Message: 7 Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2003 14:31:48 -0700 From: Toby Bartels toby+wikipedia@math.ucr.edu Subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Michael again *sigh* To: Discussion list for English-language Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Message-ID: 20030831213148.GF2876@math-lw-n01.ucr.edu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Will this be working on any wikipedia as well ?
I don't know. Would you want it on [[fr:]]?
-- Toby
Me ? No :-)))
Or Utilisateur:Papotages would have been banned before I was back from my holidays :-)
I think several french would be very happy to have that feature. But there was never any serious discussion since we considered a "fact" we could not. Likely, f the feature is now possible, it will be transfered.
Till now, we succeeded not to have any user name ever banned (except perhaps Mulot, but that was in phase I, I am still shivering in the memory of permanent deletion). The reason probably is that Jimbo is not able to follow some of the discussions.
If the feature is available, it will be used. And probably not with Jimbo seal. Till now, conflict was eventually "solved" through mass reversion and protection of page. I suppose now it will perhaps be through blocking.
It is easy to see on RC that a user is mass reverted.
It is not easy to see a page is protected (essentially because people don't put headers, do not list it, and others unprotect). But we may notice the user protesting vehemently
However, if the user is blocked, we may not even realise it (except for pure bliss coming down the wikipedia after a fight). I wonder if it might not be relevant to have somehow a warning somewhere telling us that a user name has been blocked since last connection. Otherwise, we might not notice and be able to unblock him perhaps.
Just thoughts. Setting up blocking of names (which will be block with the ip, so entirely prevent the user to communicate with us) is just changing the concept. It requires to adapt.
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Anthère wrote in part:
However, if the user is blocked, we may not even realise it (except for pure bliss coming down the wikipedia after a fight). I wonder if it might not be relevant to have somehow a warning somewhere telling us that a user name has been blocked since last connection. Otherwise, we might not notice and be able to unblock him perhaps.
Regularly check [[Sepcial:Ipblocklist]].
-- Toby
Anthere wrote...
From: Toby Bartels
Will this be working on any wikipedia as well ?
I don't know. Would you want it on [[fr:]]?
-- Toby
Me ? No :-)))
Or Utilisateur:Papotages would have been banned before I was back from my holidays :-)
I think several french would be very happy to have that feature. But there was never any serious discussion since we considered a "fact" we could not. Likely, f the feature is now possible, it will be transfered.
Till now, we succeeded not to have any user name ever banned (except perhaps Mulot, but that was in phase I, I am still shivering in the memory of permanent deletion). The reason probably is that Jimbo is not able to follow some of the discussions.
If the feature is available, it will be used. And probably not with Jimbo seal. Till now, conflict was eventually "solved" through mass reversion and protection of page. I suppose now it will perhaps be through blocking.
It is easy to see on RC that a user is mass reverted.
It is not easy to see a page is protected (essentially because people don't put headers, do not list it, and others unprotect). But we may notice the user protesting vehemently
However, if the user is blocked, we may not even realise it (except for pure bliss coming down the wikipedia after a fight). I wonder if it might not be relevant to have somehow a warning somewhere telling us that a user name has been blocked since last connection. Otherwise, we might not notice and be able to unblock him perhaps.
Just thoughts. Setting up blocking of names (which will be block with the ip, so entirely prevent the user to communicate with us) is just changing the concept. It requires to adapt.
I've changed it now so that we can switch it off on a language-by-language basis. But like you say, many French Wikipedians may want it on, and there's not much I can do about that.
Brion mentioned that it's currently not really clear what a banned user is meant to do to get unbanned: they get a message saying "discuss this with [[User:Someone]]", but they can't modify the user's talk page, and they can't email him/her either. Perhaps we need to have a sandbox especially for blocked people, where they can write comments or plead for forgiveness. The difference between this page and ordinary pages would be that there's no edit summary, and so no chance to flood RC with obscenties.
-- Tim Starling.