Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

Requests for comment/Yiddish wikipedia sysop abuse

< Requests for comment
This is an archived version of this page, as edited by Shmaltz (talk | contribs) at 00:56, 31 January 2007 (→Please close this page for edit). It may differ significantly from the current version.
This page is a public request for comment into a dispute on the Yiddish Wikipedia, which does not have enough community to resolve it locally.

Disputants' statements

This section is for statements by users involved in the dispute. Nobody else should edit this section, and disputants should only edit their own section.

Yidel

Since our community is a non existent i am forced to take this case up here for you the broader community who does not speak Yiddish to decide:

We have a sysop who blocks out users for no good reason. it is impossible to let him go on with this since our wiki is too small to watch his abuses, so please read the following discussion and act upon your decision, or to warn him or to block him or to take away his sysop rights.

Please Note before comment, Yiddish wikipedia policies and rules are the same and is translated in Yiddish word by word from the English wikipedia.

That means:

  1. in case one: Not to block user, only while edit war, not as a punishment afterwards.
  1. and in case 2: a sysop himself should not block his nemesis while involved in a fight with the other user.

read carefully both cases and decide:

Case 1: Sysop blocks users for warning someone about violating policy

sysop blocks user, who tried to warn other user for breaking policy, after everything is long over as punishment
here we had a case of a user who acted recklessly and nobody was willing to confront him and warn him on numerous issues. the reason why the admins are silent is that since we are a non existing community, i have to warn the user who acts recklessly.

The following 4 breaches of policy, is what this new user has done to trigger my warnings:

  1. Using a user name of a known funny person in our community, without saying he is not that person. and i warned him to put up a notice that he is not the real name the community knows. my warning [1]
  2. putting up news items without proper sources against policy, and i warned him not to do it.
  3. evasively posting images which the free licensing was in question, no attribution on the copy rights what source it is. i was the only user who cared to warn him on his talk page and questioned the user to not break universal wikipedia policy.
  4. Writing childish harassing comments on article of well known figure: that he pickpockets, and prays sexually on men. [2], and that the girls who are his secretaries at his work in the Forward newspaper buero have long been complaining against his dirty ethic.. [3]. now seeing that his unsourced baby talk doesn't get tolerated he wants to shop for sysop rights to block the article [4]. my warning [5]


While this admin was silent, and latter came in to say that he saw everything, i struggled with this user for days not to act like this and the user was constantly deleting my warnings as to say get lost, so in a way i was forced to act like admin without admin tools since no sysop is active. and this particular sysop was silent as well. when i saw the user erasing the warnings to hide his track record, i reverted it since this is clear vandalism to undo warnings from talk pages in order to hide your previous history and keep on doing this further and further as he did while erasing the warnings.

Now this admin has agreed that the other user has also done 3rr, and he never ever blocked him, and only warned him about 2 of the issues, after i was blocked to make it sound good and mask his sockpupetry.

the only way to expose his abuse is by this exemple why and how he blocked me, against normal sysop procedure to only block before a warning while in an edit war, here he blocked me after the edit war when everything was over... --יודל 02:55, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Keep in mind that this admin always is silent and if he would have acted i would have not have to warn nor to revert even one time.

As I said before, if I'm not alerted I have no way of knowing.--Shmaltz 03:01, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

that sour point that to block yidel you are always alert and to warn other users you are not aware of whats going on.--יודל 03:56, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Case 2: Sysop blocks user for insulting him

sysop is insulted by word and blocks the guy who wrote it
It is clear policy in all wikipedias, even translated in Yiddish policy as well: a sysop must not block when involved in fight with other user.

