A user may be blocked when necessary to protect the rights, property or safety of theWikimedia Foundation, its users or the public. A block for protection may be necessary in response to:
A user may be blocked when his or her conduct severely disrupts the project; that is, when his or her conduct is inconsistent with acivil, collegial atmosphere and interferes with the process of editors working together harmoniously to create an encyclopedia. A block for disruption may be necessary in response to:
Disagreements over content or policy are not disruption, but rather part of the normal functioning of Wikipedia and should be handled through dispute resolution procedures. Blocks for disruptive behaviour should not typically be used in response to isolated instances of behaviour, but in response to persistent patterns of behaviour.
Users who aggressively and repeatedly violate fundamental policies may be blocked if there is a consensus among uninvolved users that it is necessary. Such persons should be dealt with kindly and patiently, but should be prevented from wreaking havoc over the period of weeks or months it would take to process an obvious Arbitration request. Remember to note the case onThe Administrators' incident noticeboard. Be kind.
Furthermore, some types of user accounts are considered disruptive and may be blocked:
public accounts (where the password is publicly available or shared with a large group);
bots operating withoutapproval or outside their approval;
accounts that appear, based on their edit history, to exist for thesole or primary purpose of promoting a person, company, product, service, or organization in apparent violation ofConflict of interest oranti-spam guidelines, should be warned that such edits are against Wikipedia policy. If after the warning such edits persist, and the account continues to be used primarily or solely for the purpose of promotion, any uninvolved admin may block the account.
A Wikipedia ban is a formal revocation of editing privileges on all or part of Wikipedia. A ban may be temporary and of fixed duration, or indefinite and potentially permanent.
Blocks may be used to enforce bans. Such blocks are based on the particular terms of the ban. Except for partial bans, banned users are customarily blocked for the duration of the ban.
Non-static IPs or hosts that are otherwise not permanent proxies typically warrant blocking for a shorter period of time, as the IP is likely to be transferred, the open proxy is likely to be closed, or the IP is likely to be reassigned dynamically.
It does happen that an account is compromised, meaning that some else than the account's owner has for whatever reason gained access to the password. This is particularily serious when it happens to an account with administrator privileges, since the damage it can do with the deletion and block buttons is quite serious. If there is evidence that this has happened the account may be blocked (and if applicable, have its adminship priveleges removed) as an emergency measure. The account may be subsequently unblocked if the owner can provide evidence that he or she has regained access to the account.
To prevent this from happening, all users are advised to choose passwords which are difficult to guess, and shouldnever reveal their password to anybody else.
An administrator may reset the block of a user who intentionally evades a block, and may extend the duration of the block if the user engages in further blockable behaviour while evading the block. User accounts or IP addresses used to evade a block may also be blocked.
Administrators must not block users with whom they are engaged in a content dispute; instead, they should report the problem to other administrators.
An exception is made when dealing with unsourced or poorly sourced contentious biographical material about living persons. Administrators may enforce the removal of such material with page protection and blocks, even if they have been editing the article themselves. (Seethe BLP policy.)
Sometimes people request that their account be blocked, for example to enforce awikibreak. Typically such requests are refused, because of the possibility of collateral effects to other users using the same IP address. There is a JavaScript-based "wikibreak enforcer" which may be used instead.
Blocks should not be used solely for the purpose of recording warnings or other negative events in a user's block log. The practice, typically involving very short blocks, is often seen as punitive and humiliating.
However, very brief blocks may be used in order to record, for example, an apology or acknowledgment of mistake in the block log in the event of a wrongful or accidental block, unless the original block has not yet expired (in which case the message may be recorded in the unblocking reason).
Administrators may unblock a user in order to re-block them with different blocking options selected, where that is necessary (for example, if a block on a registered account is causing significant collateral effects to a shared IP address or a blocked user is abusing theSpecial:Emailuser function).
Technical instructions on how to block and unblock, and information on the blocking interface, is available atHelp:Block and unblock. The following is advice specifically related to blocking and unblocking on Wikipedia.
Everyone was new once, and most of us made mistakes when new. That's why wewelcome newcomers and arepatient with them, andassume that most people who work on the project are trying to help it, not hurt it. We also ask that newcomers make an effort to learn aboutour policies and guidelines so that they can learn how to avoid making mistakes.
As such, before blocking is used, efforts should be made to educate users about our policies and guidelines, and to warn them when their behaviour is in conflict with our policies and guidelines. Avariety of template messages exist for convenience, although purpose-written messages are often preferable.
Warning is not a prerequisite for blocking (particularly with respect to blocks for protection) but administrators should generally ensure that users are aware of policies, and give them reasonable opportunity to adjust their behaviour accordingly, before blocking. Users who have been made aware of a policy and have had such an opportunity do not require further warning.
The purpose of blocking is prevention, not punishment. The duration of blocks should thus be related to the likelihood of a user repeating inappropriate behaviour. Administrators should consider:
the severity of the behaviour;
whether the user has been blocked for engaging in that behaviour before.
Blocks on shared or dynamic IP addresses are typically shorter than blocks on registered accounts or static IP addresses made in otherwise similar circumstances, in order to limit side-effects on other users sharing that IP address.
While the duration of a block should vary with the circumstances of the block, there are some broad standards for block durations:
blocks for all types of disruptive behaviour are typically for 24 hours, longer for successive instances;
blocks on types of user accounts considered disruptive are typically of indefinite duration;
blocks for protection are typically for as long as protection is necessary, which may often be indefinitely.
There are several options available to modify the effect of blocks, which should be used in certain circumstances.
autoblock should typically bedisabled when blocking unapproved or malfunctioning bots (so as not to block the bot's operator), though it should beenabled when blocking malicious bots.
prevent account creation should typically bedisabled when blocking accounts with inappropriate names (to allow the user to create an account with an appropriate name), though it should beenabled when blocking malicious names (for example, clear attacks on other users).
block e-mail will disable the user from accessingSpecial:Emailuser for the duration of the block. This option shouldnot be used by default when blocking an account, but rather it should only be used in cases of abuse of the "email this user" feature. When enabled, efforts should be taken to ensure that the user's talk page remains unprotected and that the user is aware of other avenues (such as unblock-en-l) through which he can discuss the block.
A "softblock" is a block with autoblock disabled, account creation not disabled, and blocking only anonymous users enabled. The effect is to block anonymous users but allow registered users to continue editing. Softblocks are commonly used when blocking shared IP addresses.
Administrators must supply a clear and specific block reason which indicates why a user was blocked. Block reasons should avoid the use of jargon as much as possible so that blocked users may better understand them. Administrators may also notify users when blocking them by leaving a message on their user talk page. It is often easier to explain the reason for a block at the time than it is to explain a block well after the fact.
When implementing a block, a number ofpro forma block reasons are available in a drop-down menu; other or additional reasons can also be added. Users can be notified of blocks and block reasons using a number of convenient template messages — seeCategory:User block templates andWikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace.
