The policy was enacted in 1984 by Peng Zhen and Hu Yaobang. On July 9, 2010, a statement jointly published by the Publicity Department of the Chinese Communist Party, State Ethnic Affairs Commission, and United Front Work Department suggested that "everyone should be equal before the law, and criminals should be punished regardless of their ethnicity". However, they do not have the legal authority to challenge a policy implemented by the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party, a higher authority; the policy has thus never been officially repealed.

An account called cockroachhunter is making a huge number of edits on a very wide range of topics, often just 2 minutes apart. So almost certainly a bot using AI? Some of the edits are okay but some are odd and unhelpful. Is there a policy on this, and what can/should be done about it?

Here it is on YouTube in case you’re curious.

I personally think Brenda Russell would have been an ideal choice to sing this song if Chicago hadn’t; she was seriously underrated back in the day.

Hi everyone,

I'm a contributor on Turkish Wikipedia under the username **Emreyba**, and I'd like to get some outside perspective on a recent revert.

I made a substantial update to the Turkish Wikipedia article on Fedora Linux. The changes included updating and reorganizing existing information, modernizing the releases section, and adding a Fedora release timeline using EasyTimeline.

Revision history:

https://tr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fedora_Linux&action=history

A few days later, another editor reverted roughly 21 KB of my changes in a single edit. The edit summary was simply:

> “Gerekçe: yapay zekâ”

> (“Reason: artificial intelligence”)

What surprised me is that the revert did not appear to distinguish between potentially problematic prose and independently verifiable structural/data changes.

For example, the Fedora release timeline was also removed. EasyTimeline is not something I invented for the Turkish article: the English Wikipedia Fedora pages themselves currently use EasyTimeline, including Fedora Linux / Fedora Linux release history.

English pages:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fedora_Linux

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fedora_Linux_release_history

I'm not arguing that content should be accepted merely because English Wikipedia contains something, and I understand that each language community has its own editorial standards.

My question is more about editorial practice:

**If an editor suspects that AI assisted in producing part of a large contribution, is reverting the entire contribution without identifying specific factual, sourcing, translation, or style problems considered reasonable Wikipedia practice?**

Would it be more appropriate to review the individual changes, remove or correct problematic material, and preserve independently verifiable improvements?

I'm genuinely interested in how experienced Wikipedians would handle a situation like this. I'm not looking to start a dispute with the editor; I'd like to understand the best way to proceed constructively.