Universal Code of Conduct/Coordinating Committee/Cases/Sysop abuse in Swahili Wikipedia

Parties

---

Kisare

Description of the problem - (Kisare)

I am reporting severe UCoC violations by the admins of Swahili Wikipedia. There is frankly a lot to report, but I'll try to be concise and detail everything in chronological order.

2008

In the article tendo la ndoa (sexual intercourse), Riccardo wrote:

"Jinsia zinalenga kukamilishana katika ndoa. Kadiri ya Biblia Mungu baada ya kumuumba Adamu alisema, 'Si vema mtu awe peke yake. Nitamfanyia msaidizi wa kufanana naye' (Mwa 2:18)."

Translation: "The genders complement one another in marriage. According to the Bible, God after creating Adam said, 'It is not good that man be alone. I will create for him a helper suitable for him' (Gen. 2:18)."

He goes on to write in that same section giving his personal opinions on the spirit of men and women. He also incorrectly states that the breaking of hymen is a sign that a woman has lost her virginity.

Here[9] Riccardo wrote a new article on uzazi wa mpango (family planning). He writes that

"(njia za teknolojia za uzazi wa mpango) zinaweza zikaandaa njia kwa mauaji ya halaiki."

Translation: "(technological methods of family planning) can lead the way for genocide"

He goes on to promote abstinence as a superior method of family planning, stating about contraceptive methods:

"zinategemea uamuzi hata wa mmojawao tu, zinajenga ubinafsi, zinamfanya mwanamume hasa azingatie kujamiiana tu hata mwanamke asiridhike na hivyo asipende kuungana na mumewe tena, zinaelekeza kutembea nje ya ndoa bila ya wasiwasi."

Translation: "they depend on only one of them, they build selfishness, they make the man focus only on sex to the point that the woman is not satisfied and therefore does not want to be with her husband anymore, they lead to leaving the marriage carelessly."

He furthermore promotes a conspiracy theory that the U.S. government is trying to spread contraception to poor countries because they need new markets since people in rich countries are supposedly seeing the harms of contraception.

2013

In this edit of the article on contraceptives, Riccardo removes someone else's statement that contraception reduces the likelihood of STDs, and adds a statement which claims without evidence that contraception lead to the spread of "ukimwi na maradhi mengine" (AIDs and other diseases). [10]

2016

In this discussion between Riccardo and another wikipedian, the wikipedian laments that the family planning article is extremely biased and written from a strictly religious viewpoint, and that the article needs to be neutrally written. Translated into English, he responds:

"Brother, thank you for your comment. As you read above, there is another page on birth control that presents a different position, namely the one promoted by those who profit from the contraceptives business, abortions and fetal remains. Let people also hear the pro-life perspective, or edit that page as well. In any case, let us not deceive ourselves that abortion is a method of family planning, because if there is a pregnancy, the birth has already begun. Abortion is the murder of an innocent person. Even if it is small, it has all its identity in its DNA. Peace to you!

In addition to that, Swahili is an African language and our people have their own values that do not necessarily align with those of Western countries. For example, in Tanzania abortion is a criminal offense, as is homosexuality. But the English Wikipedia leans towards supporting them."[11]

It should be noted that although Riccardo Riccioni often makes references to "our people" and "our culture", he himself is an Italian born[12] catholic missionary [13] [14] [15] in Tanzania. Using this "us vs them" language, which he does often, is extremely hypocritical and dismissive, but there's more of that later.

2020

Here, Riccardo proselytizes about Christianity. [16]

2021

Here, in the context of same-sex marriage, Riccardo writes:

"inabidi kulinda maadili ya jamii ili iweze kustawi dhidi ya tamaa zisizoijenga" [17]

Translation: "it is necessary to protect social values so that it can thrive against desires that do not build it ('it' being society)"

2024

Finally, what brought this all to my attention was the article on homosexuality. The article was originally written by a user in 2019 in a fairly neutral manner albeit with no sources[18]. Riccardo dramatically altered the article. He wrote that gay people are sometimes gay because they have "been subjected to or has allowed themselves to be subjected to the temptation until they become so addicted to it that they are unable to break free" (translated).[19]. He wrote the rhetorical question "Is it permissible to follow any direction that we feel or have accustomed ourselves to by repeatedly committing evil deeds?" (translated).[20]. The amount of hateful and biased edits he made are frankly too numerous to list here. Just simply look through the difference history and look at any of the edits he made, and you are guaranteed to find something comparing gay people to pedophiles,[21] comparing gay sex to rape,[22] conflating gay people with transgender people, claims that gay people are trying to force children to transition,[23] links to extreme right wing articles as if they are reputable sources,[24] etc. Multiple people attempted to rectify this article before me, [25][26] but Riccardo promptly undid these edits [27][28]. This resulted in arguments with those two users, one of whom was banned [29][30].

Originally not knowing this long history, I similarly attempted to edit the article, and I was similarly attacked and accused of imperialism by Riccardo [31]. He of course undid my edits repeatedly.[32] A similar conflict occurred in the article on transgender people.

Previous attempts at a solution - (Kisare)

I reported this situation as a steward request.[33] A request for comment was also created by a global sysop. [34] This same global sysop attempted to restore my edits[35] but Riccardo once again undid this.[36][37] I was then temporarily banned for reporting these abuses by Asterlegorch367, who was supported by Riccardo and Hussein m mmbaga, and Justine Msechu, all of whom are admins of swwiki.[38] Neither the steward request nor the request for comment have been resolved, despite the original report occurring in April of 2024.

Suggested solutions - (Kisare)

The moderation at swwiki seems fundamentally flawed. They apparently coordinated together to maintain the misinformation and hateful content in the article [39]. This has been a problem in some form going back all the way to 2008. Multiple people have brought up this issue, and each time they are shot down or even banned. At the very least I think Riccardo Riccioni needs to lose his privileges, as he has absolutely abused them and has shown a complete a total disregard to neutral point of view. I don't know what should be done about the other administrators who were complicit and supportive of Riccardo, but perhaps they should lose privileges too.

