User:Lemonaka/Get alert

'd like write something to alert the community, before I got banned here or I broke something.

• Wikipedia and Telegram

Telegram group, although previously considered as an off-wiki group by Arbcom, currently it works like Wikipediocracy for English Wikipedia, which may be consist of critic or may also leak privacy, though the latter one has been investigated more than once by enwp Arbcom. As a public, long-standing group on the wiki, most issues that arise there will cause trouble to this project. This is actually not only limited to Telegram/Discord/IRC groups, but also includes non-connected QQ groups, though the latter one has been silence for a while.

Since the case of WMF v. WMC, The security of these off-site groups has been questioned. The suspicion of canvassing for votes and manipulation off-site has never stopped. Sadly, the English Wikipedia has an effective arbitration committee system that regularly investigates what happens on Wikipediocracy, and from what I know, the last investigation into the situation off-site on our project seems to be Antigng v WMC.

• Checkuser problem & Checkuser information

Any checkusers have access to the checkuser Wikipedia, however, there's nothing to prevent these checkusers directly copy down the content on such a wiki, no matter through page-print, take a photo or just directly using view the source from browsers. Though checkuser information will only be last for six months, nothing prevent them taking a piece of note down to local, or just use a pen. This is just a bug of current Checkuser system.

However, such bug can become quite harmful when such pieces of notes can be shared, even with users who didn't sign NDA, without being noticed by Wikimedia Foundation and without any evidence to report, for example, what about just sharing them within a private group on Telegram, then deleting all of them?

In addition, previously, Poetlister signed NDA, though he had already been banned by Wikimedia Foundation, but WMF did not aware that, passed their NDA, gave their CU privileged until being found.

• Infallibility of the Arbcom

The Arbitration Committee is usually the highest legislative and executive body of a Wikipedia. The decisions it makes must be followed by all Wikipedia members, and the Arbitration Committee rarely overturns its previous conclusions. But the Arbitration Committee is elected by the Wikipedia community. Once the Arbitration Committee is controlled by people with ulterior motives, they do not even need to control all the seats but only need a majority. In fact, some people have already made a try to take control of a Wikipedia project. See Croatian issues.

In addition, without the multilingual culture of the English Wikipedia, it would be very scary if the arbitration committee accidentally got into some problems on some matters.I have opposed the introduction of Checkuser many times, but after the arbitration committee being introduced, I shortly had a hope of Checkuser reintroduction. However, considering that if the Chinese Wikipedia's arbitration committee eventually becomes a purely lagging bureaucratic system, it is better not to do so. For that someone abuses CU priviledge,your investigation will face great resistance and it will be difficult to maintain confidentiality, and you may even need WMF to help make some modifications.

Worse still, I have predicted that all editors will change. I have seen many mature editors hanged on ANM, including me, and I may be permanently banned soon. Can you guarantee that the arbitration committee members you choose will never make fatal mistakes, or will always be better and better?

• Correctness or Verifiability

Outlookxp discovered qqqyy（讨论 | 貢獻）, and I discovered Boogi wu（讨论 | 貢獻）. Both users introduced a large amount of fake content into Wikipedia. Unlike the infamous "Zhemao", they affect the accuracy of the content through tiny vandalism. Unfortunately, only Outlookxp（讨论 | 貢獻） is still paying attention to the former, and only I, though I hope not, will regularly investigate the latter. In addition, the latter often makes changes in the English Wikipedia or the corresponding Wikipedia before tampering in the Chinese Wikipedia. Multi-Wikipedia comparison is no longer effective, and the corresponding reference must be checked.

For such malicious editors, the current method can only be to watch the corresponding pages one by one, but if they also affect some reference materials, it will be more difficult to find. This is the WP:CIRCLE way of the former one, QQQyy, which further proves that their own fabrication is correct by letting external materials incorrectly quote Wikipedia.However, Wikipedia is highly dependent on verifiability. When external references are tampered with, the accuracy of Wikipedia is very easy to be questioned. This cycle of tampering and vandalism is a heavy blow to the cornerstones of various projects.

