User talk:Donald Trung/1 (one) place for imports/Archive 186

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

{{Aan}} .

Tung Tseng Hao - Private Issue China - 1000 Cash ND Shantung-Wen I PCGS - 62. (eBay)[edit]

"Title" field.
  • 1000 Cash - Tung Tseng Hao, Shantung-Wen I (Undated) Confucians 0X.
Informational fields.
  • A privately issued Chinese banknote issued by the Tung Tseng Hao private bank with a denomination of "1000 (one-thousand) cash coins".
"Source" field.
Source links. LINK 🔗.

--Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 15:30, 19 May 2023 (UTC) .[reply]

Extract icons and graphic designs from this website (Pinoy government)[edit]

"Source" field.
Individual images.
How to categorise them.
  • I am thinking 🤔 of adding them to a sub-category of "Software icons by theme". Or call them "Gov.ph icons" as a sub-category of "Icons by theme". Not sure how to necessarily organise the other images, perhaps create a "Media contributed by www.gov.ph" and then make the icons a sub-category.

--Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 19:38, 11 March 2023 (UTC) .[reply]

How can Adminpedia repel interest groups?
(OLD.).[edit]

This is a draft to respond to another Wikimedia Commons user's concept.

I've been thinking 🤔 about your Adminpedia concept, and I've been thinking about how the social trust system would essentially create cliques.

I did the math, you don't need a lot of people to control Wikimedia websites, as of 12-05-2023 the English-language Wikipedia has 126,965 active members, only 24,145 members (or about ⅕th) were eligible to vote on the Universal Code of Conduct, and only 1004 voted. You don't need a lot of people to control Wikipedia. To control the Wikimedia Commons and Wikidata (based on the number of votes on policy and in admin elections) you only need around 20~40 people, for Wikipedia this number is maybe 100 (one-hundred) or 200 (two-hundred).

I think that the number for Wikipedia is even less, only a small handful of "power users" contribute both most of the content and do most of the enforcing (The Pareto Principle), plus you don't even need to actively have those users under your command, now let me explain.

Let's say hypothetically that I am a government agent hired by the government of Verweggistan to infiltrate Wikipedia. The Verweggistani government makes me a "full-time Wikipedian" (that is I could do it as a 9-5 (nine to five) job), initially I explore Wikipedia as a noob, I will read all of its policies and guidelines, I will look at the way users interact with each other and how policies are enforced and how consensus is reached.

I will come to the conclusion there are "obvious ways" of infiltration that won't work, for example having multiple government agents work from the same location, or even using government connections (as CheckUsers can detect where an IP address is registered to), I will then set up a report and submit it to the Verweggistani Intelligence Service (VIS). In this report I'd write that the VIS can simply use around 50 (fifty) or so agents, these agents would only have to work one (1) or two (2) hours a day, or agents could do it after work hours and get paid overtime, I'd state that only 5 (five) or 6 (six) power users would be needed and that these power users likely shouldn't have overlapping interests. I'd also scout "unknowing agents" (or more cynically called "useful idiots"), people whose voting patterns and ideologies align with the goals of the VIS.

Let's say the VIS wants a certain Absurdistani newspaper flagged as "an unreliable source", of our 40 (forty) active agents only 4 (four) will vote to ban it, based on earlier voting patterns we expect 6 (six) other users to also vote in favour of the listing and only 5 (five) voices dissent, while there are more people disagreeing with the VIS than agents of the VIS voting a certain way we have successfully influenced the vote in our favour, without us the verdict on the newspaper from Absurdistan wouldn't have reached a clear consensus but now it has.

If there's an edit war you only need 2 (two) users, let's say a user keeps adding stuff you dislike, you'll simply ask one fellow agent to step in, no need to get another involved, if another agent is an admin this "uninvolved" admin can block the target for edit warring. This can all simply be co-ordinated from a Discord server, a Microsoft Skype chat room, or a Meta's WhatsApp-Messenger group. All these activities are untraceable on-wiki and the IP addresses and device signatures don't match up so no allegation of sockpuppetry will stand. The end result is that it's impossible to stop the VIS.

https://web.archive.org/web/20230512222129/https://m.oncyclopedia.org/index.php?title=Oncyclopedia:Forum:Readonly&t=20220909103611 --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 21:49, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lynda Trouvé.
(OLD.).[edit]

Bảo Đại.
Khải Định.
Duy Tân.
Thành Thái.
Đồng Khánh.
Tự Đức.
Brevet.
Gouvernement.
Passeport.

--Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 12:31, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

COVID19.GOV.PH[edit]

Main page(s).
Icon pages.

- 1.

- 2.

- 3.

- 4.

- 5.

- 6.

--Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 00:39, 28 May 2023 (UTC) .[reply]

The Vietnamese economic crisis that never happened (or "Nguyễn Dynasty coinage denialism").[edit]

== Documenting the Nguyễn Dynasty. == .

This is a draft message (e-mail) to Associate Professor Lê Minh Khải (黎明凱) about a number of documents on the Wikimedia Commons and information relating to them.

"Dear Kẻ đốt đền,

Always cite your sources.

At the Vietnamese-language Wikipedia there is an article entitled "Viện Cơ mật (Huế)", there you can find a sentence which claims "Cơ mật viện dùng loại ấn là Ấn, với tên là Cơ mật viện chi ấn (機密院之印).". This sentence is 100% (one-hundred percent) bullshit, there's no source given and the Cơ mật Viện only had two (2) Great Seals, these great seals have the Chinese seal script inscriptions Cơ mật viện ấn (機密院印) and Cơ mật chi ấn (機密之印), there is no and never has been a great seal with the Chinese seal script inscription Cơ mật viện chi ấn (機密院之印). The top of the article rightfully states: "Bài viết này cần thêm chú thích nguồn gốc để kiểm chứng thông tin. Mời bạn giúp hoàn thiện bài viết này bằng cách bổ sung chú thích tới các nguồn đáng tin cậy. Các nội dung không có nguồn có thể bị nghi ngờ và xóa bỏ." ("This article needs additional credits to verify the information. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced content may be questioned and removed."), there simply is so much unsourced content which claims something but doesn't back it up. But even if content is sourced it can still be wrong due to the bad methodology employed by (many) modern Vietnamese historians.

Same word, different translation.

I've downloaded the 2018 book Đồ sứ ký kiểu thời Nguyễn by the author Trần Đức Anh Sơn and the book is quite interesting, something what I also find interesting about it that everything is written both in Vietnamese and in English, so I can directly compare the Vietnamese-language text with the English-language text. Now what I find interesting is how the author decided to translate the word "Vua", whenever a Vietnamese monarch is mentioned, for example vua Minh Mạng or vua Khải Định they are translated as "King Minh Mạng" and "King Khải Định", but when a Chinese monarch is mentioned vua Khang Hi becomes "Emperor Kangxi". I wonder if Vietnamese historians simply think less of Viet-Nam and their monarchs, because in Vietnamese they use the exact same word but in English they use the more prestigious word for Chinese monarchs than they do for Vietnamese ones.

Perhaps this has to do with the fact that both the Communists and the Capitalists after 1955 were anti-monarchists and being irreverent towards the monarchy and monarchism by deliberately being disrespectful towards the styles or the monarchy might have become the norm. I have never seen anyone call Qing-China "Vương quốc Đại Thanh", yet I've seen many call the Nguyễn Dynasty ""Vương quốc Đại Nam". The moment the Nguyễn Emperors learned more French they insisted on using "Grand Empire" instead of "Royaume" in official documents.

What I find most ironic is when I see anti-Chinese Vietnamese nationalists do this, I've seen a number of people who are vehemently against the notion that China had any historical influence on Vietnam try to remove any references to "Empire" and "Emperor" and replace them with "Kingdom" and "King". The irony comes when you realise that an Emperor is by definition independent while a King is subservient to an Emperor (at least in European, Persian, and Sinitic cultures). Especially when you realise the importance of the notion of Ngoại Vương Nội Đế (外王內帝) in historical Vietnam.

Of course, I'm not claiming that Trần Đức Anh Sơn should be grouped together with any of these people. Anh Sơn understands both Classical Chinese and French, he understands Imperial Chinese symbolism and how they differ from Imperial Vietnamese symbolism, he understands Confucianism, Etc. His books are amazing because, like you and the archivists, seems to understand that you need to know these to understand pre-modern Vietnam. My issues aren't with his writings in Vietnamese, rather I find it an odd choice to translate the same word in Vietnamese differently in English.

The Vietnamese economic crisis that never happened (or "Nguyễn Dynasty coinage denialism").

Throughout the entire history of the Nguyễn Dynasty the imperial government the empire was unable to provide the population with enough money and often they were forced to accept low quality counterfeit money produced by the Chinese. This all is very well documented, but the moment 1883~1885 comes along most Vietnamese historians pretend that the scarcity of cash coins on the market has ended because of the introduction of the French Indo-Chinese Piastre. Sometimes passing mentions are brought up about the "money of the Huế Court" but the focus very quickly shifts to the French. I think that a very egregious example is found at the Vietnamese-language Wikipedia here.