Riccardo Riccioni

Description of the problem - Riccardo Riccioni

Prima premessa: scrivo in Italiano perché le traduzioni automatiche dal Kiswahili sono piuttosto scadenti. Potrei scrivere in Inglese come quando ho risposto a Minorax [40], ma non l’ho studiato tanto; per di più vorrei sottolineare che è solo una delle tante lingue in uso, non necessariamente la migliore, e che l’edizione inglese di Wikipedia non è il modello di tutte le altre, come la cultura anglosassone non è proprio ideale.

Seconda premessa è che io sono Tanzaniano e richiedo di essere riconosciuto e trattato come tale. Kisare, che pure crede nella possibilità di cambiare “genere”, e magari pretende io chiami donna un uomo nonostante la biologia non lo permetta, continua ad insistere sulla mia origine italiana per separarmi dal popolo di mia scelta come fossi ancora un estraneo alla cultura est-africana. Io sono un “trans”: mi sono inserito bene nel contesto in cui vivo da oltre 40 anni e da cui sono stato accettato in pieno. Lui ha giustamente notato che gli amministratori di Wikipedia in Swahili mi tengono in alta considerazione, ma non sa che è lo stesso a livello nazionale. Solo lui, un Americano, non mi accetta come Tanzaniano e vede la mia identità come ”extremely hypocritical and dismissive”: linguaggio piuttosto offensivo e contrario alle nostre regole di condotta.

Terza premessa: Kisare sottolinea che sono un missionario cattolico come avesse fatto una grande scoperta che mi metterebbe in discredito. E’ forse una colpa? Io non faccio mistero di chi sono, per questo non uso uno pseudonimo e ho messo una mia foto in saio francescano sulla mia pagina come utente. Da quando in qua Wikipedia esclude contributi di qualcuno in base alla religione o alla professione? Vuole tornare ai tempi della caccia alle streghe o ai comunisti, o al “dalli all’untore”, per suscitare reazioni avverse in chi magari ha antipatia verso la Chiesa Cattolica, come d’uso nella bigotteria degli USA, solo in parte passata con il Ku Klux Klan. Si tratterebbe di cristianofobia.

Quarta premessa: negli argomenti controversi in oggetto la mia posizione, a prescindere dalla religione, è quella della stragrande maggioranza degli Africani e di tanta altra gente in tutti i paesi del mondo. Non per niente Kisare definisce la Tanzania nel suo complesso “a very homophobic country”, abusando di un termine per mettere il bavaglio ad opinioni diverse. Lui valuta la nostra nazione in modo molto negativo solo in base alla sua posizione verso l’omosessualità. Questa è miopia.

Quinta premessa: Kisare critica miei contributi a partire dal 2008, senza pensare che in 16 anni potrei avere cambiato totalmente posizione ed essere diventato promotore della cosiddetta ideologia gender, beneficiando per questo di tanti dollari o euro dall’estero. Inoltre qua la questione non è cosa penso o cosa ho scritto, ma se dal 2014 ho abusato dei miei privilegi come sysop in contrasto con la neutralità programmatica di Wikipedia. Personalmente penso di aver agito in modo più neutrale di Kisare che difende a spada tratta l’omosessualità come se fosse già universalmente accettata o difesa dalle istituzioni internazionali, mentre all’ONU le discussioni al riguardo sono sempre più accese nonostante i paesi occidentali ricorrano a ricatti soprattutto economici. La mia neutralità è che oggi abbiamo culture che l’accettano e altre che la rifiutano, e che quindi su Wikipedia bisogna dare spazio a tutte. Quello che in Occidente viene presentato come diritto da noi è un delitto. All’inverso la poligamia che in Occidente è un delitto, da noi è un diritto ben consolidato. Perché Wikipedia dovrebbe schierarsi tutta da una parte come vorrebbe Kisare e come fa l’edizione inglese, dove ho cercato più volte inutilmente di contribuire? Dobbiamo anche tenere conto delle leggi locali, dove praticare e promuovere l’omosessualità è reato e potrebbe avere gravi conseguenze per la nostra edizione e i suoi amministratori.

Sesta premessa: chiunque può sbagliare, soprattutto quando il lavoro è tanto e il tempo poco. Non pretendo che tutti i miei oltre 137,000 contributi siano stati perfetti. Una volta mi sono perfino autobloccato! In ogni caso non ho mai bloccato Kisare, nonostante fin dall’inizio abbia mostrato un’insopportabile sicurezza di sé e un disprezzo degli amministratori locali, tanto da non ritenerli presenti con la mentalità dell’ “Hic sunt leones”. Tuttora pensa andremmo tutti cambiati, lasciando a lui campo libero. Invece ci siamo, lavoriamo in pieno accordo e abbiamo fatto crescere la nostra edizione fin quasi a 100,000 pagine, visitate da un numero rispettabile di Tanzaniani e sempre più anche da gente di altri Paesi.

Vengo alla questione “omosessualità”: io ho soltanto bloccato CuriousScientist1 per tre giorni dandogliene le ragioni [41]. Inoltre, contrariamente a quanto scritto da Kisare, io non ho approvato il suo blocco da parte di Asterlegorch367 (forse mi ha confuso con Czeus25Masele che gli scrisse come Hussein m mmbaga na Justine Msechu).

Quanto a Feelinabsurd, che ha avviato la pagina, non è solo che non ha messo note, come riferito da Kisare, ma ha pubblicato un testo del tutto difforme dallo stile di Wikipedia [42], teso più cha altro ad incoraggiare gli omosessuali a fare “coming out”. Io ho cercato di utilizzare tale materiale in una pagina conforme a tale stile e meno partigiana.

