Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Arbitration‎ | Requests  (Redirected from Wikipedia:AE)
Jump to navigation Jump to search



Piznajko[edit]

Piznajko is topic banned indefinitely from the subject of Ukraine, broadly construed. Seraphimblade Talk to me 21:26, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

This request may be declined without further action if insufficient or unclear information is provided in the "Request" section below.
Requests may not exceed 500 words and 20 diffs (not counting required information), except by permission of a reviewing administrator.

Request concerning Piznajko[edit]

User who is submitting this request for enforcement 
Ymblanter (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) 20:40, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
User against whom enforcement is requested 
Piznajko (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

Search DS alerts: in user talk history • in system log

Sanction or remedy to be enforced
Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Eastern Europe#Standard discretionary sanctions :
Diffs of edits that violate this sanction or remedy, and an explanation how these edits violate it 

(see my comments below)

  1. 4 August 2018 Talk page notice: "Due recent negativity pushed on me by pro-Russian editors, I'd like to keep this talk page to official messages only; to make myself more clear: unless you're a WP admin or bureaucrat, who came to my TP to leave an official WP message, your contribution to this talk page is not welcome (and will be removed)"
  2. August 2019: Walls of text 1, walls of text 2, walls of text 3, unclosed a closing, unclosed again, all on Talk:Kiev/naming (after which I gave then a DS alert).
  3. September 2019 New walls of text, and more, and more, and more, and again and completely irrelevant rant with personal comments still on Talk:Kiev/naming, and now here on Talk:Ukraine, literally the same, again pinging Roman Spinner, and again and now claiming Roman Spinner is the only authority for which eventually I gave them a block
  4. 5 October 2019 Walls of text at Talk:Ukrainian literature, not really addressing the point of discussion
  5. 5 October 2019, walls of text at Talk:Ukraine again
  6. tendentious editing 17 October 2019
Diffs of previous relevant sanctions, if any 
  1. 26 March 2018 Warning for edit warring on Talk:Kiev
  2. 31 March 2018 Warning for edit warring on Antisemitism in Ukraine
  3. 4 May 2018 24h block for edit warring on Antisemitism in the Russian Empire
  4. 5 May 2018 Warning for personal attacks
  5. 20 February 2019 Warning for edit-warring on 4A Games (Ukrainian company - Ymblanter)
  6. 2 October 2019 48h block for disruptive editing on Talk:Ukraine (unblock request posted, not acted on within 48h [1])
If discretionary sanctions are requested, supply evidence that the user is aware of them (see WP:AC/DS#Awareness and alerts)
2018, 2019
Additional comments by editor filing complaint 

Apparently, Piznajko had a troubled history before I noticed them in August 2019, and has been warned multiple times and blocked for edit-warring in articles related to Ukrainian topics. I noticed them first at Talk:Kiev/naming. This page was created to reduce disruption at Talk:Kiev, where Ukrainian users constantly demanded to move the article to Kyiv. In August, Piznajko started to post walls of text there, celebrating that style guides of certain media switched to Kyiv, constantly pinging Roman Spinner, the only other editor who advocates this name, and would not stop even after having repeatedly told by multiple editors that the only factor which matters is how the city is actually called by the native speakers of English. At one instance, they edit-warred for closing the thread and stopped only when I explicitly told them I would block for the next revert. Still, they soon posted more walls of text, and went to other pages (pinging again Roman Spinner hoping to get support). After they claimed that Roman Spinner is the only user who understands the matter and went far into WP:IDHT territory, I blocked them. They of course disagreed and posted an unblock request that they did not do anything wrong. A couple of days ago, they started editing articles, and the editing of Ukrainian literature (where at the talk page they previously also posted walls of text not really addressing the point) is clearly disruptive. For example (diff above), at some point they had a list of countries in the lede which said Ukraine was ruled by, one of them was Lithuania with a link to the modern state. When I replaced Lithuania with the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth (since of course modern Lithuania never "ruled" Ukraine) they replaced all other countries (for example, Romania to the Kingdom of Romania) leaving Russia intact (apparently implying modern Russia "ruled" Ukraine?). Given that on their talk page they state "Due recent negativity pushed on me by pro-Russian editors, I'd like to keep this talk page to official messages only; to make myself more clear: unless you're a WP admin or bureaucrat, who came to my TP to leave an official WP message, your contribution to this talk page is not welcome (and will be removed)", my conclusion is that Piznajko is just not capable of constructively contributing to any topics related to Ukraine. This disruption continues already at least for one and a half year.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:40, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Notification of the user against whom enforcement is requested 
[2]

