said above item is "Intimidation for local community".
    7. Then I got 6 months blocking at the Japanese Wikipedia as per local community RfB.
    8. Unfortunately, some user said "Should be withdrawn your T&S reports if you want to stay this community" (summarised).
    9. I got some other clearly harassment at onwiki and/or off wikis. e.g. Requests for comment/Steward rights abuse and threats by User:Rxy on the Japanese Wikipedia
    10. I got answer from WMF T&S team, And this case "Should be handled by local community and meta community." ; I agree with this.
    Yeah, Disclose of a reporting to T&S may gives someone to scary, and I'm lack of that consideration. I'm regretting my actions. I hope still work together with Good-faith Wikimedians for Wikimedia Movement. if I confirmed from the Wikimedia community, I want to continue steward and/or MediaWiki development. Thanks,--rxy (talk) 14:09, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • ভাষা:
  • ব্যক্তিগত তথ্যাদি: translation needed
  • Sprachen:
  • Informationen zur Person: translation needed
  • Idiomas:
  • Información personal: translation needed
  • Nyelvek:
  • Személyes információk: translation needed
  • Lingue:
  • Informazioni personali: translation needed
  • Taalvaardigheid:
  • Persoonlijke informatie: translation needed
  • Языки:
  • Личная информация: translation needed

Comments about Rxy[edit]

  • Remove Remove Abuse of steward position. Should be remove. He was blocked on the home wiki project, JAWP for six months. Not only does he put the blame on JAWP's community, but he does not reflect on what he has done, per his statement.--Infinite0694 (Talk) 14:00, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove We need a better explanation for the long-term block on jawiki, your homewiki, that takes ownership of the problem. What was the accusation (especially for non-ja speakers)? Why did you do what you did? What will you do better in the future? From reading your statement (and I admittedly didn't look at the links, which I am sure 90% of people won't either) it looks like at best you were not careful with how you were perceived as a steward, and at worst you really did intimidate people at your homewiki with your status. Also no explanation as to what the dispute was about. Rschen7754 14:04, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • As explained in the statement, I just did "resignation request of a sysop at the Japanese Wikipedia" as a Japanese Community member in personally. After that, the community member said "That is abuse of steward potision". Why Steward(s) can not describe own opinion in personally when local community tries override Stewards_policy#Corollary? Absolutely, I declare to I'm have no abusing "steward position" (steward abilities). Which rights have a local community overrides Global policy (except global policy allowed that)? I never know. Could you please submit an evidences? Please note to the Japanese Wikipedia Community does violate of CheckUser Global policy in the past case: w:ja:Wikipedia:チェックユーザー依頼/MaximusM4氏のRfA関連#Remarks from the ombudsman commission.--rxy (talk) 14:37, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • I don't understand. Why did you ask for a resignation? Because you don't like their opinion? Because they violated policy? There is a time and place for asking for a resignation, but if the response from the community isn't "thank you" but "how dare you" that is not a good sign. --Rschen7754 01:50, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is not "Demanding resignation of user:ぱたごん". after that rxy tried to intimidate and silence comments for rxy from the Japanese community.(I'm not good at English.I'll explain in Japanese.)
問題はぱたごんへの辞任要求ではありません。問題は,その後,rxyさんへのコメントをT&Sチームという日本語コミュニティにはよくわからないものを持ち出して黙らせようとしたことです。 --ぱたごん (talk) 12:05, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
#jawp ウィキペディア日本語版のコミュニティにはもはや WMF の基本理念や利用規約に従う気はないらしいので、利用規約違反の疑いがあるものには逐一 T&S チームに通報していきます。 — @rxyさん 15:58, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
Since the Japanese Wikipedia community no longer seems to be willing to follow the basic principles and terms of service of the WMF, we will report every single suspected violation of the terms of service to the T&S team in order.


— 青子守歌さん 13:17, 26 May (UTC)
It is somewhat possible that he is fed up with the nature and character of the jawiki community, which is (perceived to be) different from the global and other wikis, and is ready to antagonize the whole community.

Deliberately using greater understanding of the processes to further your own agenda is actively discouraged.