Quando dall’estero 73.76.10.179 ha aggiunto un collegamento con interviste a omosessuali Tanzaniani Mahojiano: WanaLGBT Tanzania, non l’ho affatto cancellato, ma solo tradotto e trasferito al posto giusto, aggiungendo un altro collegamento a opinioni contrarie. Questa è neutralità.

Quando Kwamigami ha offerto i suoi contributi in favore dell’omosessualità, li ho lasciati. In tale occasione è intervenuto a proteggere il testo il compianto Kipala, che da buon tedesco era piuttosto favorevole all’omosessualità.

Poi è ricomparso Feelinabsurd per rimuovere il collegamento che avevo aggiunto, ritenendolo contrario alla verità. Per tre volte consecutive l’ho reinserito informandolo che si completava con quello di opposta posizione degli omosessuali Tanzaniani. Vedendo questa guerra editoriale, Kipala è intervenuto di nuovo [43] ed ha alzato il livello di protezione. Dopo di che io ho continuato a rivedere il testo per tenere conto delle osservazioni di CuriousScientist1.

Quanto all’accusa rivoltami da Kisare che io cerchi di promuovere la mia religione, lui porta come prova la pagina sui 10 Comandamenti. Non capisco dove sia la colpa di presentare la prospettiva cristiana al riguardo, usando un titolo esplicito: “I 10 Comandamenti nel Cristianesimo”. E’ vero che ho scritto molto sul Cristianesimo Cattolico, ma anche su altre religioni [44] e denominazioni cristiane [45], come su filosofie anche opposte a ogni fede [46]. Descriverle non significa promuoverle.

Secondo me il problema di fondo, fin dall’inizio quando Kisare ancora studiava il Kiswahili, è che cambia cosa e come vuole, anche modelli usati da tanti articoli, trasferisce pagine, etc. spesso senza consultare nessuno di noi che conosciamo la realtà e gli usi linguistici locali, non solo dai libri come lui. Basta leggere la sua pagina di discussione [47] per vedere che su questo suo modo di fare è stato richiamato diverse volte. Riconosco che è competente e preciso e che a volte negli ultimi tempi ci ha chiesto dei pareri, ma crede troppo di capire tutto lui.

Justine Msechu

Description of the problem - Justine Msechu

Kumekuwa na changamoto kubwa inayomhusu Ndugu Kisare katika kufuata maelekezo na miongozo inayotolewa na wakabidhi wa Wikipedia ya Kiswahili. Mara kwa mara, Kisare amekuwa akibishana kila anapoelekezwa badala ya kushirikiana au kujifunza. Pia, ametoa kauli zinazodharau jumuiya yetu, akidai kuwa Wikipedia ya Kiswahili ni ndogo na haina wakabidhi, jambo linalodhihirisha dharau kwa kazi ya wachangiaji wengine. Zaidi ya hayo, amejificha chini ya mwamvuli wa kuhariri makala yenye mada nyeti (ushoga), akitumia mada hiyo kama njia ya kuendeleza ajenda binafsi huku akipuuza maonyo yaliyotolewa na wakabidhi. Kisare amekuwa akifanya mabadiliko makubwa kwenye makala bila kushirikiana au kuweka mjadala wa pamoja, jambo ambalo linavunja misingi ya ushirikiano wa Wikipedia. Anabadili majina ya nchi kwa Kiswahili wakati hata katika silabasi hakuna. Mfano Guinea, yeye ameiita GINE kama kawaida. Huo ni upotoshaji. Kama katika Kiswahili sanifu halipo, basi makala irudi umbo la awali. Hakuna majadaliano, wala hakuna nini anatoa tu maumbo.

Kila mara anapokosolewa au kuelekezwa, hujibu kwa ubishi na msimamo wa kwamba yeye ndiye anayejua zaidi. Hali hii haifai katika jumuiya inayojengwa kwa ushirikiano. Tafadhali rejelea mijadala ifuatayo kwa ushahidi wa tabia yake ya kupuuza wakabidhi na kushindwa kushirikiana:

Previous attempts at a solution - Justine Msechu

Wakabidhi wamekuwa wakijaribu kumwelewesha kwa njia ya mazungumzo kupitia kurasa za majadiliano. Mfano wa majaribio haya unaweza kupatikana kwenye viungo vifuatavyo:

1. Majadiliano ya Mtumiaji Kisare (Sehemu ya 7)
2. Majadiliano ya Mtumiaji Kisare (Sehemu ya 6)
3. Majadiliano ya Mtumiaji Kisare (Sehemu ya 9)
4. User Talk Kisare kwenye Wikipedia ya Kiingereza

Kumekuwa na majaribio ya kumpatia maelekezo juu ya jinsi ya kushirikiana kwa heshima na kuheshimu michango ya wachangiaji wengine. Michango yake kwenye makala mbalimbali, ikiwa ni pamoja na mada nyeti kama ushoga, imetolewa maonyo kwa mabadiliko yaliyovunja misingi ya Wikipedia ya kiswahili, lakini bado hajazingatia maonyo hayo.

Kufungiwa kwake hakukuwa uamuzi wa mtu mmoja pekee; ni maamuzi ya pamoja ya maadmini wote baada ya mjadala wa kina. Lengo lilikuwa ni kumwelewesha makosa yake na umuhimu wa kuheshimu michango ya wengine. Ni muhimu atambue kwamba makala za Wikipedia ni matokeo ya juhudi za wachangiaji wengi. Badala ya kufanya mabadiliko makubwa bila mawasiliano, inampasa kushiriki katika majadiliano ya pamoja, hasa pale anapohisi kuwa makala fulani haiko sawa.