The introduction already starts bad "Tiền tệ Việt Nam thời Nguyễn phản ánh những vấn đề liên quan tới tiền tệ lưu thông thời nhà Nguyễn độc lập (1802-1884) và những đồng tiền do nhà Nguyễn phát hành trong thời kỳ Pháp thuộc trong lịch sử Việt Nam. - Từ thời Đồng Khánh, thực dân Pháp đã phát hành những đồng tiền Đông Dương gồm các loại như tiền giấy và tiền kim loại với nhiều mệnh giá được lưu thông rộng rãi hơn tiền do triều đình phát hành rất nhiều. Vì thế ta thấy được sức ảnh hưởng của thực dân Pháp vẫn còn khá nhiều.

With the implication here being that the money of the Nguyễn Dynasty was less important after the French Indo-Chinese Piastre was introduced. I'm sure that if you only look at Hanoi and other major cities that you can maybe make this claim, but this claim barely applies to rural areas. Also "Từ thời Gia Longn thời Thiệu Trị: 1 tiền đồng - 1,2 đến 1,3 tiền kẽm" who is "Gia Longn"?! LOL 🤣 (don't worry, I already corrected it). But all jokes aside, the text is largely correct until the French come along. For example, here:

"Từ năm 1883, Việt Nam chính thức bị Pháp đô hộ. Từ thời Đồng Khánh (1885-1888), tiền lưu thông trong nước là những đồng tiền "xu", tiền giấy "đồng" do Ngân hàng Đông Dương của người Pháp phát hành. Các đồng tiền do triều đình nhà Nguyễn phát hành chỉ được dùng như tiền lẻ lưu hành ở thôn quê. Tiền do triều đình Huế đúc ra không còn yếu tố quan trọng trong đời sống kinh tế như trước mà chỉ có tính tượng trưng."

The claim is made that the coins were immediately called "Xu", this isn't true, multiple terms were competing, but "Xu" eventually won out. Then they state "Vua Đồng Khánh cho lập ra Cục Thông bảo để đúc tiền. Tiền Đồng Khánh lớn bằng đồng ăn 10 đồng tiền kẽm, 1 đồng tiền nhỏ ăn 6 đồng tiền kẽm." I have literally never seen a big Đồng Khánh coin in my life, as far as I'm aware only "value 6 (six)" versions of them exist, unless (very weirdly) "Đồng Khánh" is meant to also include the Thành Thái Emperor and the Duy Tân Emperor... Not off to a good start, but it gets worse.

The claim: "Tiền do triều đình Huế đúc ra không còn yếu tố quan trọng trong đời sống kinh tế như trước mà chỉ có tính tượng trưng." Is the most horrendous claim in this section, why would they made hundreds of millions of "symbolic coins" which cost the government millions?

Here is another batch of claims: "Sang thời Khải Định, 1 đồng Khải Định ăn 6 đồng tiền kẽm. Tiền Khải Định được đúc nhiều đợt, trọng lượng không đều, có đồng nặng 6 phân, có đồng tới 7-8 phân. Từ thời Khải Định đến thời Bảo Đại, người Pháp cho làm tiền xu bằng máy rập, được gọi nôm na là "đồng trinh". Tiền đồng trinh Khải Định thông bảo và Bảo Đại thông bảo là hai đồng tiền duy nhất của chế độ phong kiến Việt Nam không phải là tiền đúc mà được dập bằng máy do Ngân." The first machine-struck cash coins were made during the 1860's and were planned for French Cochinchina. Likewise, the Khải Định Rhông Bảo cash coins were among the most uniform cash coins produced during the Nguyễn Dynasty period. Regarding the further claim: "Do làm bằng máy, những đồng tiền này chứa ít chất đồng hơn tiền đúc nhưng nét chữ sắc sảo hơn." The amount of copper in the alloy was only significantly lowered with the tiny cash coins of the French protectorate of Tonkin, I am not sure how they project this onto the entire period.

