[WikiEN-l] Re: Per-article blocking

[Michael Snow]

JAY JG wrote:

>> > For how long would these individual article blocks remain?
>>
>> Just like current user blocks, the duration can be set by the
>> blocker/admin. I would assume that a 24 hour block for a 3RR violation
>> could for just the article in question, not for the entire Wikipedia.
>
> I fail to see the advantage then; they would likely just move on to 
> revert-warring on some other article, and then return to the original 
> after 24 hours.

The advantage is that it gives the antisocial more rope to hang 
themselves with, while simultaneously taking a lot of the sting out of 
being blocked, for those who aren't simply on Wikipedia to push an 
agenda. Yes, the battlefields may shift occasionally, but the process of 
building a case for arbitration against serious offenders can move much 
more rapidly. Then you won't have to wait as impatiently to get a 
sanction that lasts longer than 24 hours, in situations where this 
proves necessary.

Back in the day when the three-revert rule was only a guideline, I 
brought an arbitration case against three of the most prolific revert 
warriors of the time. I think the arbitrators found the evidence 
persuasive in part because I could point to a long list of pages that 
had to be protected due to their revert wars. This is straightforward 
and a lot easier to deal with than wading through diffs to figure out 
who said what personal attack to whom. The same principle would apply to 
somebody who gets blocked from 10 different articles on closely related 
topics in short succession. With this kind of track record established, 
I'm confident that arbitration would quickly consider hearing such a case.

--Michael Snow