Suggested solutions - Justine Msechu

1. Kushirikiana na Jumuiya: Kisare anapaswa kuelewa kuwa Wikipedia ni ya kushirikiana, na maamuzi kuhusu makala yanapaswa kufanyika kupitia mjadala wa pamoja badala ya uamuzi binafsi.
2. Kuheshimu Wakabidhi na Michango ya Wengine: Lazima atambue kuwa wakabidhi na wachangiaji wengine wana mchango muhimu katika kuimarisha jumuiya, na hivyo mawasiliano ya heshima ni ya msingi.
3. Kufundishwa Upya Miongozo: Iwapo Kisare atakubali kurekebisha tabia yake, anaweza kufundishwa tena miongozo ya Wikipedia, ikiwa ni pamoja na umuhimu wa kushirikiana na kuheshimu vyanzo vya habari.
4. Kuhusisha Mijadala: Pale anapohisi kuwa makala fulani haiko sawa, anapaswa kuanzisha mjadala wa wazi katika ukurasa wa majadiliano badala ya kufanya mabadiliko makubwa bila mawasiliano yoyote.
5. Ufuatiliaji wa Mabadiliko Yake: Ili kuzuia ukiukaji wa miongozo kwa mara nyingine, mabadiliko yake yafuatiliwe kwa ukaribu kwa kipindi fulani.

Other feedback

For people who are not parties, the following rules apply:

• Comments/replies may not be longer the 500 words and may not include more than 25 diffs/links. The U4C may, if asked, grant additional words or diffs/links.
• Comments/replies are permitted only in your own section
• Contributions that do not help clarify the matter can be removed
• All accusations and claims must be supported with diffs/links

Discussion between the involved parties and the U4C members

Only the involved parties and U4C members may edit in this section.

• Just a note that, given the holiday period, our usual service standard of two weeks might get slightly pushed, but we do encourage everyone involved to leave at statement as soon as they are able so we can proceed with the case. To the respondants (Swahili Wikipedia administrators in particular), I want to note the importance of providing a complete response here - these are serious allegations that could suggest a systemic failure to enforce the UCOC on your project. @Kisare: I see the notification diffs you have provided above only give notice that you intend to file a U4C case. Please provide a subsequent notice that the case has been filed, linking those users to this page, and update the diffs when done. – Ajraddatz (talk) 19:10, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

  Will do Kisare (talk) 21:49, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

• Hello @Kisare:, what appeals have you attempted locally on sw.wp so far? --Ghilt (talk) 15:56, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

  Adding to the question of my colleague: why did you got Meta earlier this year rather than ask the sw.wp community for help? Barkeep49 (talk) 00:06, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

  For one, Riccardo is highly respected in swwiki,[48] having been around since its founding. He is essentially the main admin and by far the one that is most active. Additionally, I saw this had been an issue in swwiki for literally years. As I explained, multiple people had brought up this problem, attempted to resolve it, and nothing was ever done about it. So it seemed like a fundamental failure of governance in swwiki. Lastly, Tanzania is a very homophobic country (homosexuality can result in years in prison). The average Tanzanian finds homosexuality to be a perversion (I'm speaking from experience in my family as well as statistically). The collection of those facts meant I thought appealing on swwiki would be absolutely fruitless. And as I later found out, it turns out the admins of swwiki had actually coordinated the homophobic content.[49] Kisare (talk) 01:29, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

  You haven't shown diffs for "multiple people had brought up this problem, attempted to resolve it, and nothing was ever done about it.". Barkeep49 (talk) 01:31, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

  Yes I did. For the homosexuality article specifically, see: "Multiple people attempted to rectify this article before me, [25][26] but Riccardo promptly undid these edits [27][28]. This resulted in arguments with those two users, one of whom was banned [29][30]." The section labeled 2016 also describes this problem in a different article, but I didn't know about that at the time of reporting this on meta. Kisare (talk) 01:39, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

  When the other swwiki admins learned of my report on meta, they decided to ban me temporarily [1]. Discussion with them was fruitless. They only decided to unban me once my banning got attention on meta[50]. Kisare (talk) 01:21, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

  @Kisare which admin rights did Riccardo use in violation to the UCoC? The links you provided are mostly about his role as an editor. --Ghilt (talk) 10:03, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

• @Justine Msechu: or other Wakabidhi: can you please link to the policies that you believe Kisare violated? Anything besides sw:Wikipedia:Kuheshimiana? Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:23, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

  Tatizo linaendelea kuonekana wazi kupitia mabadiliko yanayofanywa na Ndugu Kisare katika kurasa za Wikipedia ya Kiswahili. Kisare mara kwa mara amekuwa akibadilisha maudhui kwa namna ambayo inakiuka misingi ya Wikipedia, ikiwemo:

  Kutumia Kiswahili cha mtaani: Amedhamiria kubadilisha majina ya makala kwa Kiswahili cha mtaani badala ya kutumia lugha rasmi ya Kiswahili inayokubalika na jumuiya ya wachangiaji.

  Kutozingatia vyanzo vya habari: Ameshindwa kufuata maudhui ya vyanzo alivyotumia, ambapo marejeo yaliyotolewa kwenye makala hayalingani na maudhui aliyoongeza.

  Kwa mfano, katika ukurasa wa Gine ya Ikweta, Kisare alifanya mabadiliko makubwa yanayokiuka miongozo ya Wikipedia:

  Linki ya BBC: (BBC Swahili) inahusu habari inayotofautiana kabisa na alichokiandika.

  • Linki ya DW: (DW Swahili) inahusiana na uchaguzi nchini Guinea ya Ikweta, lakini alibadilisha maudhui kwa mtazamo wake binafsi bila uhusiano sahihi na chanzo.

  Mabadiliko katika ukurasa: (Mabadiliko ya Kisare katika Gine ya Ikweta) yanaonyesha jinsi alivyobadilisha maudhui na kupuuza viwango vya uandishi vya Wikipedia.