Likewise, the claims Lục Đức Thuận and Võ Quốc Ky make here is most revealing of the fact that they were likely not qualified to write on the subject they were writing: "Đồng trinh Khải Định có giá trị bằng 1/200 đồng bạc Piastre của Ngân hàng Đông Dương, tức là nửa xu. So với tiền Khải Định thông bảo, tiền Bảo Đại thông bảo nhỏ hơn, chỉ có giá trị từ 1/600 tới 1/400 của 1 xu Đông Dương nên chỉ là tượng trưng, không có chức năng kinh tế nào cả." Most people were so poor that they've never seen a full Piastre in their life, half cent (½¢) coins were likewise minted in the United States of America. During the same time cash coins were 1/1000th (one-one-thousandth) of a Dollar / Mexican Peso in China, Korea, the Ryūkyū Kingdom, and Japan. In fact, on the island of Ceylon (Sri Lanka) there existed a quarter farthing coin which was worth 1⁄3840th of a Pound Sterling. Anyone with even a passing knowledge of pre-World War II coinage would know that tiny denominations were the rule, not the exception. In the Netherlands a half cent (½¢) also existed well until the 1940's. Of course, contemporary sources very much paint a completely different picture 🖼️.

I have added information to the English-language Wikipedia that puts the Vietnamese-language Wikipedia to utter shame. Not once did they actually look at what contemporary newspapers (valid reliable secondary sources) talked about, the House of Representatives of Annam and the imperial government of the Nguyễn Dynasty all talked about the economic needs of the people in detail. There is a common saying that "you can't trust Wikipedia", the more I spend time making the sausage 🌭 the more I realise why Wikipedians tend to distrust Wikipedia the most and why people are skeptical of blindly translating articles from other language editions of Wikipedia.

If someone only speaks modern vernacular Vietnamese and has no knowledge of either French or Classical Chinese then they will likely learn a lot of misinformation about Vietnamese history.

What I find interesting is that both the Government-General of French Indo-China and the imperial government of the Nguyễn Dynasty insisted that the creation of cash coins was "a necessary burden the government needs to carry for the good or the people".

One thing I often say is that "history is full of transitions" and we may associate certain things with certain periods and other things with other periods, and when one (1) period ends and another begins is often very difficult to pinpoint, multiple things change left and right. But this isn't a unique thing, I have seen people forget things that only happened a few years ago, so it's not like this problem is either unique or will easily go away.

Erasing Sinitic words from the Vietnamese language.

The Republic of Vietnam (or "South Vietnam") in the past tended to use many Sino-Vietnamese terms rather than purely Vietnamese equivalents. For example, they call airports (sân bay) as phi trường, or the White House (Nhà Trắng) in the US as the Toà Bạch Ốc.

This wasn't just a difference between North Vietnam and South Vietnam, it is also a difference between North Korea and South Korea. In South Korea a lot more Sinitic words are preserved in daily conversation than in North Korean, though South Korean also has a distinctively American character to it.

Can I request something from you in Huế?

I saw that you and your partner are going to Huế soon for the next Engaging with Vietnam conference, I recently wrote a Wikipedia article about the "coat of arms or the Nguyễn Dynasty" which mentions a number of cultural relics (using a PRC term to describe them) which feature it.

At the Bảo tàng cổ vật cung đình Huế there is a collection of Thành Thái period porcelains called the "Bộ đồ sứ Đại Nam" (Đại Nam porcelains) and in the An Định Palace there is a set called the Khải Định porcelains. Example images are here:

https://web.archive.org/web/20230515085440/http://khaocohoc.gov.vn/sites/default/files/2018/10/tintuc/do_gom_su.jpg

http://web.archive.org/web/20230515203458/https://scontent-ams2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/346795733_2438197496337536_2355559471675498900_n.jpg?_nc_cat=104&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=5cd70e&_nc_ohc=GydlScGkuAwAX9A1f5b&_nc_ht=scontent-ams2-1.xx&oh=00_AfCX-876SFSaL45sHp08KhAyHRfmlgmAQlGA_MUnx_b6HA&oe=6466F184

Yours faithfully,
TQD

Get Outlook for Android".

Signature (Siggy) to prevent automated archiving. 諺. https://web.archive.org/web/20200702025454/https://www.reddit.com/r/WarCollege/comments/e0lyd7/arvn_ineffectiveness/ --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 15:59, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Shenyi[edit]

--Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 15:26, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hanoi a 100 years ago[edit]

Informational fields.
  • Nhiếp ảnh gia Léon Busy được Viện Bảo tàng Albert Kahn (Pháp) cử sang Việt Nam để ghi lại cuộc sống của người dân Hà Nội và miền Bắc Việt Nam từ năm 1914 tới năm 1917.
"Source" field.
Check for duplicates before uploading, my dudes.