chronicle of events how an what exactly transpired

  1. A user with the name רוני has been a bureaucrat, and has made himself other user name יידיש [6]
  2. then gives himself 2 times sysop power with 2 names, without any votes or due process, his accuse for this grave unheard abuse was then he feared of hackers that's why he created a second name and gave it powers....[7]
  3. now he has since lost his bureaucrat and sysop power under the name רוני due to abuse on one name. with second name יידיש he has agreed only to use for technical thinks [8]
  4. then he erasises everything from his page.[9]
  5. months pass by and silence, after this 1 user with both names רוני and יידיש breaks his own word that he will not use the name יידיש to help the name runy [10]
  6. so a user נבוכדנצר put it back for everybody too see [11]
  7. and warns him that he is not holding his word underneath the words where he promises not to use it. [12]
  8. up comes running this abusive sysop שמאלץ and warns the user not to write on others user page only on their talk pages. [13]
  9. נבוכנדנצר answers: it is very important to put it on his user page so everybody should know they are the same user. [14]
  10. abusive sysop שמאלץ cleans the whole page of יידיש taking away any link between both users so nobody should see that we are dealing with sock puppet.[15]
  11. Sysop שמאלץ warns that from your answer i see that your going to do it again, it says clearly in his page that he is the other user so their is no need to put it on his page. if you do it again i am going to block you. [16]
  12. sysop erases his own warning [17]
  13. נבוכנדנצר puts back sysops warning and tels him: you can block me 5 times a day, i will not let others act as sockpupets.[18]
  14. שמאלץ answers that from your answer i see you are going to do it again so i will block you out from wikipedia when you will do it again. [19]
  15. שמאלץ writes that he was mistaken for warning and asks to take it off. [20]
  16. נבוכדנצר puts it back and answers him; " i am putting back this warning for everybody to see since you are a wild windy sysop that blocks everybody for nothing, go ahead and dear to put it up...."
  17. שמאלץ blocks the user נבוכדנצר. giving the reason on "personal attack" [21]
  18. clarifies in the log book that he blocked נבוכדנצר for attacking me personal... Saying clearly that he abused his power here to achieve personal revenge.[22]

Answers to Shmaltz's points

answer from yidel on the allegations from shamlts

  1. a sock puppet means when you use 2 or more names to gain consensus. i haven't done that. and neither was נבוכדנצר so shamlts evidently is trowing the kitchen cabinets here in a last attempt to divert the subject from his abusiveness. yes i have allot of names and never ever will i use it to be a sock puppet. the reason i must write with countless names, is simple all the stewards and admis by now know how many times i was persecuted with my personal info dispersed by those like this abusive sysop. he has never ever done anything. every single time i must turn to the stewards to stop it. now is it any wonder i must hide myself with many user names? but again i haven't used in any disruptive way. not in votes and to create any kind of consensus.
  2. yes i keep on intimidating users who are sockpupets because that's the right think to do, if i have powerful evidence to it especially when they use it to intimidate and abuse others.
  3. There is no community in Yiddish wikipedia, it is a scam and a joke that he says he has votes. [23]. Who are those votes? רוני he has made himself a known sock puppet with creating himself as a new sysop under his other name יידיש . alzuz is blocked for vandalism and sockpuppetry in exposing my privacy numerous times [24]. shamlts is now on the debating table and the other hasn't have 4 edits in the Yiddish wikipeida and is probably a sock puppet. that's it! so here you see what votes we have against me. a bunch of vandals terrorists and criminals!
  4. and nobody has provided any link where i was disruptive. it is a simple lie: i was never ever disruptive!--יודל 11:26, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shmaltz

Because of recent events on the yiddish project I am currently withdrawing my request, and for the moment just want to keep this on record but ask that no action should be taken agains Yidel. My points are however still valid.--Shmaltz 19:35, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Statement

  • The problem can be described in 3 words, a disruptive editor.
  • It happens to be that that editor has been by one of his names a sysop, it was removed after the community asked for it to be removed[25]. His name with sysop rights has been יודל. As you can see here he is the only user that oposed the vote.
    • He has created for himself at least 5 names, and left disruptive comments on usertalk pages with diffrent names, users thought that it is all different users. I don't have a list of those names, but there are other users that kept track.
    • Used one name to disrupt the project (which is what happened today as well), I blocked that user, then came back with his sysop name to cry sysop abuse, when in fact that was the goal, to first disrupt and then be able to yell sysop abuse.
    • He keeps intimidating users that they are sockpuppets [26] therefore creating the image to other users that they can ignore it, and/or giving himself an excuse to ignore things.
    • He has constantly gamed the system, by wiki lawering thru the rules, and then came back to intimidate everyone that they are braking the rules.

