Just to re-emphasis the point, in the words of the admin who blocked Desiphral:
"at present there's no community consensus to block for commercial editing" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Bad_news ----- "Andrew Turvey" <[email protected]> wrote: > From: "Andrew Turvey" <[email protected]> > To: "Desiphral" <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, 9 July, 2009 17:37:06 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, > Portugal > Subject: Fwd: [WikiEN-l] The current purges in English Wikipedia (...and my > personal case) > > > Hi Desiphral, > > Not sure if you get these message - please find below the message I sent - > hope it helps! > > Regards, > > ----- Forwarded Message ----- > From: "Andrew Turvey" <[email protected]> > To: "English Wikipedia" <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, 9 July, 2009 17:35:34 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, > Portugal > Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] The current purges in English Wikipedia (...and my > personal case) > > > Looking at the blocking notice [2], there seems to be a sensible solution to > this: > > You stated [1] that: "Some years ago, other people I knew became interested > in my work at Wikipedia and I gladly supported them. The initial idea was > that each one should have a personal account, but in practice, since it was > real life collaboration and we had available only one computer, most of > their/our edits ended up under my username ... I learned later that some of > them managed to supplement their income by working at Wikipedia." > > Per the policy [[WP:NOSHARE]], "Sharing an account – or the password to an > account – with others is not permitted, and doing so will result in the > account being blocked." > > It sounds like you had a clear contravention of this policy and the admins > giving you a block seems to be the right thing to do. However, given your > long history of good editing to the projects, particularly with the other > account, you seem to have grounds to appeal the "indefinite" block. > > All you need to say is: > > "a) I accept that I shouldn't have let others use my account > b) I no longer let others use my account and won't in future > c) My account is not compromised as I have changed the password" > > Therefore: > > Given that it was done in good faith given that we only had access to one > computer, and I have an otherwise clean record of extensive good faith edits > to Wikipedia: > > "Please replace my indefinite block with a time limited block (maybe ask for > a week?)" > > In the "Guide to appealing blocks" [3], it explicitly says: > > "You, as a blocked editor, are responsible for convincing administrators: • ... or: • that the block is no longer necessary because you understand what you are blocked for, you will not do it again and you will make productive contributions instead." > If they come back with other concerns about, say, paid editing, then you can > address that then - but at the moment I'd suggest you focus on the reason > given for the block. > > Do all that and I'm sure you'll be up and running in no time. :) > > Regards, > > Andrew > > > [1] > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Bad_news > [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Desiphral#Compromised_account > [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:GAB > > "Desiphral" <[email protected]> wrote: > > From: "Desiphral" <[email protected]> > > To: "English Wikipedia" <[email protected]> > > Sent: Thursday, 9 July, 2009 11:18:44 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, > > Portugal > > Subject: [WikiEN-l] The current purges in English Wikipedia (...and my > > personal case) > > > > I was recently indefinitely blocked in connection with the paid editing > > issue, without being a paid editor myself. Actually the paid users with > > whom > > I had a previous collaboration on voluntary subjects are even now free to > > edit. Worse, it is proposed the closure of the Wikipedia I put on track. > > > > > > Here are the relevant links: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Bad_news > > > > > > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Forum#The_Vlax_Romani_Wikipedia_and_its_compromised_admin > > > > > > and in this article: > > > > http://publish.indymedia.org/en/2009/07/926495.shtml > > > > this is the part that concerns me: > > > > > > "However, we find even more tragicomic and worrisome a strange case that > > occured in the last few days. One of the "detectives" > > found<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Bad_news>that > > > > the Tayzen account from Elance included in its portfolio from October > > 2008 the work of Desiphral, a veteran user who contributed a great deal of > > voluntary work at English Wikipedia and also founded the Wikipedia in his > > native language. The proposed conclusion, namely that this user is engaged > > in paid editing, was accepted by most of the other users without any > > inquiries. Quickly, in the discussion place there appeared users seemingly > > having some previous grudges against Desiphral, using the opportunity to > > request his block. Additionally there appeared some at least dubious users > > requesting the closure of the Wikipedia founded by Desiphral (in the > > language of a certain minority of Indian origin widely discriminated). In a > > normal (or better said, a previous) communication process at Wikipedia, > > such > > conclusions would have been dismissed as a good joke, but it was not the > > case here. We took our liberty to check the edits of the incriminated user > > and we did not find anything to suggest paid editing. Needless to say that > > the accusers too did not present any actual evidences for their > > allegations. > > > > After a few days, when it appeared there Desiphral himself, it turned out > > that he had some years ago a collaboration on Wikipedia with people from > > the > > staff of Tayzen, but not in the field of paid editing (our investigation > > found out that the respective Elance account did not even exist at that > > time). Somehow unexpectedly (given the current atmosphere of fear and > > adulation at Wikipedia around the issue of paid editing), besides > > complaining about the attempt of public shaming, he started to point out > > the > > unprofessional manner of conducting the current purges. There followed some > > retorts, then... silence. When we contacted Desiphral to find out what > > exactly is going on there, we learned that his account was blocked, but the > > blocking notice was hidden somewhere in the talk page, not displayed on the > > user account, as it is the common practice at Wikipedia. The "death > > sentence" was done on the sly, after talking too much, somehow reminding of > > our attempt to talk openly there. We found the blocking reason really > > sarcastic, namely that "he indicated he permitted the use of his account > > for > > commercial purposes" (without showing where exactly was that indication, > > while we could not find anything of this kind in his replies). Even if it > > would have been true, this is not a punishable offense on Wikipedia... only > > you'll get intro trouble with those who do not like this. The accusers > > changed later the reason for blocking to "group account", because he > > permitted some years ago some people to learn how to edit, using his > > account. Obviously, a pretext, the same "first shoot, then ask" pattern, > > since the casual teaching of other people did not amount to what is > > understood at Wikipedia as a "group account", plus that the respective user > > was not active on Wikipedia for about a year and a half and at the time > > scale of Wikipedia such old issues are not considered when judging an user. > > > > The suppressed user also told us that he was not announced by e-mail about > > the public shaming (he was not active on Wikipedia for long time and for > > such cases this would be the standard procedure), thus preventing him to > > present his position. He was not announced also about the following > > requests > > of somebody to > > block<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_requests/Global#Global_lock_for_Desiphral>him > > > > in the Wikipedias in all languages and to > > close > > down<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Forum#The_Vlax_Romani_Wikipedia_and_its_compromised_admin>the > > > > one he founded. The most ironic thing in all this affair is that those > > suspected editing on behalf of Tayzen are free to edit even at this moment > > (although they keep being hindered), while the one who was wrongly accused > > to associate with them was taken to the backyard and executed on the sly > > for > > sulking against the conduct of the purges. The language and the conduct of > > this episode suggests a combination of muting the dissent and a seizure of > > the opportunity by some people who have a problem with the respective user > > and/or with the Wikipedia he started." > > > > > > > > After this episode, I have a feeling I am in China when logged in to > > English > > Wikipedia. I don't know if other users are in my situation. I guess that my > > luck resides in this coverage, to make my case known to the "free world". I > > did not check thoroughly the other things highlighted in the article, > > however, the links provided look compelling. > > > > > > Desiphral > > _______________________________________________ > > WikiEN-l mailing list > > [email protected] > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > > _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