Making personal battles out of Wikipedia discussions goes directly against our policies and goals.

--市井の人 (talk) 12:22, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Remove Remove Stewardship is not for towering over other editors with the power you preceive yourself as having. Stewards should be answerable to the community. Naleksuh (talk) 14:38, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove, with regret. If rxy was a new candidate, and put themselves in SE, I probably would've opposed. No permissions on his home wiki, recent community-block, ... Also, the only reason why they would be able to put them into SE is that they have sysop at testwiki. I can't ignore this. Best, --Martin Urbanec (talk) 14:41, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove per above. --IWI (talk) 14:46, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral Neutral I really respect Rxy as a person, but the recent issues gave me pause. I think these issues need to be addressed before I can support again. Jianhui67 talkcontribs 14:53, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove per a number of the above --Herby talk thyme 14:56, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep Looking at multiple points of view with my limited abilities, that he was blocked from homewiki clearly needs to be considered in this confirmation, but I am not sure that this is an abuse of steward status or not. As far as I understand, I think the central point of the problem was what he recommended to an admin to resign and what he said he reported to T&S. My personal opinion is that he was at least free of abuse in global activities, and given that he resigned himself on homewiki when something went wrong, I can trust him until what happened on the homewiki is clearly revealed. I can change my opinion if it becomes obvious, but it's not yet clear to me. --Sotiale (talk) 15:02, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove ja:Wikipedia:管理者への立候補/rxy/20200416 As it stands, it's more than a flag of local disapproval. It is very unreasonable to think that the all-powerful full authority will be unconditionally extended to us. --市井の人 (talk) 15:05, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove - I have to disagree with Sotiale's (provisional) reasoning. Even if their community actions didn't indicate a flaw with their global actions, it would indicate a lack of sufficiently strong local support and general status. I don't feel testwiki sysop status should qualify for SE, and so on that ground alone I'm reticent to support. Now a great explanation might show that ja-wiki was acting very oddly or exerting local pressure to demand unacceptable global actions, but unless that is demonstrated I oppose. Nosebagbear (talk) 15:07, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral Neutral -- Wagino 20100516 (talk) 15:12, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove User:rxy,s home wiki is Japanese wikipedia. Stewards should not like to use his/her Permissions on the home wikis. rxy tried to use his connections with Metawiki to turn the conflict in homewiki to his advantage. rxy used his/her connection to Meta-Wiki to threaten the homewiki. As a result, rxy has been blocked on his home wiki.--ぱたごん (talk) 15:35, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep In condition that rxy should not act as a stward on jawp; in other words I still believe rxy could contribute much as a stward outside jawp. There was very unfortunate discommunication betweeen rxy and some of jawp people especially about the meaning of "report to T&S": some poeple were scared by the word "report to T&S" (which sounds very frightening indeed!), while rxy looked really suppressed or harassed by others. I, myself, thought rxy was too naive and out of oneself then (if you cannot keep yourself tough and shrewd, you should have wiki-break!). In RFB of rxy about 40% voted "long-term block", more than 30% "short-term or middle-term block" (probably for cooling down), and more than 20% "oppose", which resulted "six months".--miya (talk) 15:51, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove I agree with the above. --ToprakM 16:05, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove He / she performed an act of flickering steward authority and threatening conflicting users at JAWP. The person may deny it, but it is an act that cannot be helped even if it is interpreted as such.