The only resolution I see for the moment is to block User:יודל from the yiddish project, togther with all names, I think a vote on this will show a lot.

Answers to Yidel's points

In general
  • Non existent, Only because a user by the name of yidel, who happens to had his sysop rights removed after a vote by that nonexistent community, has chased away lots of active users [27] look at Nov 22 edits.
  • I always gave a reason why I blocked [28]
  • If I'm not alerted I have no way of knowing that something needs my attention.
  • If someone writes 70+ edits on the same page, then I don't need to be alerted, I will spot it on my own, the same goes for any disruptivness, otherwise it wouldn't be disruptive.
  • the following is an answer I gave here and I am copying here:
The issue at hand was that that particular user was editing his own talk page, not an article and was therefore not a vandal, while User:יודל kept reverting that users talk page to what he wanted the page should say. Which is exactly the reason that 3RR exists, to avoid edit wars, and that was the reason he was blocked, to unblock a user that clearly violated 3RR is quite irresponsible. On a side note, he has been involved in too many disruptive editing, and has been gaming the system for a long time now. He does whatever he wants just making sure that it is not a violating a policy but still very disruptive. On the english wikipedia he would have been blocked a long time ago. I don't think he should be blcoked now, but to just unblock someone who has violated 3RR just because he asked for help, without contacting the one that blocked him, or anybody else on that project is very irresponsible, as it gives way for more of the same to happen.--Shmaltz 16:30, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • There were other reasons that נבוכדנצר which is also יודל was blocked, and that is that he (they) are disruptive and it was needed so that it doesn't get out of hand, which is exactly what it did, since you can see that it moved here for a resolution.
About case 2

sysop answer in case 2, that although the given reason of the sysop while blocking was that he was insulted, but in truth he blocked user because of disruptiveness

While everything outlined in case 2 by User:יודל is true besides for the minor fact of that he said 'ביסט א ווילדער רוח' in English translation You are a wild ghost (a very insulting phrase in the Yiddish language), I disagree in the events of what happened. Here is my outline of the events and the problem, I can get more users to agree with me on this.--Shmaltz 03:07, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
shamalts please say what was he disruptive?--יודל 03:58, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
first of all its not that insulting if we take it in context, and mainly that proves the point that you blocked him because he insulted you. this is sysop abuse, because you have to relinquish you sysop power when you are involved.--יודל 03:44, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Another note, while the given reason was personal attack, there were other reasons, and that is that that user was disruptive as outlined in the problem. I acted based on best effort not to disrupt the project even more. Which is ecactly what it did, as you can see, we got it all here :) --Shmaltz 03:37, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
shamlts if you did not block him because he insulted you what was the reason you block him?--יודל 03:43, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Please note nobody was disruptive, he claims this without even backing it up. Samalts was blocked from English wikipedia in the past, [29] so he has a history and well known reputation outside our wikipedia of being a trouble maker and bully. now should we block him? desysop him? or give him another chance? you decide--יודל 08:48, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from other users

This section contains comments from other users. Each user's comment should be in it's own section. Do not respond to comments; if necessary, summarize your response in a single sentence and link to discussion section.

Jiddisch

i agree. we should to block him for a while. Jiddisch 05:06, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • See relevant comments: clarified that it is Yidel that should be blocked, accused of being a disputant.

