„Wikipédia:Wikitanácsi indítványok/Bencemac (másodszor)” változatai közötti eltérés

Tartalom törölve Tartalom hozzáadva
Címke: 2017-es forrásszöveg-szerkesztő
Sb008 (vitalap | szerkesztései)
52. sor:
Az angol nyelvű válaszom megtalálható a [[Szerkesztővita:Bencemac#Discrimination|vitalapomon]], de ide is írok egy gyors összefoglalót. Alensha fordításában („''külföldieknek csak akkor jár, ha csak globális cseréket végeznek''”) a következőt pontosítanám: ''nem adunk'', tehát nem „''csak akkor jár''”. A mondat nagy általánosságban értendő, az elmúlt évek gyakorlata alapján. Sb008 nem beszél magyarul (ami még nem lenne kizáró ok) és szerkesztései tartalmi szerkesztések, ezeket jelenleg a járőr ellenőrzik. Amennyiben megadom a megerősített szerkesztői jogod, akkor szerkesztései azonnal láthatóvá válnak, így az esetleges tartalmi, nyelvtani vagy épp technikai hibák nem kerülnek javításra. Véleményem szerint csak olyan szerkesztő kaphat megerősített szerkesztői jogot, akiről a jog megadásának pillanatában a közösség és a bürokraták úgy gondolják, hogy alkalmas rá és a jog megadása után nem kell ellenőrizni szerkesztéseit. Egy magyarul nem beszélő szerkesztőnél pedig szinte biztosra veszem, hogy akarata ellenére is hibázni fog. Xebulo közreműködéseit átnéztem és alkalmasnak találtam a jogra, habár a „300-as lélekhatárt” még nem érte el. Döntésemet a projekt érdekeit szem előtt tartva, illetve a [[Wikipédia:Bürokraták kézikönyve#Munkamódszer|bürokraták kézikönyvének]] idevágó szakasza alapján hoztam meg. A két ügyben született döntésem egymástól független. Véleményem szerint a jog megadásának több a hátulütője, mintsem az így felszabaduló járőrkapacitás. [[User:Bencemac|Bencemac]]<sup> [[User vita:Bencemac|A Holtak Szószólója]]</sup> 2018. február 1., 10:23 (CET)
 
=== {második érintett félsb008 álláspontja} ===
 
The answer of Bencemac in English on his/her talk page:
 
“’’First of all, you should waited my answer, so I explain now my decision. As I wrote before, we appreciate your contribution as every editor's. You must understand that this is a Hungarian project and it's language is Hungarian. Consequently a trusted user has to understand the content of the page what she/he edits. Furthermore, a trusted user's edits are usually not checked, so if you make a grammar or a technical mistake, it is possible that no one will notice and will appear for the readers. About Xebulo; I wrote her/him the following: ''Although you have quite less edits in the main (article) namespace yet, I checked them and I think that you deserve the trusted user permission. Even though, if you are unsure, be brave to ask help (even from me)''. As you can read, I check her/his edits and I find them good, so I decided to grant the permission. In summary, in my opinion; if a foreign user makes edits in the main namespace (so she/he changes the contant of the pages) and these changes are not global replacements of files, then a native user's control is necessary in the defend of our project. This doesn't meant that I say your activity is (or will be) dangerous, but one more user's control doesn't cause problem, but a wrong edit can. Trusted user represents that we '''''absolutely sure '''''about that we don't have to patrol after her/him when we grant the permission. In my opinion, this not discrimination. Discrimination would be that if I reject you without no reason, but I did check your contribution (included on other projects) before I made my decision.’’”
 
My response to that answer:
 
# I waited 2 days, I think that is more than enough.
# What makes you think I don't understand the content of the page? Please give me proof which indicates I don't understand the content.
# Which technical mistakes did I make? I think I removed quite a few!!! Please give me proof of my technical mistakes.
# Which grammar mistakes did I make, besides those where I '''explicitly''' asked someone to check my edits? Please give me proof of such grammar mistakes.
# You really don't have to explain to me what a trusted user is. But since I'm not Hungarian I'm probably to dumb to know.
# You checked Xebulo's edits and think they're good. You say you checked my edits too. And those weren't good? Please tell me which of my edits weren't good.
# You told Xebulo to be brave enough to ask for help. '''Without''' someone telling me to be brave, I was brave enough to ask someone for help on the rare occasions there was a chance there could be a grammar mistake.
# In your opinion, control of a native user is necessary if a foreigner makes edits. You realize what you are saying? You assume foreigners to be incompetent by definition!
# If one more user control doesn't cause a problem, I can only conclude you are going to give up your trusted user status voluntary. After all, you're not god and we have to be ''' absolutely sure''' your edits don't include any mistakes. An extra control of someone else will not cause a problem where a mistake, even by you, can. As a matter of fact, according to your line of reasoning, nobody should get trusted user rights, since no one is perfect and we have to be ''' absolutely sure''' there’re no mistakes.
 
Additionally my response to the answer of Bencemac on this page above:
 
# People can get enhanced editorial rights if the community and the bureaucrats think they are fit to get this right. And why am I unfit besides being not Hungarian?
# You’re sure I will make a mistake. Can you name me 1 person who will not make a mistake? Just 1, that will do!
# Granting me the right has more disadvantages than the patrol capacity thus made available. The pages of the current football season (2017–18) of the Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, German, French, Austrian and English league had no information about standings, results etc. They were basically empty. Even the page of the Hungarian league was not completely up to date and full with deprecated tags. How was it possible there were so many mistakes on a page with, till then. only Hungarian editors? But that’s not even the issue. In all your capacity considerations, did you also calculate the capacity needed to keep those pages updated? I can guarantee you that will take a 100 times more capacity than patrolling. Or are you so naïv to think I keep updating those pages on a Wikipedia where they consider me incompetent because I’m a foreigner and as someone who requires a babysitter? Think again!
 
All in all:
 
Bencemac considers foreigners unfit by definition, they will make mistakes for sure and therefore need a babysitter. He mentions I could make grammar and technical mistakes and don’t understand the content.
 
Yet, he/she doesn’t provide a single piece of evidence of me not understanding pages and making grammar and technical mistakes. Although I’m sure, if he/she’ll search hard enough, he/she’ll find a mistake somewhere. But then, he/she can inspect any random user and I’m just as sure he/she’ll find a mistake as well. I’m even sure if I would inspect all his/her pages I would find mistakes.
 
His/her only argument is I’m a foreigner, and a lot of generalizations about foreigners.
 
I’m not judged by the work I did, but by a lot of assumptions and speculations of what might be.
 
He/she thinks that is no discrimination. However that is exactly what discrimination is, discrimination of the worst kind. As defined in the Merriam Webster dictionary “discrimination: to make a difference in treatment or favor on a basis other than individual merit”.
 
Being able to speak a language is just 1 aspect of being a good editor. For edits which involve little to none text it’s a negligible aspect. I can update football league pages in any language. Actually I do update league pages on the English, German, Dutch, Spanish, Portuguese, Russian, Ukrainian, Italian, Greek, Finnish and Hungarian Wikipedia. I’ve no intention to write narrative literature on any of these sites. I know my limitations.
 
I even doubt Bencemac had a real look at the work I did. On the pages I've been editing there's, in the last month, a continuous flow of edits made by me, all approved without corrections (besides those I asked for).
 
Like I already mentioned, no proof is provided about my edits being bad. I’m not judged by the work done but by a subjective generalizations about foreigners.
 
By doing so, the arguments presented and the proof '''not''' presented, Bencemac proves over and over to discriminate and to be totally unfit for the for the duty of bureaucrat. It’s even a criminal offence.
 
So the big question is, to use the words of Bencemac, is it in the interest of the Hungarian Wikipedia to have someone who discriminates as bureaucrat?
 
– [[Szerkesztő:Sb008|Sb008]] <sup>[[Szerkesztővita:Sb008|vita]]</sup> 2018. február 1., 13:23 (CET)
 
=== A testület állásfoglalása az ügy befogadásáról ===