WikiIslam:Blocking Policy: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
ok for now
(ok for now)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{shortcut|[[WIBP]]}}
==Criteria for Blocking==
Administrators are required to be fair while blocking users. Heavy-handed or unfair usage of the blocking function effects the community negatively and will be promptly reversed and reviewed so blocking must be done with great care. If a block can be disputed, other admins must be consulted before a user is blocked.


{{shortcut|[[WIBP]]}}
The main criteria for blocking a user is this: Can a user make positive contributions to the site in the future? If the answer is maybe or yes, then they should not be blocked without consultation. All attempts should be made to communicate with the user before they are blocked. All efforts should be made to be fair, forgiving and give users plenty of chances to improve their work or correct their understanding of issues directly related to article content.


==Block Durations==
==Block Durations==
The usage of an indefinite block can only be done for spam or vandalism. All other uses of an indefinite block have to be consulted with other admins especially if a block can be disputed.


Edits from new users that ignore guidelines or are intentional vandalism should be blocked (1-3 months if it is an IP address or infinite if it is a username).
{| class="wikitable"
|-
!colspan="3"| Simple Vandalism/Spam
|-
! User activity  !! Block duration !! Notes
|-
| Spam or spambot|| 3 months for IP addresses, indefinite for user names || IP addresses can also be range-blocked if needed
|-
| Vandalism: large amounts of text removal, replacing content. || As above || This kind of vandalism is obvious. A user who has made a mistake or an error cannot be treated as a vandal if the edit can be discussed with them.
|-
!colspan="6"| Other activity
|-
| 3 reverts in 24 hours or/and gross incivility  || 1st offense: 24 hours, 2nd offense: 1 week, 3rd offense: 1 month, 4th offense: 3 months, 5th offense and each consecutive attempt: 6 months. Do not block indefinite without consulting other admins. ||
|}


==Usernames==
==Usernames==
Line 14: Line 32:
Reverts for vandalism or ignoring guidelines should be done with no comment or a comment similar to "reverting/reverting vandalism". No other type of comment should be used in the revert.
Reverts for vandalism or ignoring guidelines should be done with no comment or a comment similar to "reverting/reverting vandalism". No other type of comment should be used in the revert.


It is useless to respond to vandalism-only/content violation accounts on their talk pages. IP addresses change frequently so they are unlikely to read any messages. It is not useful to respond to a registered username which has been infinitely blocked because they cannot respond. If any comments are left, they should only be about the edit that was reverted. No personal attacks of any kind should be used.
It is not useful to respond to vandalism-only/content violation accounts on their talk pages. IP addresses change frequently so they are unlikely to read any messages. It is not useful to respond to a registered username which has been infinitely blocked because they cannot respond. If any comments are left, they should only be about the edit that was reverted. No personal attacks of any kind should be used.


==Blocking Existing Users==
==Examples of Incorrect Blocks==
No blocks of any kind (temporary or indefinite) can be made without consulting other admins for the following situations:
* '''Opinions''': An editor expressed a disagreeable opinion: Editors have diverse opinions and they should not be blocked for expressing an opinion unless it is something universally illegal or extreme. Even then the editor should be warned for his initial offense and should be allowed to continue making positive contributions to the site. The first priority is having someone contribute positively to the site's main article space while complying with guidelines. Everything else, including their personal opinions on different issues is secondary.
* '''Mistakes''': An editor made a mistake/typo or an accidental edit (that is not intentional vandalism). They might return to make positive contributions.
* '''Incorrect edits''': An editor made an edit which is not obvious vandalism but is incorrect in some way due to their current perception or understanding of an issue. They should be engaged on the talk page first.
* '''Slight/occasional incivility/aggression''': Slight incivility can be subjective and occasional incivility can be forgiven. Maintain a neutral dialogue and consult with other admins if aggression continues.


This section is about blocking a user who has not engaged in obvious vandalism and who has made some constructive edits in the past. Such a user cannot be blocked by an admin without discussion with the user and other admins. Where appropriate, blocks of fixed lengths should be considered before using indefinite blocks.
Incorrect blocks will be reversed as needed.


==Summary==
==Summary==
No one should be blocked except for the following situations:
No one should be blocked except for the following situations:
* Obvious and intentional vandalism. Inappropriate usernames with no edits can be renamed or blocked.
* Obvious and intentional vandalism, text removal, replacement and/or corruption.  
* Inappropriate usernames with no edits can be renamed or blocked.
* Spam
* Spam
* Ongoing harassment/gross incivility
* Continuing to edit after they have been told not to edit (for example, if it is clear that a user cannot understand our [[WikiIslam:Policies_and_Guidelines|policies]], has been asked to stop yet continues to edit).
* Continuing to edit after they have been told not to edit (for example, if it is clear that a user cannot understand our [[WikiIslam:Policies_and_Guidelines|policies]], has been asked to stop yet continues to edit).
 
For all other situations, consult other admins before blocking a user.
===Examples of Incorrect Blocks===
 
* An editor expressed a disagreeable opinion: Editors have diverse opinions and they should not be blocked for expressing an opinion unless it is something universally illegal or extreme. Even then, the editor should be warned for his initial offense and allowed to continue making positive contributions to the site. The first priority is having someone contribute positively to the site's main article space while complying with guidelines. Everything else is secondary.
* An editor made a mistake/typo or an accidental edit (that is not intentional vandalism). They might return to make positive contributions.
* An editor made an edit which is not obvious vandalism but is incorrect in some way. They should be engaged on the talk page first.
 
Incorrect blocks can be reversed as needed.


==External Links==
==External Links==
Autochecked users, Bureaucrats, Editors, oversight, recentchangescleanup, Reviewers, rollback, Administrators
19,746

edits

Navigation menu