This caused him / she to lose confidence as a local administrator at JAWP and was blocked by RfB in the community for 6 months, but there was no comment such as an apology to the parties after the block period ended. .. For this reason, I disagree with continuing to grant steward privileges to him / her.
As a Japanese speaker, I would like to avoid the absence of a Japanese speaker steward, but that is another matter.--Daraku K. (talk) 16:39, 5 February 2021 (UTC)(I withdrew part of my remarks.--Daraku K. (talk) 09:26, 6 February 2021 (UTC))[reply]
  • Could you please submit an evidences? if you have no evidences, that is personal attacking. I did not "flickering steward authority" in any cases. I guess such as "when you does not resignation, I'll remove your flags" is clearly intimidation. That example or similar case SHALL be removed stewardship. However, I didn't these or similar things.--rxy (talk) 16:58, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • You made such a statement to a specific opponent in an administrator confidence vote (ja:special:diff/77233887). You later apologized for this at your own RfC, but no matter how tired you may be, such a statement can be interpreted as "flickering steward authority."
Sure, my wording above may have been wrong, but unfortunately it has given the impression that it can't be helped in the JAWP community. --Daraku K. (talk) 17:32, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • rxyさんはまた、ご自身のRfAにてこうもおっしゃいました。
  • 「無意識に自分の利益のために」ご自分がされたら、あるいは誰でもされたら嫌なことをしてしまう。要するに誰にも止められない宣言をされてしまっては十分脅かされました。--市井の人 (talk) 23:31, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
However, less than a few months after that, in May 2020, Marine-Blue was notified to T & S of a similar event.
I apologized to me for the time being, but when I saw the exchange with Marine-Blue, I thought that it was just a form. It made me wonder if the report to T & S was so light.
It's been a long time, but from the above, I can only think that I'm trying to use Steward's authority for my own maintenance, not for the right thing. I do not endorse Rxy as an administrator, let alone a steward.--ミラー・ハイト (talk) 03:07, 6 February 2021 (UTC)typo.--ミラー・ハイト (talk) 05:05, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove sadly. JavaHurricane 03:36, 6 February 2021 (UTC) Reconsidering, Keep Keep weakly. The block on jawiki is extremely serious, but the work done against LTAs like ISECHIKA and other stewardry also needs consideration. No abuse of steward rights has been shown to have occurred, and that brings my concerns down a bit regarding Rxy's use of the rights. Rxy has been a very good steward, the block aside, and I'm willing to give Rxy another chance. JavaHurricane 03:04, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove. Home wiki block is a major red flag. — pythoncoder  (talk | contribs) 03:37, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep per Sotiale. Although the outcome is obvious at this point. Meiræ 05:11, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep The block in homewiki is certainly not a good point. However, I don't think this is a reason for removal. I wish rxy a long and successful career as a steward. KantoDetectiveBot (talk) 05:33, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove I'm not really sure what to make of the controversy, I initially thought maybe they should have stood for full election again to