  1. Maonyo ya Awali: Wakabidhi walimwelekeza mara kadhaa kuhusu kufuata miongozo ya Wikipedia, lakini maelekezo hayo yamepuuzwa.
  2. Rufaa ya Mabadiliko: Wakabidhi walirekebisha baadhi ya makosa yake kwa mikono ili kurejesha maudhui sahihi, lakini bado Kisare aliendelea kubadili makala kwa namna isiyokubalika.

  Vyanzo vya Mafunzo: Viungo vya mafunzo kuhusu misingi ya Wikipedia, kama vile Neutral Point of View (NPOV) (Wikipedia Essentials Training), vilitolewa ili kumsaidia kuelewa jinsi ya kushirikiana ipasavyo, lakini hajazingatia Justine Msechu (talk) 14:21, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

  Kiswahili cha mtaani? "Gine ya Ikweta" ni jina linalotumiwa na Umoja wa Afrika,[51] na kinyambuo cha jina hilo, "Ginekweta" ni jina rasmi na sanifu kwa mujibu wa TUKI. Lakini wakabidhi wamesema kwamba hawapendi majina ya Kiswahili sanifu ya TUKI na kwa hivyo hawayafuati. Siyo Kiswahili cha mtaani. Kwa kweli ni Kiswahili sanifu.

  Also, I genuinely thought the name of the article was a mistake because the article elsewhere uses Gine ya Ikweta. But if you want to change it back, I don't care. I just wish you would alao notice to my attempts to open a discussion about this issue[52][53] Kisare (talk) 15:16, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

  Kama ungekuwa unaelewa maana halisi ya majadiliano, ulipaswa kusubiri tufikie uamuzi wa pamoja badala ya kujiamulia mwenyewe. Tulishakubaliana kama wakabidhi wa Wikipedia ya Kiswahili kwamba tunapaswa kutumia majina rasmi ambayo hata vyombo vya habari vinavitumia. Rejea linki uliyotuma hapo juu – je, ni wewe peke yako unayeongea Kiswahili kana kwamba umeamua sisi sote tutumie TUKI? Je, hakuna watumiaji wengine wa Kiswahili?

  Hatupendi kuona Wikipedia ya Kiswahili ikiwa na majina tofauti na yale yanayotumiwa na media nyingine. Hili si sahihi, kwani linaweza kufanikisha upotoshaji wa taarifa. Kuandika majina kwa sauti tunayoisikia haimaanishi kwamba tunaweza kuacha umbo la asili, ambalo mara nyingi lina msingi wake katika uhalisia wa lugha.

  Kingine, unachaguaje kuandika au kutumia maneno ya jinsia kama she ilhali hujui jinsia ya mtu husika? Hili pia linaweza kufasiriwa kama dharau.

  Wanachama wa U4C wanapaswa kuangalia suala hili kwa mtazamo mpana zaidi. Sisi hatupigani nawe, bali tunajaribu kufanya kazi kwa pamoja na kujenga maelewano. Tukishirikiana na kuelewana, tunaweza kuimarisha Wikipedia ya Kiswahili na kuhakikisha inabaki kuwa chanzo cha kuaminika kwa watumiaji wake. Amani kwako Justine Msechu (talk) 16:02, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

  Sielewi unataja NPOV ingawa kwa zaidi ya miaka 10 Riccardo amekuwa akikiuka NPOV na wakabidhi wa swwiki hawajaingilia, kwa kweli wamemjalia wakiwafungia wale ambao wamejaribu kuitengeneza. Wewe mwenyewe ulikubali kunifungia kwa sababu ya kuripoti Riccardo na kuandika kuhusu ushoga bila upendeleo. Nimekiuka NPOV vipi? Kisare (talk) 16:07, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Google translate to Swahili/Google kutafsiri kwa Kiswahili
@Justine Msechu: au Wakabidhi wengine: tafadhali unaweza kuunganisha na sera ambazo unaamini Kisare alikiuka? Kitu chochote zaidi ya sw:Wikipedia:Kuheshimiana? Asante, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:23, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

• @Kisare: I want to understand the full context here. What level of Swahili proficiency do you have? I see people left you comments with concerns about your approach to editing when you were editing astronomy articles. Unlike your later editing with editing about homosexuality, it's not clear to me that you were responding to UCoC violations. This does not excuse UCoC violations, but the full context is important to helping me understand what kind of problem we have here. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:23, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

  My Swahili proficiency is intermediate.

  The editing of other articles including astronomy articles was not related to any concerns about UCoC violations. There was some carelessness I had early on as I was new to Wikipedia, but I never engaged in any sort of edit war. When people had issues with my edits and undid them, I never engaged in any edit wars. When they told me stop doing something, I stopped. That only changed when it came to the homosexuality article, because they were violating the UCoC.

  Of the 4 examples Justine provides, 2 are related to them wanting to force unsubstantiated and hateful content about homosexual and transgender people. Her citing that as an example of me being in the wrong for arguing against it just further demonstrates her lack of respect for the UCoC. The other two citations they provide are related to issues about country names, and the infobox country template.

  When it came to what to name the country articles, there were many articles that were not following the official, standard Swahili names for these countries as listed in multiple TUKI and BAKITA dictionaries, which are the organizations which define what is standard Swahili. Oftentimes the names of the articles were in English. Granted there was some carelessness on my part, I probably should've opened a discussion about it first, though at the time I honestly didn't suspect it'd be so contentious given it's just standard Swahili. When they brought up that they didn't like what I was doing, I tried to restart a discussion about it. No one ever responded so the discussion kind of died there and I stopped changing any country article names.

  When it came to some issues around the infobox country template, which can be a little buggy in swwiki, I tried to make fixes and improvements that unintentionally caused some issues. This was an unintentional and careless mistake on my part. When these issues were brought to my attention, I talked with the admins and we discussed how we can collaborate on improving the infobox country template while not breaking any articles which use the legacy template. I thought that whole thing was resolved a while ago, and I was completely cooperative, so I don't understand why that is being brought up now.

