User talk: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)

┌──────┘
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)

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)