Hello,
Your proposal looks interesting, there are several points that need clarification to me. Keep in mind that my opinion is mostly based on what you wrote, because (I think) most of it doesn't apply to the french wikiquote - where I'm a sysop - for several reasons.
On fr: we don't have any checkuser, so the second point would be moot on this project and I have nothing to rely on to judge your proposal. I have nothing against the fact that checkusers could block - and think they actually have to - at their own discretions because of their status, it sounds pretty logical to me. I am however concerned about blocking IPs for several months. Most IP addresses are dynamic, thus the vandal would have a new one after a few days, so what's the point of blocking someone for months? I think the most effective way of dealing with vandalism is by having an active community that can check all edits made by anons and new contributors. On fr: we have the chance to be able to do that, because we have a relatively large number of regular contributors, and so we almost never have any vandalism, and when we have it is dealt with extremely quickly.
We also do not have any formal blocking policy on fr, everything stays at the sysops' appraisal. We mostly block the few vandals we have for 24hours, sometimes up to a few days if the vandalism was bigger, and it doesn't go farther. I also believe that our "
Charte" helps us against sneakier vandalism (adding made-up quotes,...) that could ask for longer blocking, because we require strict references to
each and every quote.
Anyways, back to your proposal, and the cross-project vandalism, I am wondering whether you'd block the IP detected on at least two projects before detecting it on your wikiquote or after having seen an edit (provided it is vandalism) ? The way it sounds to me (
proactive) would mean that you'd block the IP before it even got to wikiquote. I'm not sure about the usefulness of that, you'd first have to keep track of the blockings on other projects, and then block an endless amount of IPs all the time, over and over again ? It looks easier to me to just block at first sight :) and foregoing the standard warnings if it's an IP proved to have vandalized heavily other projects. What do you think about it?
Byebye!
chtit_draco
I would agree to all of this, but stress the fact that it as at the sysops' discression (as shown by our own policy).I also find your comment very important, we must stress that CUs know what others don't and can block at their own discression.Casey BrownCbrown1023
On 7/22/07, Aphaia <aphaia@gmail.com> wrote:Hello,
this proposal mainly mean to the English Wikiquote and Japanese, where
I'm active, but I'd like to hear opinions from more wider audience
and write to this list. If you have a similar problem or rules already
on your project, please let us share in this occasion.
My proposal is modification of Blocking policy with two new additional thoughts.
* Cross project vandalism
* blocking based on CU investigation
Currently two projects have some similarity on those Blocking policy.
The English version, Wikiquote:Blocking says
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/WQ:BP#Vandalism
> Vandalism
> Sysops may, at their judgement, block IP addresses that vandalise Wikiquote. For dynamic IPs, such blocks should last 24 hours. For static IPs, such blocks should initially last 24 hours, but repeat violators may be blocked for a maximum of one month; there are various rules of thumb that sysops follow in how much to extend the blocks of habitual vandals, none of which are formal policy. In general, casual vandals should be warned twice before being blocked, though warnings are not usually given for deliberate vandalism intended to discredit Wikiquote or serve an activist agenda. See dealing with vandalism for overall policy.
My proposals aim to let us take a proactive blocking for possible
vandal IP addresses/accounts.
For cross project vandalism, my proposal is the addition as the below:
If an IP address is detected vandalizing at least two Wikimedia
projects, and it is likely this IP address will be used to vandalize
the other project, sysops may block this IP address on their project.
Also they have not to limit the blocking term within 24 hours, but may
determine a reasonable duration.
As for CU investigation, currently the maximum length of blocking on
English Wikiquote is one month, but I heard some sysops argue IP
addresses determined as vandals may deserve much longer blocking.
Personally I am inclining to this opinion. I therefore propose to add
a new clause about CU investigation, as following:
IP addresses which are determined to be used for vandalism as a result
of Checkuser investigation may be blocked up to X months, exceeding
the normal limitation of one month.
The substitution of X could be arguable ... I think six months could
be an opinion, but I am open to other opinions.
Cheers,
--
KIZU Naoko
Wikiquote: http://wikiquote.org
* habent enim emolumentum in labore suo *
_______________________________________________
Wikiquote-l mailing list
Wikiquote-l@lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiquote-l
_______________________________________________
Wikiquote-l mailing list
Wikiquote-l@lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiquote-l