  This all feels like a distraction. Nowhere in their ban explanation do they cite the above issues. Those issues had already been resolved. The only things they actually cited are my edits to the homosexuality article, and my reporting of their UCoC violations. You can read their explanation yourself. Kisare (talk) 05:17, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Google translate to Swahili/Google kutafsiri kwa Kiswahili

@Kisare nataka kuelewa muktadha kamili hapa. Je, una kiwango gani cha ustadi wa Kiswahili? Ninaona watu walikuachia maoni wakiwa na wasiwasi kuhusu mbinu yako ya kuhariri ulipokuwa unahariri makala za unajimu. Tofauti na uhariri wako wa baadaye na uhariri kuhusu ushoga, siko wazi kwangu kuwa ulikuwa ukijibu ukiukaji wa UCoC. Hii haitoi udhuru kwa ukiukaji wa UCoC, lakini muktadha kamili ni muhimu ili kunisaidia kuelewa ni aina gani ya shida tuliyo nayo hapa. Asante, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:23, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

• Riccardo: thank you for your comments. They are very thoughtful and I am considering much of what you have written. I also wish there was better translation of Swahili and understand why you reply in Italian. I do want to respond to part of your 5th premise. Respecting the values of other projects and cultures is important to me. That is part of the Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC). Also part of the UCoC is: "In all Wikimedia projects, spaces and events, behaviour will be founded in respect, civility, collegiality, solidarity and good citizenship. This applies to all contributors and participants in their interaction with all contributors and participants, without exceptions based on age, mental or physical disabilities, physical appearance, national, religious, ethnic and cultural background, caste, social class, language fluency, sexual orientation, gender identity, sex or career field. Nor will we make exceptions based on standing, skills or accomplishments in the Wikimedia projects or movement." The Wikimedia Foundation Board has chosen to say accepting the sexual orientation of others (in addition to religion and nationality which you also mention) is a minimum expectation. What "respect, civility, collegiality, solidarity and good citizenship" looks like for homosexuality in a language where many of the countries its spoken have outlawed it is a difficult question. But that is the question to answer, not whether it will be respected. Barkeep49 (talk) 16:31, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Google translate to Swahili/Google kutafsiri kwa Kiswahili

Riccardo: asante kwa maoni yako. Wanafikiri sana na ninazingatia mengi ya uliyoandika. Pia natamani kuwe na tafsiri bora zaidi ya Kiswahili na nielewe ni kwa nini unajibu kwa Kiitaliano. Ninataka kujibu sehemu ya msingi wako wa 5. Kuheshimu maadili ya miradi na tamaduni zingine ni muhimu kwangu. Hiyo ni sehemu ya Kanuni ya Maadili ya Jumla (UCoC). Pia sehemu ya UCoC ni: "Katika miradi yote ya Wikimedia, maeneo mbalimbali na matukio, tabia itatakiwa kuwa kitu cha msingi kuzingatiwa ikiwa ni pamoja na utu, ujamaa, mshikamano na uraia mwema. Dhana hii itatumika kwa wachangiaji na washiriki wote kuhusu namna wanavyohusiana na wachangiaji pamoja na washiriki wengine bila ubaguzi wa kujali umri, kuwa sawa au na ulemavu kiakili, mwonekano wa nje wa mwili wa mtu, utaifa, udini, ukabila, asili ya kitamaduni, tabaka, tabaka la kijamii, uwezo wa kuongea lugha kwa ufasaha, mwelekeo wa kijinsia, utambulisho wa kijinsia, au eneo la kazi ambalo mtu anafanyia kazi. Wala hatutatakiwa kumtofautisha mtu kwa kigezo cha mafanikio, ujuzi au msimamo wake katika miradi ya Wikimedia au harakati zake." Bodi ya Wakfu wa Wikimedia imechagua kusema kukubali mwelekeo wa kingono wa wengine (pamoja na dini na utaifa ambao pia unataja) ni jambo la chini kabisa. matarajio. Je, "heshima, ustaarabu, ushirikiano, mshikamano na uraia mwema" (utu, ujamaa, mshikamano na uraia mwema) inaonekanaje kwa ushoga katika lugha ambayo nchi nyingi zinazozungumzwa zimeharamisha ni swali gumu. Lakini hilo ndilo swali la kujibu, si kama litaheshimiwa. Barkeep49 (talk) 16:31, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Deepl translation to Italian

Riccardo: grazie per i tuoi commenti. Sono molto ponderati e sto considerando molto di quello che hai scritto. Vorrei anche che ci fosse una migliore traduzione dello swahili e capisco perché rispondi in italiano. Vorrei rispondere a una parte della sua quinta premessa. Rispettare i valori di altri progetti e culture è importante per me. Questo fa parte del Codice di Condotta Universale (UCoC). Fa parte dell'UCoC anche: {In tutti i progetti, gli spazi e gli eventi Wikimedia, il comportamento sarà improntato al rispetto, alla civiltà, alla collegialità, alla solidarietà e alla buona cittadinanza. Questo vale per tutti i collaboratori e i partecipanti nella loro interazione con tutti i collaboratori e i partecipanti, senza eccezioni basate su età, disabilità mentali o fisiche, aspetto fisico, provenienza nazionale, religiosa, etnica e culturale, casta, classe sociale, conoscenza della lingua, orientamento sessuale, identità di genere, sesso o ambito professionale. Non faremo eccezioni in base alla posizione, alle competenze o ai risultati ottenuti nei progetti o nel movimento Wikimedia.} Il Consiglio della Wikimedia Foundation ha scelto di affermare che l'accettazione dell'orientamento sessuale degli altri (oltre alla religione e alla nazionalità, che anche tu citi) è un'aspettativa minima. Che cosa significhi “rispetto, civiltà, collegialità, solidarietà e buona cittadinanza” per l'omosessualità in una lingua in cui molti dei paesi in cui è parlata l'hanno messa fuori legge è una domanda difficile. Ma è questa la domanda a cui rispondere, non “se” sarà rispettata. Barkeep49 (talk) 16:31, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