see if they still had the community's trust, but they're not eligible to do so. So remove, but thank you for all of your past work. Legoktm (talk) 06:30, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep --Novak Watchmen (talk) 07:15, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral Neutral In global, I think there is no isse with rxy's activities as a 2020 steward. In particular, specify jobs that other stewards cannot do, such as automatic locking of Long-term abuse. Stewards do not exercise their authority on their home wiki. In other words, his activity as a steward should be evaluated outside of the home wiki. However, given the "trust" from the community, I can't say "keep". --mirinano (talk) 10:03, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep Sotialeさんのご意見が最も状況を的確に捉えていらっしゃるものと考えます。これまでのrxyさんの対荒らし対処の実績も考慮すると、引き続きスチュワードを務めていただくのが好ましいと考えます。Infinite0694さんのおっしゃるようなスチュワードの地位を濫用した事実はないものと思料します。--Ohgi (talk) 10:08, 6 February 2021 (UTC) 以下のご指摘に基づき、最初の1文を最後に移動。--Ohgi (talk) 05:36, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ohgiさん(別名: 篠田陽司さん)は、rxyさんが始められたwikiサイトの二人きりの最上位スタッフ・共同運営者、いわゆるお仲間ですよね。--市井の人 (talk) 10:56, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      Translation - Ohgi's vote: I do not think what Infinite0694 said about Rxy misusing his steward position is correct. I consider Sotiale's interpretation of the situation to be the most accurate. After considering Rxy's track record of anti-vandalism efforts, I think it is desirable for Rxy to continue serving as a steward.
      市井の人's comment: Ohgi and Rxy are operators of the duo highest ranking wiki site which Rxy started. In other words, they are partners. Jianhui67 talkcontribs 12:01, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • 問題なのはT&Sへの通報ではなく、それをわざわざ人前で告知することです。この点についてrxyさんは「本件においてコミュニティの皆様、およびミラー・ハイトさんさんに、多大なるご迷惑と恐怖心、不信感、精神的圧力、時間的損失、不快感を与えてしまったこと、深くお詫び申し上げます。」との理解を示されています。また、rxyさんはミラー・ハイトさんに対し「現時点で私はスチュワード権限をもっており、」などを誇示した事実がありました。それでも「(rxyさんが)スチュワードの地位を濫用した事実はない」と考える利用者がおられるのですね。その是非はここでの結果として現れるのではないでしょうか。--市井の人 (talk) 00:15, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • なお、OhgiさんはスチュワードのSotialeさんを引き合いに出していますが、Sotialeさんのご見解は「(rxyさんが)スチュワードの地位を濫用した事実はない」ではなく「見つけられなかった」以上でも以下でもないはずです。上記で示した差分をご確認いただき、再評価を望みます。--市井の人 (talk) 00:36, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • 当方も今一度確認しましたが、Sotiale氏の原文を要約すれば「当人(立候補者)がホームウィキ(=日本語版Wikipedia,以下JAWP)でブロックされた事は明確に考慮が必要ながら、これがスチュワードステータスの濫用かは確認出来ません(=見つけられません)でした。少なくともグローバル活動における濫用は確認出来なかった。JAWPにおける行為が明確になるまで立候補者を信頼出来るが、JAWPでの行為が明確であれば票の変更の可能性がある。」と言う内容。要は「グローバルでは問題は起こってないが、JAWPにおいて問題が起こっている。しかしその問題行為(T&Sチームの件)は明確には確認出来なかった」と言う事で、末尾に「but it's not yet clear to me.(=しかし当方では(JAWPでの行為が)ハッキリしていない).」とあります。しかし、Ohgi氏の発言は、市井の人さんの仰る通りSotiale氏の発言を引用し、意図的ではないにしろミスリードによりSotiale氏が「地位を濫用した事実はない(事を確認した)」事を追認した」と言う体になってしまいます。Sotiale氏は「No fact of abuse status(=地位濫用の事実なし)」と言った濫用の事実が無かった事を断定する類の事は一言も仰っていません。よってOhgi氏の発言は非常に不適切と存じますし、善意に取って参考での引用の意図ならば「ブロックされた事実はあるが明確に濫用は見つけられなかった旨ではあるが~」なり付け加えるべきです。--Tece Onir (talk) 10:16, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        • 「いわゆるお仲間ですよね。」は、特にここの投票権とかかわるものではないので、個人攻撃(人身攻撃論法)だと思いました。その他の点については、私の申し上げていないことを論じておられますが、ご意見はわかりました。--Ohgi (talk) 12:34, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
          • 「特にここの投票権とかかわるものではない」=「個人攻撃(人身攻撃論法)」というのがよくわかりません。「お仲間」を「ステークホルダー (stakeholder)」と言い換えても無根拠ではなく事実ではありませんか。--市井の人 (talk) 12:59, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
            • 本来の投票に係る事ではないので苦言としてこれだけに留めておきます。Ohgi氏においては「私の申し上げていないことを論じておられますが」と仰っておりますが、ニュアンス的に意図しなくとも、特段引用相手が英語である事を用いて、意味合いが違う事をあたかも事実のように引用している時点で実際そう取られてもおかしくない行為(少なくとも私にはそう感じられますし、善意に取っても当方指摘のように説明不足でしょう)であると感じられます。それを「ご意見は解かった」で淡白に済ませるのは、違う意図で引用されたSotiale氏に対しても、また投票するに当たって参考になさる方に対しても極めて礼を失する行為かと存じます(撤回修正するなりした方が宜しいかと思いますが)。以上場を汚すようですが失礼しました。--Tece Onir (talk) 18:41, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
