Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Heqong

Statement by

 * I think User:Chiang Kai-shek has crossed the line by directly insulting User:Ideogram on his own user talk page. It is inexcusable to call a person a "bitch" and to tell them to "go to hell". That is inappropriate behavior and violates WP:NPA. Chiang Kai-shek had been warned on several occassions to assume good faith and to refrain from making accusations against others. Unfortunately, it seems he has ignored such advice and resorted to personal attacks. — Nrtm81 09:39, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Edit: I think a lot of things that has happened has been due to misunderstandings. I don't believe people have bad intensions but things get ugly when we start making comments that are not constructive. Chiang Kai-shek has been pushed into a corner with regards to Portal:Taiwan. I can understand his good intentions but when there is a dispute regarding Wikipedia (in this case the portal name for Portal:Taiwan), we should confirm an agreement that the dispute has been resolved before moving on. — Nrtm81 09:22, 15 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Edit: For the record, I don't believe Ideogram targetted Chiang Kai-shek. Ideogram has been quite fair in his conduct and I have not seen any evidence of bullying. The situation involves politics to some extent so things can get nasty. Taiwan is such a sensitive issue.


 * I sincerely hope that Chiang Kai-shek regretted the action of leaving a nasty remark on Ideogram's user page. Also, I hope I'm not being played around as a fool in this case by Chiang Kai-shek. I fully support Ideogram and I would like to support Chiang Kai-shek if he will just try to refrain from making comments that are not constructive. Let's not play the victim card or try to push the blame on another person. That's not productive.


 * This case was filed because of Chiang Kai-shek's conduct on Wikipedia. The second comment made by Chiang Kai-shek is the kind of comment that he had been warned to refrain from making (i.e. accusations). It's funny to read if you don't take it seriously, but at the same time it's not professional and is harmful. — Nrtm81 19:48, 15 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh great, Ideogram mentions here that Chiang Kai-shek was pushing a pro-ROC agenda. I had accused him of that in the past but have since refrained from saying such things. What a headache! lol, I don't know what to do anymore. Can we just stop fighting each other? — Nrtm81 20:45, 15 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Ideogram's remark to User:^demon confirms what I've been thinking: Misunderstandings. Chiang Kai-shek's latest edit, moving the article name from "Taiwan Province (People's Republic of China)" to "The Claimed Taiwan Province of the People's Republic of China" is similar to the dispute over Portal:Taiwan. As long as the content is clear about the situation and has references, there's really no need to make article names so correct. In this example, "The Claimed Taiwan Province of the People's Republic of China" just doesn't look professional. It would be alright as the title of a blog entry or essay but I don't think it's appropriate as the title of an encyclopedia entry. — Nrtm81 10:13, 16 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm a bit concerned by this Edit summary usage for Chiang Kai-shek: 5% for major edits and 100% for minor edits. Mine (57%, 55%), Ideogram (100%, 94%)  — Nrtm81 17:47, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Analysis (please take this observation into consideration)
Regarding User:Chiang Kai-shek, I am not willing to participate in the case against him. I just want to state that I believe the situation has been blown out of proportion. Chiang Kai-shek's conduct in relation to Portal:Taiwan has been quite reasonable (I have reread all of his messages on Portal talk:Taiwan). I believe the situation has gotten out of hand because of bad communication mostly on my part.

There has also been a long running misunderstanding because Portal:Taiwan at the time was using template:browsebarcountry. I had accepted the reasoning given by Captain0 as to why a Portal:Republic of China isn't plausible and assumed Chiang Kai-shek would understand and accept the reasoning. I then made a string of mistakes starting with requesting a mediation case (which is meant to bring about a compromise) when my intension was to get Chiang Kai-shek to understand and accept the portal name as it is. This directly dragged Ideogram into the dispute mess.

I also made the mistake of being the first to accuse Chiang Kai-shek of having a political agenda, when he was only trying to reason that the portal name can be misleading (i.e. mislead people into thinking Taiwan is a nation, when really it is a territory under the jurisdiction of the 🇹🇼 Republic of China) This was to result in unnecessary and off-topic accusations of communism and seperatism agendas.