Leon Busy. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 23:14, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Chiang Lim China - $1 ND (ca. 1910's) Printer's Desgin PMG - 60NET (eBay)[edit]

"Title" field.
  • $1 - Chiang Lim (ca. 1910's) Printer's Design - Confucians 0X.
Informational fields.
  • A privately issued Chinese banknote issued by the Chiang Lim Bank during the 1910's with a denomination of "1 (one) Yuan / Dollar".
"Source" field.
Source links. LINK 🔗.

--Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 15:30, 19 May 2023 (UTC) .[reply]

TỰ PHÁN - DI CẢO CỦA CỤ PHAN BỘI CHÂU[edit]

--Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 12:05, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sapèque d'Or cigarettes[edit]

Thuốc-lá Kim-tiền (金錢煙草 - Cigarettes Sapèque d'Or), Hanoi (1935) 0X.
  • An advertisement for the "Golden cash coins cigarettes" (Vietnamese: Thuốc-lá Kim-tiền; Traditional Chinese: 金錢煙草; French: Cigarettes Sapèque d'Or) sold in the French protectorates of Tonkin, Annam, and Laos. Notice that the design of the package features a cash coin with the inscription Kim Tiền Yên Thảo (金錢煙草).

This website is so mobile unfriendly, but on my wife's laptop I can actually isolate articles and texts without having to screenshot them. I genuinely didn't know this, I kept thinking that this website was just badly designed until I realised that you do get a better experience using it on a desktop computer. Wow, just wow. Just like Gallica, this website is practically unuseable when you use a mobile device but it works really well when you use a desktop...

--Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 07:19, 31 May 2023 (UTC) .[reply]

On Adminpedia.
(OLD.).[edit]

This is a draft to respond to another Wikimedia Commons user's concept.

I wrote sometime ago that I think that I don't think that Adminpedia will succeed, at the time I wrote that I would come back to you later and due to a lot of circumstances this reply is a bit later than I would like to have written it, but I'd say that it's better late than never.

For one (1), I believe that Adminpedia (under whatever name it shall use, as the current name doesn't seem to have wide appeal to me) will have to market itself as an alternative to Wikipedia while also being able to match both its support infrastructure, fight against its entrenched reputation, and recruit people from the same pool of people willing to invest their free time in writing an online encyclopaedia completely free of charge. Adminpedia would have to be able to differentiate itself from Wikipedia enough in order attract a critical audience wide enough beyond those are "just curious" and "in the know".

Before I will explain why I think Adminpedia will not succeed if it doesn't match the strengths of Wikipedia I must first (1st) explain what I think those strengths are and why they may not be as easy to emulate as simply "building another encyclopaedia". The following strengths are why I think that Wikipedia is currently unchallenged outside of the People's Republic of China and why I think that this status won't go anywhere anytime soon:

  • The Wikimedia Foundation (WMF): I can think of lots of things that I dislike about the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF), in fact most Wikimedians can, they seem distant, lack transparency, love banning people without giving anyone a reason, they try to push a political narrative that paints Wikipedians as "racist" and "sexist" over demographics that likely aren't caused by the intrinsic culture of Wikimedia websites but due to extrinsic factors outside of its control, it wastes donation money on frivolous and ineffective campaigns, it refuses to actually fix the tools it breaks and rarely communicates with volunteer developers, it rarely consults the communities of the websites it drastically changes before implementing major changes with only token "elections", Etc., Etc., Etc. But despite all of this and much, much more non-sense, the WMF is actually backbone of Wikimedia websites and as much as I have to complain about, I can't say that they have particularly mismanaged their position. The main goal of the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) is to maintain and manage Wikimedia websites and providing support to nascent projects, while I think that they largely fail at the latter, as volunteer projects this isn't fully their responsibility and looking at it as a purely technical organisation... It's fine, while there's a lot of room for improvement they keep Wikimedia websites up to date and maintain a full technical staff to update Wikimedia websites with technical features.
  • The most up-to-date version of the MediaWiki software: Wikimedia websites are owned by the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) which actively develops the MediaWiki software on which essentially every online wiki works, because of this the latest and most up-to-date version always appears on Wikipedia's. An argument can be made that almost all essential parts of the MediaWiki software has already been developed and that the WMF has been slow to adapt to a changing internet environment, but looking at how Wikia (or "Fandom") looks today and how less inviting it is than Wikimedia websites I am not sure how easy it is to develop an alternative for the MediaWiki software.
Copy it completely and your website isn't different enough to stand out against Wikipedia, change it too much and those already experienced with writing on Wikimedia websites will find the steep learning / adaptation curve a turn-off.
So, this means that (at least according to 2011 numbers) around 49% (forty-nine percent) of the audience of Wikipedia is also Adminpedia's target audience.
  • Other language versions of Wikipedia: Wikipedia's largest edition is obviously the English-language Wikipedia, but the Teutonophone (German), Hispanophone (Castilian), Francophone (French), Belgophone (Dutch), Bisayaphone (Cebuano), and many other language versions have essentially become "the standard online encyclopaedia" of their languages as well, Adminpedia wouldn't just need to attract Anglophones, it would also need to attract these Non-Anglophones. Only handful of demographics haven't fully come aboard the the Wikimedia train, most prominently the Mandophone (Mandarin) community and this is purely due to the top-to-bottom actions of the Chinese Communist Party, not due to an organic bottom-to-top grassroots movement originating in the People's Republic of China.
  • There is a clear established order with decades worth of jurisprudence: Yeah, I know, neither of us are exactly fans of the established order and the corrupt system it produces, but for all its faults it is still somewhat accountable and any new user can bring a case in front of the community and argue based on their merits. Yes, entrenched users with their own cliques hold more power and those who speak truth to power can only expect to be banned, but to the average conformist editor who is only there to write an encyclopaedia and basically never interacts with admins and may not even know that "admins" and "village pumps" exist and only sees Wikipedia as its content, this system largely works nor do they question it. See it like doing business in a dictatorship, you know that political dissidents disappear and that nobody is safe from the all-seeing eye of the dominant ideology, but if you simply mind your own business and not challenge the establishment most people will be able to simply do their business. Second-class citizens (IP users, those previously blocked / banned, and / or currently sanctioned, Etc.) have less rights and can be arbitrarily executed on the whim of the police (the admins), but to those who aren't in the lowest caste nor the highest caste this system isn't particularly oppressive nor is it particularly beneficial, it is simply stable. Being from a Communist dictatorship myself this is how I would describe it like and I'd say that Wikimedia websites are very similar in culture to them.
Adminpedia is noble in that it tries to implement some form of "equality" (which I don't think will work, but more on that later), but the Wikimedia system's stability exists because the system is somewhat hard to reform and as dominant as the Exclusionist ideological clique is, they don't hold absolute power (otherwise your ban here wouldn't have been controversial). Wikipedia is somewhat easy to manipulate by interest groups and I think that multiple interest groups secretly have agents infiltrating it (and I think that the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) is actively trying to find some of these groups), but I think that Adminpedia's system will give these interest groups way more power than they currently have within the Wikimedia environment (but more on that later).

Here are the reasons why I think that Adminpedia will fail, I will also give some possible solutions when applicable:

  • The invite-only system has been tried, it failed before: Originally Wikipedia's predecessor Nupedia was an invite-only website, the result was that "Nupedia raakte al snel door Wikipedia overvleugeld en hield in september 2003 op te bestaan. Er waren toen 25 artikelen voltooid, en er waren 74 in voorbereiding. Een deel van de artikelen werd toegevoegd aan Wikipedia." (Bron), even after the success of Wikipedia one of its co-founders and critic Larry Sanger launched Citizendium which failed, sure Citizendium wasn't invite-only but by simply increasing the standards it attracted less people. Wanting less people may seem like a noble goal as you'd be excluding vandals and those with malicious intentions or simply those who aren't competent enough to accurately research a topic, but the issue is that by having your doors open to anyone you'll get lots of diverse perspectives and ideas commonly receive push-back while by closing yourself off you'll end up with largely having the same few cliques of people fighting it out.
  • It lacks an established international charity organisation, like the WMF:
Robots will likely replace lawyers in the future.

Unrelated, but here's an interesting question, do blanked user pages with block notices psychologically influence an admin's chance of unblocking users and adding sanctions to users when unblocked?

User "Koavf" was indefinitely blocked from 09:28, 2 December 2020 until 15:46, 10 September 2022, yet throughout that entire time their userpage remained untouched. When they were unblocked they weren't given a single sanction, this is extremely rare. Both the unblock without a sanction and a user who was indefinitely blocked that didn't have their user page blanked, this makes me wonder if this might be related.

What if it might be standard practice to blank user pages to make it seem like the user was never "a real Wikimedian" to begin with and that the block notices + blanking is done to reduce their entire presence to that of a persona non grata?

--Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 21:49, 12 May 2023 (UTC) .[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Donald_Trung/1_(one)_place_for_imports/Archive_186&oldid=768979893"