Discussion

About the dispute

  • Yidel, the definition of sockpuppet is well defined, no need for you to redefine it. Why is using the name נבוכדנצר to disrupt (as is evident from previous links), and then when blocked as deserved go yell sysop abuse not disruptive?--Shmaltz 14:13, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
because i may alert the community on your abuse Evan when against נובכדנצר
again those who voted against me are blocked for vandalism and are known sockpupets.--יודל 14:28, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • From your own words: how many times i was persecuted with my personal info dispersed by those like this abusive sysop. he has never ever done anything Show me at least one line where you asked for help from any admin. In fact look at this.--Shmaltz 14:13, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
i don't want the stewards are well aware of this.--יודל 14:28, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Again quoting you: how many times i was persecuted I have to tell you although still unjustified, you earned it. You are disruptive and that's why people did it.--Shmaltz 14:13, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
i know you think so that's why we are having this discussion for all to see and others to judge.--יודל 14:28, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
please don't quote me out of context you lowlife--יודל 14:28, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It is not out of context, we have had the discussion before, you can't intimidate users even if they are in fact sockpuppets. Yidel don't forget personal insults are not allowed, and is very unconstructive.--Shmaltz 14:33, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
listen bully don't quote me out of context!--יודל 14:35, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Quote: who are sockpupets because that's the right think to do, if i have powerful evidence to it especially when they use it to intimidate and abuse others. Name one sockpuppet, and the evidence. This is an old tactic of his and part of his disruptivness, if there is a sock-puppet on the Yiddish project s/he should be blocked.--Shmaltz 14:18, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why did you change this paragraph in a way that completely changes the meaning? [30] this is unacceptable.--Shmaltz 15:47, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

יידיש and רוני --יודל 14:28, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

רוני and יידיש, was known to be one and the same user, he actualy had that on the userpage.--Shmaltz 14:31, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
so why dont you block him?--יודל 14:42, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes there is a community, although a modest one. You have succeeded in making sure that any good editors don't write anymore. BTW, how was it decided that alzuz is katlukanye? and again I never noticed that, you never came to any admin. Just for the record we all agree that personal info misuse is a crime.--Shmaltz 14:22, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
there is no comuinity stop lying--יודל 14:34, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


  • Quote: Please note nobody was disruptive, he claims this without even backing it up. Samalts was blocked from English wikipedia in the past, [31] so he has a history and well known reputation outside our wikipedia of being a trouble maker and bully. now should we block him? desysop him? or give him another chance? you decide--יודל 08:48, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I was blocked in the middle of an edit war, and I have earened that block. No I did not bully anyone, and I'm not a known troublemaker.--Shmaltz 14:26, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
hey buddy the defention on a bully is somebody who breaks the 3rr rule--יודל 14:32, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Just for the record: [32]. Now judge who is the bully.--Shmaltz 14:39, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
now who has blocked whom i you or you me? last time i checked you hae bloced me.--יודל 14:41, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jiddisch's comment

Is there anybody who will back you up that you would like to call here? I mean if everybody in the yiddish community is against you, the problem probably lies with you. Also, if there's someone who only speaks Hebrew who you would like to call, that's okay too as I can translate this (assuming others agree of course). Yonatanh 00:13, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
there is no community to call here there is only those 1 sysop abuser and the other one רוני that has made himself 2 times sysop and the third one that was blocked out from wikipedia due to harassment. please explain what it is unclear to you here? that you need backup. for translating there is no dispute here on translation so this is not of any issue here.--יודל 04:14, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I'm from the yiddish wikapadia. (my user page [33]) Yes! it is currect, EVEREBODY wants out this and this user! as you can see in all pages wich Jiddisch gave you. and we had votes to give back the sysup tights for Jiddisch (in the yidish wikipadia: [34]רוני) as you can see here. PLEAS take care!
you can see more details here or here from yiddish wikipadia members.
Thank you!--Nullad 14:21, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please close this page for edit

The entire day is user י.מ. סופר fighthing on this page. He turn it back and back 100 of times. after we got votes that in the news we shoud'n have no sex related issues from the news section on the front page. Pleas block this user from editing this page. thank you.--Nullad 22:09, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for asking aigan, can someone help us emergency??--Nullad 22:37, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The votes were undecided look here, this is just a stupid edit war, and shows how disruptive Yidel is.--Shmaltz 00:56, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Requests_for_comment/Yiddish_wikipedia_sysop_abuse&oldid=521303"