Discussion concerning Piznajko[edit]

Statements must be made in separate sections. They may not exceed 500 words and 20 diffs, except by permission of a reviewing administrator.
Administrators may remove or shorten noncompliant statements. Disruptive contributions may result in blocks.

Statement by Piznajko[edit]

Statement by Thomas.W[edit]

Unfortunately Piznajko isn't the only Ukrainian editor who simply cannot edit any article even tangentially connected to Ukraine in a neutral way, but they have lately been one of the most active ones, absolutely refusing to accept that the Ukrainian government can't decide what "common use" in the English language should be, as can be seen in Ymblanter's diffs above of walls of text posted by Piznajko on Talk:Kiev/naming and Talk:Ukraine, and also making POV edits like this one on Ukrainian literature, as part of a series of edits mentioned by Ymblanter above. An edit that removed Poland from the list of countries that have ruled parts of the modern country of Ukraine (the edit replaced "Romania" with "Kingdom of Romania" and "Ottoman Turkey" with "Ottoman Empire", changes I have no objections to, but removed "Poland" entirely instead of replacing it with the Second Polish Republic, as would have been historically correct), with an edit summary saying that they "aren't aware of Ukraine ever being ruled by modern Poland ...", which is an astounding claim since there is no way a Ukrainian editor who is educated enough to be able to edit the English language Wikipedia cannot know that much/most of modern-day Western Ukraine, including the large city of Lwów/Lviv, was part of Poland until being occupied by the Soviet Union and transferred to the Ukrainian S.S.R. during World War II, resulting in a "population exchange" where the majority of the Poles living there (who made up 57% of the population before WW II, but only 0.7% in 2001) were forced out, and replaced by Ukrainians and Russians from elsewhere. A removal of Poland that IMHO can be seen only as a deliberate attempt to falsify history, considering that they, since they correctly changed "Romania" to "Kingdom of Romania" in the edit, obviously knew that parts of Romanian Bessarabia were also transferred to the Ukrainian S.S.R. during WW II, after being occupied by the Soviet Union (while the rest of Bessarabia became Moldova). - Tom | Thomas.W talk 12:30, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Statement by My very best wishes[edit]

I think that editing by Piznajko was definitely problematic. I saw him to be engaged in sustained edit warring against consensus on pages like Antisemitism in the Russian Empire, i.e. [3],[4],[5],[6],[7],[8] and on a couple of others (for example, [9],[10],[11],[12],[13]), although it was a year ago. My very best wishes (talk) 17:54, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Statement by (username)[edit]

Result concerning Piznajko[edit]

