I'm sure this idea has already been kicked around, but why aren't there selective blocks, i.e. blocks restricted to one or more certain pages? I don't mean temporary bans on articles or article groups as occasionally imposed by the ArbCom, but a block-button block. It could e.g. give users with specific conflicts of interest (not necessarily in a corporate sense, also like strong personal bias/POV etc.) the opportunity and even an incentive to work on completely different areas, as they would be working to actively restore the community's trust in their willingness to contribute to the encyclopedia as a whole. Wouldn't that be a lot more constructive than temporarily revoking '''all''' editing privileges for things like an 3RR violation on a certain page, or personal attacks in some heated debate on a certain talk page? If it later turned out that the user in question is generally intolerable, s/he could accordingly be fully blocked (as usual) to give them a stronger warning. So, well, nevermind if the idea has already been discussed and rejected. Adrian _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

I'm sure this idea has already been kicked around, but why aren't there selective blocks, i.e. blocks restricted to one or more certain pages? I don't mean temporary bans on articles or article groups as occasionally imposed by the ArbCom, but a block-button block.