Requests for comment/Administrators' abuses and harassments in the German Wiktionary

The following request for comments is closed. User:Ыруатук was desysopped in the community process, and this was done properly and recognized by the stewards, so there is nothing else to do here. --Rs chen 7754 01:41, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A small group of administrators and followers around the bureaucrat user:Baisemain with extreme views, and a contempt for democracy, are trying to control the German Wiktionary and its contributors.

Their contempt for democracy is e.g. clearly expressed in this post from the German Teestube:

"Dann werde ich jetzt ausnahmsweise mal sehr deutlich:
Wikipedia ist keine Demokratie. Gleiches gilt auch für Wiktionary. Wir befinden uns hier in einem Projekt zum Aufbau eines Online-Wörterbuches. Demokratiespiele bitte woanders spielen. Das Ziel von Wiktionary wird leider hin und wieder aus den Augen verloren: Es geht hier nicht um persönliche Eitelkeiten, nicht um ein soziales Netzwerk, nicht um psychologische Betreuung, nicht um Integration aller Nutzer um jeden Preis. Es geht hier einzig und allein um den Aufbau eines Online-Wörterbuches. Wer das nicht akzeptiert und dabei massiv stört (vor allem, wenn es sich um rechtliche Drohungen wie Anzeigen bei der Polizei handelt, die direkte Auswirkungen ins Real-Life haben), hat in diesem Projekt nichts zu suchen. Punkt. --Stepro (Diskussion) 20:22, 15. Jun 2013 (MESZ)" [1]

To silence any criticism they use a policy of fear, and try to silence every user opposing to their extreme undemocratic views. Normally this fear is installed in the users by excessive bullying of other users. To silence my criticism, and since they could not find anything to accuse me of, they went to the extreme of fabricating false accusations (by user:Betterknower). Based on these false fabricated accusations they are now trying to deprive me of my user rights. This unprecedented procedure is agains any rules in the Wiktionary, in the Wiki-organisation, and in any democratic society. It is a violation of the whole Wiki-idea. What is more, after launching this attack against me, they deleted text that I wrote in my defense, they even went to the extreme of blocking me (by user:Stepro) to stop me from defending myself from these false accusations.--Lars Gardenius ^(diskurs) 18:41, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Who says Wikimedia Projects are democracy? This essay sums it pretty well up. Furthermore, I don't see how such unanimously opposed requests are undemocratic. This RFC and edits like this one (more trolling/admin right abuse is recorded for example here, here, and there) are indicating pure trolling to me. Please note that I'm not involved in this conflict and just summing up what I see about this conflict onwiki. Kind regards, Vogone talk 19:23, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User JanRieke has offered to help solving the conflict. I think the decision for or against this process should be awaited, perhaps it is possible to find a solution without having more and more agitation. IW 19:37, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Two things. a) Communities are within their rights to withdraw administrative privileges thru a discussion/vote, that is normal procedure unless a specific policy specifies the manner for such a procedure to take place; b) Wikimedia is not a democracy, and I'm not sure what gave you the idea that it was. It is based on consensus, not democracy and that has always been the guiding value among all Wikimedia projects. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 23:03, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I must also add, that from ridiculously formatted posts screaming and yelling in red characters in English on a German project, you only help whoever is desysopping you make the point that you probably should be. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 23:06, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have not said that the German Wiktionary is democratic, it is obviously not. However these antidemocratic forces that now seem to be so prevalent there, represents a very small and marginalized group in society, and therefore not suitable as a base for making a description of languages which include all types of people in a society.
I also wanted to point out to WMF, and then especially WMF Deutschland, that it is in fact funding these small extreme and marginalized groups instead of the joint project that could involve the whole population.
I believe that the post above from the user:Snowolf above illustrates my point pretty clear. It uses the kind of language and expressions that are so typically of the Wikis, and are so very seldom heard in the society outside. I don't understand if the user thinks it is right to fabricate accusations if it is done with a consensus in a very small group. These methods have been used in many undemocratic countries like the Soviet Union, China and probably also in Germany during the nazi era.
I also believe that if you ask the population as a whole they don't want a Wiktionary dominated by these small extreme groups but a democratic Wiktionary based on science, with respect for its contributors, young or old.
Lars Gardenius ^(diskurs) 07:29, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what what the population of the planet as a whole wants is relevant to a Wikimedia project and why you bring it up, but I'd like to point out that when all of this smoke disappears, all that seems remaining is that you've apparently abused your administrative privileges and your fellow wiktionarians decided to remove them from you, at which point you threw a tantrum writing in red caps in English on the page where they were doing so to make up for the fact that you appear to be in a minority of one on this issue on dewiktionary, as shown by the unanimity in the vote. While Wikimedia projects are not democratic and do not aim to be, unanimity is certainly not anti-democratic, and there's no way to spin that. Based on your strong beliefs expressed in the other RfC, I would advise you that you might be a good fit on a project such as w:Citizendium, maybe you could convince them to branch out into a dictionary instead of just an encyclopedia. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 11:49, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, I add that accusing your fellow wiktionarians of acting like Nazis is astoundingly offensive, for a) you're on the German Wiktionarian b) I don't think they've ever killed anybody, have they? Comparing fellow Wikimedians with whom you have a disagreement to mass murderers is both ridiculous and flat out unacceptable, although it proves Godwin's law is a real thing. I suggest that you withdraw the comparison above and apologize for making it. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 11:54, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Seconding Snowolf: this is a remarkable fast demonstration of Godwin's Law. You might want to take a wikibreak, have some tea, and when you come back, only edit articles. –SJ talk 01:24, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have already understood that some small extreme groups have no interest in what the population needs or wants, they participate here for their own personal goals, and to reach these goals they try to dominate and rule over some Wiktionaries.
As said I have not abused any administrative privileges, these false accusations were fabricated by user:Betterknower, based on his inability to distinguish between perfect and future tense in the English language. People are now very keen to forget these false accusations.
I believe I have every right to defend myself against these false accusations, and in any way I see fit. There may be rules in Wikipedia against users defending themselves against attacks from certain privileged users, but I live in a democratic society and maintain my right to do so, whether Wikis call themselves anti-democratic or undemocratic. And I am hardly alone, it is just that we who don't believe in these kind of undemocratic methods have decided to boycott that election farce.
I made a relevant comparison to methods used in the German Wiktionary and methods used in some undemocratic country. Since my own family is partly jewish I see no reason why Germans should be particularly sensitive to such a comparison. I might not have done such a comparison on the Israeli wiktionary, however, not to hurt some old feelings.
I have stopped working already in February due to user:Baisemain's behaviour, I see no possibility to participate in the future either as long as these extreme groups dominate the Wiktionary. I have no illusion but that their ultimate goal is to block me out, and that it doesn't matter what I do, except obeying their every whims. They will in the end fabricate some new false accusations, just like they did this time.
Lars Gardenius ^(diskurs) 08:32, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that for the protection of the average user against abuses and mobbing from administrators and bureaucrats, are these kind of fora quite useless.
It would be more reasonable to strengthen the role of the stewards and also give them more responsibilities to upheld rules and laws.
This of course demand the objectivity and independence of the stewards.
Lars Gardenius ^(diskurs) 14:03, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relevant discussions

23PowerZ (talk) 00:45, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]