@Riccardo, grazie per la tua esposizione. Ci siamo resi conto che le traduzioni automatiche dallo swahili verso qualsiasi lingua sono davvero terribili e personalmente mi chiedo quanto questo abbia contribuito all'animosità delle discussioni passate anche qui su Meta (mi riferisco in particolare alla RFC di aprile 2024). Il tema del riuscire a conciliare gli scopi divulgativi di Wikipedia con la sicurezza personale di chi localmente e in modo identificabile si occupa di un'edizione del progetto è sicuramente uno degli aspetti da considerare all'interno di questa richiesta. --Civvì (talk) 20:49, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

DeepL translation to English

Riccardo, thank you for your exposition. We have come to realize that machine translations from Swahili to any language are really terrible, and I personally wonder how much this has contributed to the animosity of past discussions here on Meta as well (I am referring in particular to the April 2024 RFC). The issue of being able to reconcile the purposes of Wikipedia with the personal safety of those locally and identifiably involved in an edition of the project is certainly one of the issues to be considered within this request. --Civvì (talk) 20:49, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Google translate to Swahili

Riccardo, asante kwa ufafanuzi wako. Tumegundua kuwa tafsiri za mashine kutoka kwa Kiswahili hadi lugha yoyote ni mbaya sana, na mimi binafsi ninashangaa ni kwa kiasi gani hii imechangia uadui wa mijadala iliyopita hapa kwenye Meta pia (ninarejelea haswa Aprili 2024 RFC). Suala la kuweza kupatanisha madhumuni ya Wikipedia na usalama wa kibinafsi wa wale wanaohusika katika eneo lako na kwa njia inayotambulika katika toleo la mradi hakika ni mojawapo ya masuala ya kuzingatiwa ndani ya ombi hili.--Civvì (talk) 20:49, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

U4C decision

Only U4C members may edit in this section

U4C member discussion

• One of the parties has privately shared some reasons they won't be able to respond soon. Combined with the holidays many members on the U4C will be celebrating over the next two weeks, I think we should plan to extend our 2 week accept/decline window. Barkeep49 (talk) 16:55, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

  No objections from me. – Ajraddatz (talk) 18:49, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

• I would like to hear from the other named editors. I am hoping they will respond within the next 3-5 days. Otherwise I will make my vote about this case without their perspective. Barkeep49 (talk) 01:41, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Google translate to Swahili/Google kutafsiri kwa Kiswahili
Ningependa kusikia kutoka kwa wahariri wengine waliotajwa. Natumai watajibu ndani ya siku 3-5 zijazo. Vinginevyo nitapiga kura yangu kuhusu kesi hii bila mtazamo wao. Barkeep49 (talk) 01:44, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

• First, I apologize for what I expect will be poor machine translation into Swahili. Below I have voted to accept. On my mind is "systemic failures". This report alleges that there are "severe" problems (the charter and guidelines normally say systemic failures, but once in each document it's referred to as severe systemic failures). I do not think there is enough to prove systemic failure, but it is possible that if we open a case more evidence will be provided to prove systemic failure. And so I have a bunch of questions:
  • This wikipedia does not have a "High-level decision-making body". What difference does it make in this case if we declare it a systemic failure or not?

    To partially answer my own question, I think we could remove administrator from the people named in this case. But I don't think we could remove every administrator or do other major changes to the project without a systemic failure.

  • When do we need to announce that we are investigating a systemic failure? Does it have to be now when we accept the case? Can it be later?
  • What due process do we have for a project when we are investigating a systemic failure? I think we must announce it with enough time that a project has time to submit evidence showing it is not a systemic failure.
  • The charter says at least a majority is needed to start a systemic failure investigation. Do we want just a majority or do we want a higher amount?
  • I think there needs to be a super-majority in order to find that there has been a systemic failure and I think remedies that can only happen with systemic failure must have a super-majority as well.

I don't know that we need to answer these now but I want to public acknowledge that I am thinking about them (and discussing them with my u4c colleagues). Barkeep49 (talk) 16:07, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Google translate to Swahili/Google kutafsiri kwa Kiswahili

Kwanza, naomba radhi kwa ninachotarajia kutakuwa na tafsiri mbovu ya mashine kwa Kiswahili. Hapa chini nimepiga kura kukubali. Kwa akili yangu ni "kushindwa kwa utaratibu". Ripoti hii inadai kwamba kuna matatizo "mbaya" (mkataba na miongozo kawaida husema kushindwa kwa utaratibu, lakini mara moja katika kila hati inajulikana kama kushindwa kali kwa utaratibu). Sidhani kama kuna kutosha kuthibitisha kushindwa kimfumo, lakini inawezekana kwamba tukifungua kesi ushahidi zaidi utatolewa kuthibitisha kushindwa kimfumo. Na kwa hivyo nina rundo la maswali: Wikipedia hii haina "chombo cha ngazi ya juu cha kufanya maamuzi". Je, ni tofauti gani katika kesi hii ikiwa tunatangaza kushindwa kwa utaratibu au la? Ili kujibu swali langu mwenyewe, nadhani tunaweza kumwondoa msimamizi kutoka kwa watu waliotajwa katika kesi hii. Lakini sidhani kama tunaweza kumwondoa msimamizi wa kila au kufanya mabadiliko mengine makubwa kwenye mradi bila kushindwa kimfumo. Je, ni lini tunahitaji kutangaza kwamba tunachunguza kutofaulu kwa utaratibu? Je, ni lazima iwe sasa tunapokubali kesi? Je, inaweza kuwa baadaye? Ni nini due process tunayo kwa ajili ya mradi tunapochunguza kushindwa kwa kimfumo? Nadhani lazima tutangaze na muda wa kutosha kuwa mradi una muda wa kuwasilisha ushahidi unaoonyesha sio kushindwa kimfumo. Mkataba unasema angalau wengi inahitajika ili kuanza uchunguzi wa kushindwa kwa utaratibu. Je, tunataka wengi tu au tunataka kiasi kikubwa zaidi? Nadhani kuna haja ya kuwa na walio wengi zaidi ili kupata kwamba kumekuwa na kushindwa kimfumo na nadhani tiba ambazo zinaweza tu kutokea kwa kushindwa kwa kimfumo lazima ziwe na wingi wa juu pia. Sijui kwamba tunahitaji kujibu haya sasa lakini nataka kukiri hadharani kuwa ninayafikiria (na kuyajadili na wenzangu wa u4c). Barkeep49 (talk) 16:07, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

