Asterlegorch367

Block

Hi Asterlegorch367 you've recently blocked a Swahili Wikipedia user [1] after they reported potential violations of the wmf:Universal Code of Conduct to the stewards, may I ask which policy the user violated and which of the user's edits constitutes a reason for blocking them indefinitely? Johannnes89 (talk) 10:49, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Dear Johannnes89,

I hope that you are doing well. Yes, I blocked the user Kisare but temporarily, contrary to a permanent ban as alleged in your message.

This was done following a consensus reached among Wikipedia Kiswahili community to allow a productive discussion between the community, admins and the user.

The user had been warned before on his style of contributing, insisting his view was the only right perception and everything else wasn’t. The latest discussion was on an article on homesexuality that he had started editing and changing things to fit his view. When he was contacted about it, things got personal and he took the discussion to meta where he even got disrespectful to one of the veteran Swahili Wikipedia top contributors. He alleged that our community is too small and had no capacity to handle such matters, contrary to reality.

Further, it is our opinion that although the user understands and writes in Kiswahili, he lacks the native proficiency and an understanding of and/or disrespects local laws, culture and customs.

Note: Since this matter relates to Swahili Wikipedia, in case of further queries we highly recommend that you and everyone else use our Swahili Village pump in discussing such matters so wider Swahili Community can be informed about their project rather than jumping into other platforms before initiating it on the base project where the issue occurred, that would be violating subsidiarity principles.

I hope this clarifies the matter, I can go further on this if needed.

Asterlegorch367 (talk) 11:10, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

By blocking an editor for removing anti-LGBT propaganda, you have made it abundantly clear that the Swahili Wikipedia is incapable of handling "such matters". It is long-standing global community consensus that local laws and customs are not enforceable on Wikipedia, especially when it's referring to laws outlawing the tolerance of LGBT people. The subsidiarity principle cannot be used to justify anti-LGBT discrimination. Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 20:42, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Respectfully, you did not answer Johannnes89's question: "may I ask which policy the user violated and which of the user's edits constitutes a reason for blocking them" Kisare (talk) 20:58, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Dear Kisare,

We appreciate your contributions, but your temporary suspension is not related to LGBTQ articles. The main issue is your extensive changes within a week without consulting others. You frequently modify templates and texts, sometimes introducing errors. Wikipedia is a community oriented project, and significant structural changes require discussion on the Community Village pump page. Your lack of communication causes disruption. It seems you overlook the presence and the inputs of others, which is problematic. User:Muddyb (Talk) 13:42, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

1. "Disrespecting local laws and customs" is irrelevant. Swwiki is merely a Wikipedia in the Swahili language, not a place for the enforcement of laws and customs of the Swahili people. If the admin corps of swwiki is enforcing Swahili customs rather than Wikipedia policy, it should be disbanded. If it is writing Wikipedia policy to match Swahili customs rather than the goals of Wikimedia, it should be disbanded.

2. Your blocking messages on Kisare's talk page don't mention Kisare breaking any templates.

3. Criticising Wikimedia projects' internal capabilities is 100% allowed. Why does your blocking message harp on the fact that Kisare complained on meta, if all you blocked them for was disruptive editing?

4. I must say it is the height of comedy that your project has admins who say stuff like "protecting our African culture" to justify retaining derogatory coverage of LGBT topics (while also clarifying that complaining on Meta was indeed a reason for the block), and then immediately runs for the literal UCoC Coordinating Committee. That "African culture" comment is still up!

5. Insulting other editors and POV-pushing are indeed blockable offences, could you please show us the diffs where Kisare did those things?

Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI (talk) 15:58, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

On point 5, I want to be clear and admit that I did say something that could be interpreted as an insult only after I was accused of imperialism. After being told by Riccardo Riccioni "we do not tolerate your [plural, referring to me and Americans generally] imperialism on these issues... we cannot support such things [homosexuality]", I said "you are a white italian, who is 'we'?". My point was that it was inappropriate to use "us vs them" language when Riccardo and I both were born and raised outside Tanzania. However, I can see how this could be interpreted as an insult, and I have since apologized. Riccardo accepted the apology. It should be noted that this wasn't mentioned as a reason for my ban, which occurred after my apology. Kisare (talk) 20:40, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Could you point me to the location of this discussion (the imperialism one)? The sw article on homosexuality does not have a talk page and I can't find where the discussion is on the swwiki village pump. Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI (talk) 02:47, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Never mind, I'm blind as a bat. You've already linked it. Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI (talk) 02:52, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Dear All,

This conversation is quickly evolving into a them against us discussion, something that do not lead to anything productive for Wikipedia/Wikimedia.

The general assumptions I sense here are:

1. The entire Swahili Wikimedia community is homophobic, which can not be possible and is quite frankly condescending and disrespectful

2. User Kisare was blocked just because he edited the article on homosexuality. Also not true

As repeatedly explained myself and others from Swahili Wikimedia community, he was blocked to allow a constructive discussion amongst us in the community (including him). He himself admitted not knowing that there were mechanisms to discuss disagreements between editors. This was not the first time the user was blocked temporarily and the other time it was actually related to astronomy articles. After the block he didn't stop disrupting articles and templates and taking any attempt to discuss or point him in the right direction as a personal attack.

We can sit here and split hair all day but I don't see how that is constructive to the cause we all care passionately about, and that is why we are here.

Wikipedia Kiswahili community is made up of a diverse group of members and has been running for a number of years now writing on both controversial and non-controversial topics with a neutral point of view. Anyone here who thinks otherwise decides to ignore this fact and does not seek to find a solution but just fuel the fire on such a sensitive topic.

Kisare, niongee na wewe moja kwa moja. Kama kweli unajali kuhusu Wikipedia ya Kiswahili inabidi tutafute namna ya kutatua tofauti zetu na sio kila mara kukimbilia kupata huruma za watu wa nje wakati sisi ndio tunaojenga hii community. You found it already thriving but for whatever reason you feel like you are the savior of something that's working just fine.

Asterlegorch367 (talk) 16:54, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Outsiders? Remember that enwiki and dewiki and hiwiki and literally every Wikimedia movement has an equal right to know and an equal right to criticise what happens on swwiki. It is not your fiefdom, it is not even your appanage. And I don't think an admin corps that insists on calling gay people mentally ill is a sign of a thriving community! The editors in general may be fine, but clearly the project is being severely injured by its admins. Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI (talk) 08:09, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Also, don't insult our intelligence to claim this is an issue with Kisare and templates. Everyone can see how another user was blocked solely for editing the page on homosexuality and absolutely nothing else. Not only was that yet another example of how little regard Riccardo Riccioni has for the Wikimedia Terms of Use, it also shows that he thinks it is fine to ban people he himself is involved in a content dispute with, which in itself is desysop-worthy. Does swwiki not have an equivalent of w:WP:INVOLVED? Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI (talk) 08:23, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

The previous ban was also dubious, but I won't get into that. Ultimately it is irrelevant. None of this, neither the previous ban nor templates issues, was mentioned in the ban message.

Just so that it is absolutely clear to everyone, this is your entire original statement explaining why I have been temporarily banned:

"Our Swahili Wikipedia has its own mechanisms, including dealing with various discussions about the improvement of our Wikipedia as a whole, including taking a topic that needs discussion to the official Community page, something you have not done and rushing to remote platforms before you bring the topic to the Wikipedia at the heart of what you are complaining about. You have gone further and said that the Swahili Wikipedia does not have the tools to resolve disputes and differences like these, which is not true and shows contempt for our community. We recognize and respect your stylistic diversity on some articles in our Wikipedia, especially Homosexuality topics, however, forcing a significant change to what is present and keeping it in line with your view is unacceptable in order to protect the diversity and balance of the relevant articles and the diversity of our fellow contributors. If you have ideas to add to a particular article, it is fine to add it in accordance with Wikipedia principles, but it is not OK to completely give up so much of others' contributions and force only your contributions to be accepted. So in order to keep existing articles from getting changes from you, I have to suspend you for a while until you stop ignoring the messages of our Wikipedia admins and agree to follow all the procedures of our Wikipedia including respecting the admins who do a great job of building this Wikipedia with volunteers like you."

