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