On 3/14/06, Steve Bennett stevage@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/14/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
Can't. They will stay within policy. Blocking won't help anyway since they can't disscuss while blocked.
It's a real pity that it's not possible to selectively block a single editor against a single page. That and the fact that blocking an IP also blocks registered users that use that IP.
Steve
FWIW, I completely disagree. I think blocks should be all or nothing (certainly technical ones, but I'd include soft blocks too, though not of course self-imposed blocks). Besides filling the code and the policies with unnecessary bloat, narrow blocking tends to give admins too much power to dictate content.
If it weren't for the latter consideration, it would be really easy to soft-block an editor from a particular page anyway. Block them for 5 minutes with a message on their talk page to stop editing that page. Then block them more permanently if they ignore that command. But IMO admins shouldn't have that power in the first place. All Wikipedians should be equal (which isn't the same as saying that all people have the right to be Wikipedians).
Now I suppose I'm breaking my rule when I say that I can understand an exception for allowing talk on the users own talk page. And semi-protection/lessened powers for new contributors seems like an acceptable solution for guarding against sockpuppets, though of course its effectiveness is dependent on a decent implementation.
Anthony