Jeroen Heijmans wrote:
Same point. The Canadian thing wasn't the first time DW "violated" wikipediquette. Also: these were mainly on the talk page, which wouldn't have helped. The Canadian thing seems to go quite well now, we all seem to be satisfied with a new approach on which we're working at a temporary page.
Even DW has been co-operating there now.
Anyway, maybe it is better to have something like this: If a user repeatedly violates some rule, convention, whatever and has ignored pleas from others to follow that rule, we could raise some flag in the database and show the user a page with "Other Wikipedians have not you have repeatedly violated X. Please read this documentation over X. If you disagree with X, please go to Talk:X or Wikipedia-L. If you continue to disrespect X, other measures may follow...".
In this way, the use "gets reminded" all the time, and can't deny knowing about the rule. Next measures be a ban from editing specific articles, all articles (or talks if appropriate), etc.
This is an interesting approach. When the offender tries to post he would be redirected to such a page that would explain his offense followed by "Do you understand and agree to the above?" He would then have yes and no buttons. A yes would bring him back on track; if he presses no he would ban or suspend himself. This all assumes that this is technically feasible.
Eclecticology