              • Ohgiさんには前段に「Infinite0694さんの反対理由は事実誤認」というご自分の主観があります。これは記事を書く上で出典が示されていないのを独自研究とするのと似ています。そうなりますと善意に取ればInfinite0694さんおよび同様の反対理由がある利用者に「どのあたりがそうなの?」と聞くことが出来るでしょう(詳細にまで話を蒸返すのを避けていたのならお互い様です)。しかし中段でそこを省いてSotialeさんの賛成理由に担保させてしまいました。意図としては「自分の考えに最も近い」のがあったのはわかりますが(であれば言葉足らず)、傍から見たら齟齬がある以上こういうのは文脈として付会と言います。一方で後段に来るOhgiさんの賛成理由ではrxyさんのこれまでの実績というSotialeさんの賛成理由とは直接の関係はない点を述べているに過ぎません。--市井の人 (talk) 20:50, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
            • 誤解を招きやすいことはわかりましたので、文の順番を入れ替えます。当然ながら、私の意見の内容とSotialeの意見の内容は異なるものですし、Sotialeがスチュワードかどうかもこの場ではあまり関係ありません。私の意見そのものや意見を述べることが可能かどうかとは無関係な私の個人的状況を指摘することによって、私の意見の妥当性に疑念を呈する論理的な誤りを人格攻撃論法といいます。ステークホルダーとのご指摘については、ウィキメディアの利用者全てがある意味ステークホルダーなのですが、私はrxyのウィキメディアのウェブサイトにおける振る舞いやスチュワード権限の有無について特別な利害関係はないです。--Ohgi (talk) 05:36, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
              • なぜステークホルダーなのかと言いますと、おっしゃるとおり広義のニュアンスがあると思ったからです。これには理由がありましてOhgiさんは以前ローカルでja:Wikipedia:削除依頼/エンペディア180813にコメントを残された際に、ja:WP:AUTOの立場をお認めになりました。このガイドラインはen:WP:AUTOBIOではほぼ本人を対象としているのに対し、jaでは拡大してまさにステークホルダーを対象としています(こういったことを統括するスチュワードはさぞかし苦労するのだろうと思いますが)。で、私は事実に着目しただけでそれ以上は何も言っていません。私がOhgiさんのコメントの妥当性について結論を出そうとしているのは、それとは視点が異なります(ましてや差分等を示して説明しています)から詭弁でないことだけは確かです。また、人身攻撃≒対人論証とするにもたとえば「OhgiさんはWikipedia日本語版の管理者です」ということをここで自己紹介されても参考になるのと同じように、第三者がそれを行ったまでで、そこをどのように参考にするかは読んだ人にもよりますから、絶対的な言ってもいないことを言ったような受け止め方は理解できませんね。--市井の人 (talk) 07:55, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • No clue about the jawiki dispute yet, but I would like to Thank you very much!Thank you very much! for handling LTAs and other CVN stuff these years. --WhitePhosphorus (talk) 10:42, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove Auto-GL and auto-blocking aren't actions that only Rxy can do. --Semi-Brace (talk) 11:11, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove --Johannnes89 (talk) 11:17, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove RemoveAmmarpad (talk) 14:29, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove * Pppery * it has begun 15:26, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep Rxy is one of most active stewards. Rxy is especially helpful in combat with LTAs on his languages. I agree to Sotiale, I also agree with the positive parts of Camouflaged Mirage's comments. I didn't understand very well the situation in local community. I tried to translate the case that caused the block with Google Translate, but I think it translated a little bad. My opinion like this for now. --Uncitoyentalk 15:38, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove --Mirer (talk) 03:33, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove --Geonuch (talk) 10:12, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral Neutral.--MCC214#ex umbra in solem 10:32, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep --cyrfaw (talk) 10:57, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove, being blocked for 6 months on a home wiki is a red flag. Yes, he is very helpful on LTAs but this is a serious problem — NickK (talk) 13:29, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove, per comments above. --Daniuu (talk) 17:18, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove, same as above. Poor attitude for a stewards. --LaMagiaaa (talk) 05:43, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove, As mentioned above, he abused Stewards rights, including threatening other users by "reporting to the T & S team." As a result, it was removed from JAWP Sysop and blocked for 6 months. So I don't think he can be trusted as a stewards.--Tece Onir (talk) 02:47, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove 一般利用者を萎縮させ恐怖を与える存在 / Steward who atrophy and scare users--フリー百科事典利用者 (talk) 06:05, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove because of T&S-related threats to users. MBH (talk) 12:09, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep I’m a sysop on JAWP. I do appreciate Rxy’s contributions in counter vandalism. In recent 24 hours, JAWP met 87 suspected ja:LTA:ISECHIKA’s new accounts. 