re Ghilt's comment re: "i will need to do further research to form an opinion." for me that's what the case/investigation/evidence phase is for. I too don't have full opinions yet and hope the next step in the process will help me. Barkeep49 (talk) 15:41, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

Accept votes

• Accept. I understand how Kisare's editing upset Swahili Wakabidhi (administrators). Much of what upset them was, however, seems to be unwritten, except the need to follow sw:Wikipedia:Kuheshimiana (be collaborative). But this request, for me, is about something much bigger than just Kisare. We have evidence of potential problems that go back before Kisare. I think a case will let us examine the full history and let us decide what is a Kisare problem, what content and decisions reflect Swahili culture and should be respected, and what violates the minimum expectations of the Universal Code of Conduct. I will have more to say in the discussion above. Barkeep49 (talk) 15:53, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Google translate to Swahili/Google kutafsiri kwa Kiswahili

Kubali. Ninaelewa jinsi uhariri wa Kisare unavyokasirisha Wakabidhi . Mengi ya yale yaliyowakera ni, hata hivyo, yanaonekana kuwa hayajaandikwa, isipokuwa hitaji la kufuata sw:Wikipedia:Kuheshimiana. Lakini ombi hili, kwangu, ni juu ya kitu kikubwa zaidi kuliko Kisare tu. Tuna ushahidi wa matatizo yanayoweza kutokea ambayo yanarudi nyuma kabla ya Kisare. Nadhani kesi itatuwezesha kuchunguza historia kamili na tuamue ni tatizo gani la Kisare, ni maudhui gani na maamuzi gani yanaakisi utamaduni wa Waswahili na yanapaswa kuheshimiwa, na ni nini kinakiuka matarajio ya chini kabisa ya Kanuni za Maadili za Universal. Nitakuwa na mengi ya kusema katika mjadala hapo juu. Barkeep49 (talk) 15:53, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

• Accept i will need to do further research to form an opinion. What strikes me in my initial glimpse at this conflict is the rare use of (predominantly scientific) references when editing controversial topics. References generally help to de-escalate in disputes over article content and reduce personal point of views of editors in articles. Also, after searching, I have not found a rule on verifiability and reliable sources in sw.wp yet. Having defined a clear hierarchy of the quality of sources also shortens controversial debates. Maybe someone from the community can point my nose to a rule? --Ghilt (talk) 10:39, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

Google translate to Swahili/Google kutafsiri kwa Kiswahili

Kubali nitahitaji kufanya utafiti zaidi ili kutoa maoni. Kinachonishangaza katika mtazamo wangu wa awali wa mzozo huu ni matumizi adimu ya marejeleo (hasa ya kisayansi) wakati wa kuhariri mada zenye utata. Marejeleo kwa ujumla husaidia kupunguza mizozo kuhusu maudhui ya makala na kupunguza maoni ya kibinafsi ya wahariri katika makala. Pia, baada ya kutafuta, sijapata sheria juu ya uthibitishaji na vyanzo vya kuaminika katika sw.wp bado. Baada ya kufafanua safu ya wazi ya ubora wa vyanzo pia kunafupisha mijadala yenye utata. Labda mtu kutoka kwa jamii anaweza kuelekeza pua yangu kwa sheria? --Ghilt (A) (majadiliano) 10:39, 15 Januari 2025 (UTC)

• Accept, this is a more complex and nuanced request and situation than first appears, and one that requires more time and depth. --Civvì (talk) 21:02, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
• Accept. This is a complex case that strikes at the heart of an uneasy balance between the principles of individual project self-governance and more centralized policies like the UCoC, and more fundamentally the cultural clashes inherent with a global movement being controlled, both at the WMF level and through a majority of the users involved in global and cross-wiki governance, by the global north. I am not sure that we will reach a good answer on all of these questions. But what is clear to me at this stage is that there is a sufficient prima facie case for accepting and further investigation, as there are credible and serious allegations of violations of the UCoC and local attempts at resolution have not been successful. – Ajraddatz (talk) 00:13, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
• Accept per Civvì; a deeper analysis is needed. Luke081515 09:25, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
• Accept. Agreed with others above that this is a complex issue, and there probably won't be an obvious solution on first glance. Will need more time to examine everything said about this case. 0xDeadbeef (talk) 08:02, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
• Accept I agree with my colleagues. After reviewing the details of the case, I found that it is complex and intricate and needs further investigation. It also relates to important matters that can't be quickly decided upon.--Ibrahim.ID (talk) 18:41, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Motions

U4C members may propose motions to resolve the case or as a temporary measure during the case.

Updates

This section is used only by U4C members and official designees (including WMF staff who support the U4C) to provide updates about the request.

• Due to private reasons of involved parties the acceptance period was extended until January 27. On behalf of the U4C, --Ghilt (talk) 15:24, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
• The case has been accepted by 7 accept votes and 1 abstention. On behalf of the U4C, --Ghilt (talk) 15:24, 28 January 2025 (UTC)