我想写点东西提醒社区，以免我在这里被封号或者破坏了什么东西。

• 维基百科和 Telegram

Telegram 群组，虽然之前被 Arbcom 视为一个站外群组，但目前它就像英文维基百科的 Wikipediocracy，可能包含批评者，也可能泄露隐私，尽管后者已经被 enwp Arbcom 调查过不止一次。作为维基上一个公开的、长期存在的群组，那里出现的大多数问题都会给这个项目带来麻烦。这实际上不仅限于 Telegram/Discord/IRC 群组，还包括非连接的 QQ 群组，尽管后者已经沉寂了一段时间。

自从 WMF v. WMC 案以来，这些站外群组的安全性就一直受到质疑。拉票和站外操纵的嫌疑从未停止过。遗憾的是，英文维基百科有一个有效的仲裁委员会系统，定期调查 Wikipediocracy 上发生的事情，据我所知，我们项目上一次场外调查似乎是 Antigng v WMC。

• 用戶查核員问题和用戶查核信息

任何用戶查核員都可以访问用戶查核维基百科，但是，没有什么可以阻止这些用戶查核員直接复制此类 wiki 上的内容，无论是通过页面打印、拍照还是直接使用浏览器查看源代码。虽然用戶查核信息只能保存六个月，但没有什么可以阻止他们将笔记记在本地，或者直接用笔记。这只是对当前用戶查核員系统的蟲子。

但是，当这些笔记可以共享时，这种蟲子可能会变得非常有害，即使是与未签署保密协议的用户共享，也不会引起维基媒体基金会的注意，也没有任何证据可以报告，例如，如何在 Telegram 上的私人群组内共享它们，然后删除它们？這正是現在烏茲別克語維基百科正在發生的事情，一些人的隱私在telegram上泄露，而泄露的人很顯然也有用戶查核權限。

此外，此前，Poetlister签署了保密协议，尽管他已经被维基媒体基金会全域禁止，但 WMF 并不知情，通过了保密协议，给予其 CU 特权，直到被发现。

• 仲裁委员会的绝对正确性

仲裁委员会通常是维基百科的最高立法和执行机构。它做出的决定必须得到所有维基百科成员的遵守，仲裁委员会很少推翻其先前的结论。但仲裁委员会是由维基百科社区选举产生的。一旦仲裁委员会被别有用心的人控制，他们甚至不需要控制所有席位，而只需要多数票。事实上，有些人已经试图通過此控制维基百科项目。参见克罗地亚问题。

另外，如果没有英文维基百科的多语言文化，仲裁委员会如果在某些事情上不小心出问题，那也是很可怕的。我曾多次反对引入Checkuser，但在引入仲裁委员会后，我曾短暂地抱有Checkuser重新引入的希望。但考虑到中文维基百科的仲裁委员会最终如果变成一个纯粹的落后的官僚体系，还是不要这么做为好。因为如果有人滥用CU特权，你的调查将面临巨大的阻力，很难保密，甚至可能需要WMF帮忙做一些修改。

更糟糕的是，我已经预测到所有的编辑都会改变。我看到很多成熟的编辑在ANM上挂了，包括我在内，我可能很快就会被永久封禁。你能保证你选择的仲裁委员会成员永远不会犯致命的错误，或者永远越来越好吗？

• 正确性或可验证性

Outlookxp发现了qqqyy（讨论 | 貢獻），我发现了Boogi wu（讨论 | 貢獻）。这两个用户都在维基百科中引入了大量虚假内容。与臭名昭著的“Zhemao”不同，他们通过微小的破坏行为影响内容的准确性。不幸的是，只有Outlookxp（讨论 | 貢獻）仍在关注前者，只有我（尽管我希望不会）会定期调查后者。此外，后者经常在篡改中文维基百科之前先在英文维基百科或相应的维基百科中进行更改。多维基百科比较不再有效，必须检查相应的参考资料。

对于此类恶意编辑者，目前的方法只能是逐一监视相应的页面，但如果它们还影响了一些参考资料，则更难发现。这就是前者QQQyy的WP:CIRCLE方式，通过让外部材料错误地引用维基百科，进一步证明了他们自己的捏造是正确的。但维基百科高度依赖可验证性，当外界引用被篡改时，维基百科的准确性很容易受到质疑，这种篡改、破坏的循环，对各项项目的基石都是沉重的打击。