A few days ago, Chiang Kai-shek requested "page unprotection" which I think resulted from a misunderstanding by a comment I made. User:Ideogram's attempt to unify China-related portals (Portal:China, Portal:Hong Kong, Portal:Taiwan, Portal:People's Republic of China, Portal:Republic of China) using one color was based on his belief that red is a traditional color used in Chinese culture. This is true but unfortunately red also has a connotation with communism. It was directly my fault for encouraging him to go ahead with the edit when I knew perfectly well that red would be too controversial a color to use. Chiang Kai-shek misunderstood Ideogram's action as imposing the idea that the 🇨🇳 People's Republic of China was the sole sovereign government over ROC government including Taiwan.

This is the conclusion I have reached from looking back at past comments. It cannot be said that Ideogram, Chiang Kai-shek, or myself have adhered to the WP:AGF since all three of us have at some point made accusations against the other which not only goes off topic from solving a Wikipedia dispute, but also generates unnecessary hostility between Wikipedians. I can't speak for other people who accuse Chiang Kai-shek of vandalism but I believe it's not constructive to get personal when the real issue should focus on pointing out concerns with content/name of Wikipedia articles.

Making comments that can be taken the wrong way or accusations will only result in the problem that led up to this arbitration. Chiang Kai-shek himself might even be in his rights to file the RFAR against me or even Ideogram if we assume the POV/NPOV issue over the portal. Some people may have strong views but we should be pointing out concerns when a content is straying from NPOV or if we consider it inappropriate, unnecessary, etc rather than make hostile comments.

I just want everyone to calm down, even apologize if it will stop the hostility. I have already apologized to Chiang Kai-shek on several ocassions so that we can be more focused on resolving the Portal:Taiwan dispute. I just hope he and Ideogram can understand each other better and perhaps they'll see neither of them have bad intensions. If anyone's truly guilty, it is I, for creating this whole mess. — Nrtm81 00:43, 19 July 2006 (UTC) STOP THE WARS!!!!!!!!!!!!!STOP THE WARS!!!!STOP THE WARS!!!!!!

Comment by Improv
Regardless of the outcome of arbitration, I believe this username must be retired (renamed or abandoned for something new) because of violations of WP:NAME -- it's inappropriate (and in this case inflammatory) to have a username suggesting such a major (and controversial on the world scene) political figure like this. The choice of username should be considered as evidence of intent for this arbitration case, should it be accepted. --Improv 12:39, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Comment from the Mediation Committee
I recently encountered Ideogram while working on this RFM involving Parsssseltongue and WCityMike. I was orrosponding my intentions to mediate their case here and here, respectively. WCityMike quickly replied on the RFM page. However, Ideogram made a comment on Parsssseltongue's talk page that rather disturbed me, as well as the accompanying edit summary "→Mediation - not possible." This prompted my follow up comment to him, here. Just thought I'd mention it, as both of their conduct seems to be coming in to question. - ^ demon  [yell at me][ubx_war_sux] /11:45, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * It has been brought to my attention that he was referring to a MedCab case. My mistake. - ^ demon  [yell at me][ubx_war_sux] /12:27, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Comment by Bonafide.hustla
Not only that Chiang Kai-shek's username is inappropriate, he has been engaged in POV pushing, wikilawyering, and personal attacks anywhere he goes. He went as far as threating other users who disagree with his POV. I am quite surprised to see him here, still editing. Someone should've gave him an indef block long ago. He has stated on his userpage that he is anti-communist, anti-Taiwanese. In any case, his contributions speak for themselves. He fails to realize wikipedia is an "encyclopedia". If this case is accepted, I believe sanctions should definitely be carried out against this vandal. Anyway these are some links that show personal attacks and POV pushing by this user. [] [] [] (a threat from this user) [](pov pushing example) And this most recent example of PA and talkpage vandalism. Apparently, only a harsh block will stop this user--Bonafide.hustla 05:37, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


 * How am I anti-Taiwanese when I, myself, is a citizen of the Republic of China with jurisdiction in Taiwan. Bonifda has engaged in POV edits all the time. He is pushing a pro Taiwan independance stance. He kept saying Chen Shui-bian was president of Taiwan, but he is in fact not. He is President of the Republic of China. -Chiang Kai-shek 06:49, 17 July 2006 (UTC)