This section is to be edited only by uninvolved administrators. Comments by others will be moved to the sections above.
  • The purpose of discretionary sanctions is to provide an environment where editors can improve articles collaboratively and productively. Editors who insult others, disrupt collaborative processes, or continuously reject consensus ought to be removed from the topic area or from the project. It would be appropriate to hear from Piznajko before proposing a solution, but I would expect their response to address the manner in which they intend to improve our coverage of Ukraine-related topics. – bradv🍁 21:24, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
    Since it has been over 48 hours and we haven't heard from Piznajko, I'm in favour of moving forward with a topic ban from Ukraine, broadly construed. – bradv🍁 16:44, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I'm posting in this section because, while I created the subpage Talk:Kiev/naming and posted a note at its top, that was in 2007, and I've had nothing to do with the issue since then, nor did I even then express an opinion on the naming issue. Like Bradv, I will also wait for Piznajko to respond — not indefinitely, though. Meanwhile, Ymblanter, I've removed the examples of evidence that the user is aware of DS that the template offered — you haven't added diffs to them, and I think you may have left them in by mistake. They're not needed, anyway. Please just restore (with diffs and names) if I'm mistaken about your intention. Bishonen | talk 10:20, 18 October 2019 (UTC).
  • Unless Piznajko comes up with a truly astounding response here in the next day or so at most then I think the minimum we should be doing here is issuing a topic ban from Ukraine, broadly interpreted. Thryduulf (talk) 01:39, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I would agree that, unless we very shortly hear something absolutely astonishing from Piznajko, a topic ban from Ukraine would be warranted. I'm having a difficult time seeing any explanation they could offer that would excuse this type of behavior. Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:39, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Am I the only person wondering why a topic ban is being discussed, rather than the glaringly obvious long-term block just being imposed? However, granted that a topic ban is what is being discussed, my opinion is that such a ban is clearly more than justified. Experience suggests that he or she is extremely unlikely to give any reasonable explanation, or to demonstrate any understanding of the issues, or to change their ways in future, so just putting a halt to their editing on the topic is the only way forward. JBW (talk) Formerly known as JamesBWatson 20:52, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Piotrus[edit]

Closed. Only auto-confirmed users may file requests for arbitration enforcement – bradv🍁 14:38, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

This request may be declined without further action if insufficient or unclear information is provided in the "Request" section below.
Requests may not exceed 500 words and 20 diffs (not counting required information), except by permission of a reviewing administrator.

Request concerning Piotrus[edit]

User who is submitting this request for enforcement 
JolantaAJ (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) 13:26, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
User against whom enforcement is requested 
Piotrus (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

Search DS alerts: in user talk history • in system log

Sanction or remedy to be enforced
Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Antisemitism in Poland#Article sourcing expectations - " cover all articles on the topic of Polish history during World War II (1933-45), including the Holocaust in Poland. Only high quality sources may be used, specifically peer-reviewed scholarly journals, academically focused books by reputable publishers, and/or articles published by reputable institutions. English-language sources are preferred over non-English ones when available and of equal quality and relevance."
Diffs of edits that violate this sanction or remedy, and an explanation how these edits violate it 
  1. [14]: using newspaper.[15]
  2. [16]: using local newspaper [17] and radio [18].
  3. [19]: using press release from prosecutor in revisionist organization. [20]
  4. [21]: using prosecutor report from revisionist organization. [22]
Diffs of previous relevant sanctions, if any 
  1. Not sure. From what I read in paper, it is probable.
If discretionary sanctions are requested, supply evidence that the user is aware of them (see WP:AC/DS#Awareness and alerts)
Not DS, but is aware, warned others: [23], [24]
Additional comments by editor filing complaint 

I am involved in Holocaust education and was disturbed by recent Wikipedia news. The other sources in Katowice massacre aren't better, the article is a one sided martyrdom account that our current government is advancing [25]. None of the sources meets the "peer-reviewed scholarly journals, academically focused books by reputable publishers, and/or articles published by reputable institutions" criteria.

Notification of the user against whom enforcement is requested 
[26]


Discussion concerning Piotrus[edit]

Statements must be made in separate sections. They may not exceed 500 words and 20 diffs, except by permission of a reviewing administrator.
Administrators may remove or shorten noncompliant statements. Disruptive contributions may result in blocks.

Statement by Piotrus[edit]

Statement by (username)[edit]

Result concerning Piotrus[edit]

This section is to be edited only by uninvolved administrators. Comments by others will be moved to the sections above.
  • No action. The first and second diffs describes Gazeta Wyborcza as a "local newspaper", which is akin to describing the Washington Post or the Times of London as a local newspaper. The third and fourth diffs pass off the Polish government's Institute_of_National_Remembrance as a "revisionist organisation", this is at best a stretch. I don't think it is unreasonable to consider these two sources as "articles published by reputable institutions", and so I see no breach of the restriction here. And a big welcome to JolantaAJ, making their second edit to the English Wikipedia. Fish+Karate 14:29, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Suggest speedy closing with no action, the filer is clearly a sock.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:36, 21 October 2019 (UTC)