14 of them have their home project other than JAWP. 3 of them created abusive global user pages on meta. LTA:ISECHIKA is beyond control of local projects. We need meta’s help; and Rxy serves it. Japanese projects owe Rxy much. Steward is neither the title of noble nor the rank of users. It is a nice cat while it catches mice.--Kurihaya (talk) 15:05, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Therefore I propose that Rxy may publish the code that is used to fight against ISECHIKA (the sensitive part may be published to checkuserwiki so that other stewards and jawiki CUs may know). On the other hand most locked ISECHIKA socks have no edits.--GZWDer (talk) 16:42, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • Doesn't make sense, why did you think the code should be open? Patterns are much meaningful. Also, the jawp community gave Rxy red flag in his RfB; the tasks for those LTAs will be done other stewards like current jawp admins do. We do not have to depend him action.--Semi-Brace (talk) 17:51, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral Neutral Toad62 (talk) 16:47, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral Neutral --Minorax (talk) 09:16, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove Because made a statement that could be read as an abuse of authority, "reporting to the T & S team.", in response to a small complaint, and because he was blocked from posting for 6 months on his home wiki.--Koyomiya(コヨミヤ) (talk) 09:16, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral Neutral This is just very sad to see, overall. Need to read into this more, it isn't clear how all this started. Leaderboard (talk) 21:04, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep Despite everything I still have a lot of faith in him as a steward --Wim b 21:06, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 22:47, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep. I always considered the block on his homewiki to be worrying and tried to understand it (at the time but also now in this confirmation process). In my view, and being succinct, informing the submission of a complaint to the Trust and Safety team about an issue, regardless of the user's rights, cannot be considered an "abuse of authority" - I also don't find it "intimidating" (although that would depend on how it was done and I'm not a Japanese speaker). In the real life this is called "regular exercise of law". I also don't see it as an abuse to ask someone to resign - it would have been abusive if he himself removed the tools of someone from the jawiki who had not resigned. Besides that, as Uncitoyen said, Rxy is one of the most active stewards and I think that his removal will be a loss to the global community. And, also, the opposition of several members of the jawiki - many without any argument, sadly - cannot be considered a valid reason in itself since "strong local support" is not an approval / confirmation requirement and this process is guided by consensus. Érico (talk) 02:41, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep Before I explain my supporting rationale, I would like to state that I have struck my neutral vote above. I have followed this discussion for a few days, and I understand where the jawiki users are coming from. What we need to consider here is a huge issue as it concerns Japanese Wikipedia and the entire Wikimedia community. It seems that many jawiki users perceived Rxy's comments here as intimidation (恫喝) of the community and abuse (濫用) of his steward status. He has since apologised for that comment. However, what remains as a fact is that many jawiki users were offended by that comment. That was why Rxy's adminship on jawiki was removed and he was blocked for 6 months. I agree with the users above that the block is indeed serious, and it cannot be overlooked. But I feel that there must