And this is another admin explaining why I have been banned:

"It is not good to bring your cultures to places where they are not wanted."

And yet another admin explaining why im banned:

"We are very respectful of your contribution to the Swahili wikipedia and we are very grateful, but this closure is not only because you have gone to speak on a remote forum, but because we are protecting our African culture, especially in the Swahili community."

The word "template" (or rather the Swahili word kigezo) is not mentioned once by any of the admins in the discussion. Kisare (talk) 23:02, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

┌──────┘
For everyone reading this, here is the machine translation of what Kisare was told by Riccardo Riccioni for their edits on the swwiki page on homosexuality. "Brother, you have turned the page on homosexuality, again, as usual, out of touch. You live in the United States and we live in Tanzania. Remember that. We are not ready to tolerate your imperialism in sensitive issues like this. We have discussed and seen that we cannot support such things."

Notice that it does not mention any actual policy that is broken - reliable sourcing, verifiability, etc. No, the complaint says that there are entirely different truths on homosexuality - to wit, the American truth, and the Swahili truth; the (bad, imperialist, out-of-touch) American truth being that homosexuality is a normal sexual orientation, and the (anti-imperialist) Swahili truth being that homosexuality is a mental illness resulting from weakness of mind in one's adolescence, and a slippery slope to paedophilia. These two truths, supposedly, warrant equal coverage on the page (along with a cute little paragraph about the evil gender cabal Transing The Kids).

I do not think it takes a genius to figure out that this is a gross violation of the Universal Code of Conduct and by extension the Terms of Use (which - in case the admins and bureaucrats if swwiki haven't noticed - are helpfully linked at the bottom of every Wikimedia page, even swwiki). Given the constant use of "we", it appears the sentiment stated above is shared by a significant portion of the swwiki admin corps. They should all be desysopped for cause right here and now. Every day the swwiki page on homosexuality is maintained as it is by swwiki admins is another day some of our most marginalised readers are told they are mentally ill for who they love and that they may even start diddling kids tomorrow for being homosexual today.

I must say it is a huge shame that people who have spent long working to maintain swwiki and who have even received grant money have missed the memo that homophobia is unwelcome in Wikimedia projects. Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI (talk) 03:32, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Dear @Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI, we are looking for best solution to fix the whole situation. Perhaps to stop it from happening ever again. We may have our views on this matter, but the UCC says otherwise. Pretty soon we'll make statement that clear out all the hateful behavior. _User:Muddyb ^(Talk) 07:23, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

It is eagerly awaited. Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI (talk) 08:00, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

FYI there are some mistranslations. "turned" should be "changed" and "out of touch" should be "without communication." Kisare (talk) 23:07, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Please learn to engage with your peers to improve our Wikipedia collaboratively. We have no ill intentions, but respecting the local community is crucial. Your claims of propaganda are unfounded.. _User:Muddyb ^(Talk) 13:42, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

I agree with you Muddyb Olimasy (talk) 14:25, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Muddyb, it was me who referred to it as propaganda, not Kisare. And it is propaganda, and local admins' using administrative powers to enforce political views contrary to Wikimedia's goals is a violation of the UCOC. Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 19:59, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

"but respecting the local community is crucial." He has removed violations of false information about minorities, which are a clear violation of the terms of use. All users of the community have accepted these through their contributions and registrations. Therefore, the removal of offences is definitely in the interest of the community.It also shows respect for the community 𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 17:32, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

You are a bureaucrat, Muddyb. The least you could do after it has been pointed out that you've been telling off the wrong person is to strike your comment and apologise. It has been two days, with no apology. Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI (talk) 16:03, 19 May 2024 (UTC)