User:S Larctia/Blocking policy

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Purple question mark.svg
You can help develop this proposal, share your thoughts, or discuss its adoption as a Wikiversity policy, guideline, or process. References or links should describe this page as a "proposal".

Blocking is the method by which custodians may technically prevent users from editing Wikiversity. Blocks may be applied to user accounts, to IP addresses, and to ranges of IP addresses, for either a definite or indefinite time. A blocked user can continue to access Wikiversity, but is not able to edit any page, except (in most cases) their own user talk page. Blocks are used to prevent damage or disruption to Wikiversity, not to punish users. Any user may report disruption and ask administrators to consider blocking a disruptive account or IP address. This can be done via Request custodian action. If you feel that you have been improperly blocked, you can ask for the decision to be reviewed on your talk page, or by e-mail if your talk page access has been removed.

Criteria for blocking[edit]

Only users who are knowingly disrupting the project should be blocked. There are three key points that must be considered before blocking:

  1. Does the Wikiversity community consider an action or behaviour disruptive?
  2. Does the person know their action or behaviour is considered disruptive or does the Wikiversity community reasonably expect the person to know?
  3. Is the person likely to continue to be disruptive, if asked to stop and constructive alternatives suggested?

An editor should only be blocked if all three criteria are satisfied. In practise, this means that only blatant vandals and spammers can be blocked without prior warning about their behaviour. The following caveats apply to blocking:

  1. Blocks are not intended to be punitive. If a user ceases their disruptive activity, it is inappropriate to block. Likewise, "cool-down" blocks should not be used in preemption of disruption. However, blocks should deter users from future disruption.
  2. Custodians should refrain from blocking users who they are incapable of treating impartially due to prior content, policy or other disputes. The custodian should instead bring the matter to Requests for custodian action.
  3. Users who have made edits in good faith to the project have a right to be notified about their block by the blocking custodian on their user talk page.

Common rationales for blocks[edit]

The following are common rationales for blocking an editor. If a custodian is in doubt as to whether to apply a block, they should consult other custodians. Blocks which are likely to be controversial should be publicly announced at the colloquium.

Blocks to protect the Wikimedia Foundation and/or specific users[edit]

  • Editors who make legal threats concerning Wikiversity or the Wikimedia Foundation.
  • Editors who persistently violate copyright law in their contributions to Wikiversity.
  • Editors who disclose the personal information of Wikiversity editors without their consent.
  • Editors who produce potentially libellous material about living people.

Blocks to prevent disruption of the project[edit]

  • Editors who create accounts with inappropriate usernames. If this is unintentional, they should be free to create another account with an appropriate username.
  • Editors who vandalize the project.
  • Editors who use Wikiversity solely as a way of unduly promoting a person, product or concept.
  • Editors who abuse multiple accounts to affect community consensus.
  • Editors who persistently create content deemed beyond the scope of Wikiversity or otherwise inappropriate, and are uncommunicative or unwilling to cease.
  • Bots operated without approval.
  • Any user may be blocked if there is a clear community consensus that their contributions are having a net negative effect on the project, either through tendentious editing, incivility or other means.


  • Any account known to be compromised should be blocked to prevent abuse.


Often blocks will occur for a specified amount of time ranging from hours to years. In some cases an indefinite block will be applied. Blocks for IP addresses must be done with care because often the disruptive editor is not the only person that will be affected. This is especially the case with range-blocks.

Anyone may request that an unblock be made at any time. You may request an unblock on the affected user's talk page, the blocking custodian's user talk page, at Wikiversity:Request custodian action, or at Wikiversity:Community Review. You should politely explain why the disruption is no longer a concern or why the blocking custodian was mistaken. Unblocking may require that editors obey special provisions to ensure they discontinue their disruptive behavior. The blocking custodian can participate in any discussion to unblock an editor, but any decision to deny the request should be made by other custodians.

The Wikiversity community may decide to conditionally or unconditionally unblock an editor or to deny an unblock request. Custodians are encouraged to start a community discussion about new or continued concerns before acting in apparent contradiction to previous community consensus. Custodians who unilaterally unblock previously blocked users may be seen as ignoring community consensus and thus acting disruptively. Whenever possible any block/unblock discussion should be closed, and the result implemented by, an uninvolved custodian.

While custodians have the technical ability to unblock themselves, custodians should not do so under normal circumstances, but request unblocking via their user talk page. Self-unblocking is seen as an abuse of the administrative privileges of the custodian.

It is acceptable for a blocked user to be unblocked so that they can edit specific discussions outside their user talk page on the topic of their block. However, any other edits in these circumstances would result in the user being reblocked.

See also[edit]