be a misunderstanding between Rxy and the jawiki community. Having no trust from the local community is a big issue and hence we are discussing if we should keep Rxy as a steward. If we were to keep him as a steward, the misunderstanding between Rxy and the jawiki community may become deeper. One feasible solution which Miya mentioned, is that Rxy should not act as a steward in jawiki. But I'm not sure if that is possible, as stewardship is global. I'm sure many users agree with me that Rxy has contributed extensively as a steward outside jawiki. Without Rxy's contributions, the ISECHIKA sock situation might become out of control. I agree with Camouflaged Mirage on this part. Removal of Rxy's stewardship would be a huge loss on the Wikimedia community as only Rxy has the most experience in this area. I acknowledge Rxy's hard work and I would like to commend him for that. In any event Rxy's stewardship is removed, we need another Japanese user to fill up this important gap. I still trust Rxy as a steward, that is why I'm voting keep here. Jianhui67 talkcontribs 04:26, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep Taivo (talk) 09:35, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep From what I have seen, the tension between rxy and the jawiki community seems to have arisen from misunderstanding of what "[reporting] to T&S" implies. While distrust from their local community is not favourable for rxy, their efforts against LTAs should be appreciated. H78c67c (talk) 18:29, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep --伊佐坂安物 (talk) 00:11, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep 結果はおそらく見えていますが・・・
  • 2020年の件はスチュワードとしての問題ではなく、一利用者としての問題と私は考えます。もちろん一利用者として問題を起こした人間を信頼できないというのはもっともな考え方とは思いますが、私はローカルで問題が起こればローカルでブロックすることができる以上、ISECHIKAの自動ロックなどRxyさんがスチュワード権限を持つメリットはデメリットを上回ると判断しました。--Q8j (talk/CA) 01:02, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Translation: The outcome can probably be seen now... but I don't think the problem of 2020's incident lies with Rxy's stewardship status. It lies with Rxy as an individual user. There are certainly people who consider users who cause problems untrustworthy. However, based on my judgement, there are more merits than demerits if Rxy maintains his stewardship status to make automatic locks on ISECHIKA's socks, as he can be blocked locally when problems arise. Jianhui67 talkcontribs 09:12, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • 既に上で『rxyさんはミラー・ハイトさんに対し「現時点で私はスチュワード権限をもっており、」などを誇示した事実がありました。』と提示しておりますが、これを「一利用者としての問題」とするには無理があります。一般的にも公衆の面前における自分の地位・肩書き、所属等を明示した上での発言は、プライベートやオフレコでは済まされないでしょう。--市井の人 (talk) 07:11, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • 例えば上でKurihayaさんが「I’m a sysop on JAWP.」とおっしゃってますが、日本語版管理者としてコメントしたわけではなく一利用者としてのものでしょうし、例えば「私は〜〜で管理者、CUで〜」といってグローバル権限に立候補する人も、別に管理者として立候補するわけではないでしょう。「一利用者としての問題」とはそういう意味で使ったつもりですが、誤解を招いたなら申し訳ないです。--Q8j (talk/CA) 07:37, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        • ここでの投票・コメントや全般的な立候補は権限を有するかとは関係なくできることです。ですから「〜であるから」などに続かない限り自己紹介に過ぎません。ところがrxyさんの場合、話の切り出しで「現時点で私はスチュワード権限をもっており、」としただけでなく、それに続けてスチュワード権限を有することによってできること(ご本人はそのつもりはないとしてはいますが)をひけらかしているではありませんか。よってQ8jさんの例えによる「一利用者としての問題」は誤った一般化です。--市井の人 (talk) 08:04, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        • 付け加えますと、「スチュワード権限を有することによってできること」とは具体的には投稿ブロックとしていますが、この発言は2020年4月25日 (UTC) のものです。rxyさんは2020年4月16日 (UTC) の時点でローカル管理者の権限を失っていますから、「スチュワード権限を有することによってできること」に違いありません。--市井の人 (talk) 08:33, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        • ポイントとしてQ8jさんがおっしゃった「ローカルで問題が起こればローカルでブロックすることができる以上、」というのも、そうはできなくなった元管理者がローカルコミュニティに対し「(まだ)スチュワード権限を有することによってできること」として投稿ブロックをちらつかせたわけです。これには恐怖で震えて当然です。--市井の人 (talk) 09:17, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Keep Keep Worth talking with (talk) 02:22, 13 February 2021 (UTC) LTA / locked account. RadiX 03:17, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep My comment is as follows:

As you all knows, I found the past comments at:コメント依頼/rxy_20200416

◇ただ、ウィキペディアンとして別のウィキペディアンに「意見」を伝えるのは自由です。会話ページで2人で話し合って合意できなければコメント依頼へ進むのが筋。今回は即座に「辞めます」と返事されたけど、自身に非が無いという確信があり権限を持ち続ける意欲があれば「辞任する気はない」と返事すれば済む話でした。◇「コメント依頼で意見を聞いてから解任に進む」という過酷なプロセスに進む前に個人的に辞任勧告する、というのは、むしろ親切なステップともいえます。解任投票にかけられ心折れてウィキペディアを去った人たちを忘れません。--miya(会話) 2020年4月25日 (土) 07:01 (UTC)

(above translation) However, as a Wikipedian, you are free to pass on "opinion" to other Wikipedians. If the two can't reach an agreement after discussing it on the conversation page, it is reasonable to ask for comments. This time, I received an immediate reply of "I quit.", but if you are confident that you are not guilty and have the will to retain authority, it would be enough to reply "have no intention of resigning". It is rather a kind step to personally recommend resignation before proceeding with the harsh process of "hear someone's opinion in a request for comment before dismissing him". I will not forget those who were forced to leave Wikipedia in the dismissal vote.

Special:Diff/77277809 追加文 3つ目「これは、個人的に、」以降のとおり考えております故、管理者としてやめても、一利用者としては居続けてほしかったからです。管理者は補充できます。しかし「嫌気がさして去ってしまう・去ってしまった利用者」は最小限度に留める必要があると私は考えています。--rxy(会話) 2020年4月29日 (水) 01:44 (UTC)

(above translation) I wanted him to stay as a user even if he quit as a manager. We can replenish administrators, but I think we need to keep "Annoying users who leave" to a minimum.

You can find more detailed discussions afterwards at: Wikipedia:投稿ブロック依頼/rxy投稿ブロック依頼/rxy

Use machine translation for English at if necessary.

From the above mentioned, I will support the comment of rxy. What's more, ""In the real life this is called "regular exercise of law". I also don't see it as an abuse to ask someone to resign"" as Érico pointed out at 02:41, 12 February 2021 (UTC). --Green (talk) 14:12, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is not "Demanding resignation of user:ぱたごん". after that rxy tried to intimidate and silence comments for rxy from the Japanese community.(I'm not good at English.I'll explain in Japanese.)

— User:ぱたごん
  •  Weak keep. I agree with the arguments that say that if Rxy were to run for an election now they would probably not be elected because they are not an admin on content wiki anymore and because the block is a big red flag. That is why my vote is "weak". This is a confirmation vote though, and we already know what kind of steward Rxy is. I know some rudimentary Japanese (~N4 JLTP wise), but I am certain that it will be very challenging for me to do the kind of work Rxy does, most notably dealing with ISECHIKA socks. I am pretty sure it would be for others too. Rxy is also helpful with some technical stuff. What I also rember is that when Rxy makes a mistake they take it very seriously. When it comes to the situation at hand, what it looks to me like is that it is mostly a local conflict, where steward rights were not involved and the only thing that was potentially involved was some degree of authority Rxy holds as a steward. In the latter case yes, that would be something I would expect a steward to be more clear about, but that is not a mistake I would want a steward to lose rights over (unless it happens regularly). I am also happy with the fact that Rxy communicated the situation to other stewards on Stewardwiki and on mailing list right away while indicating that it can be biased since it is them who wrote it. I see it as another indication that they are responsible person, and for this reason I can trust them to use their steward permissions globally while avoiding direct interaction with Japanese Wikipedia outside the indirect one of them locking the LTAs originating from jawiki. I shold also add that people should not be afraid to contact Trust and Safety team when they feel like there is a reason to do so. I have my trust in the team's judgement and if there is no valid reason for the team to perform any action they won't. --Base (talk) 15:57, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Not a safe assumption. There is no open community scrutiny of those proceedings, and we've already seen cases where T&S has taken questionable actions. But this is besides the point. T&S isn't up for voting here; someone who uses T&S as a threat/weapon is, and that behavior is not appropriate no matter what T&S does or doesn't do.  — SMcCandlish ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ʌ<  21:20, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral Neutral --20041027 tatsu (talk) 06:36, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Remove --ZabeMath (talk) 11:51, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep --Araisyohei (talk) 12:53, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep--Jusjih (talk) 23:04, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Comment He said "reported you to the T&S team" to some people on purpose. It can be taken as a action that preventing people from participating discussions. he said: