User:MBisanz/RfBan

A ban is the formal revocation of editing privileges on all or part of Wikipedia. A ban may be temporary and of fixed duration, or indefinite and potentially permanent. The standard invitation Wikipedia extends with the statement "edit this page" does not apply to banned users.

A ban may be applied through the Requests for Banning process, by the Arbitration Committee (either directly or via discretionary sanctions), or by Jimmy Wales. Matters involving requests for discretionary sanctions to be applied to a user should be handled at the Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard.

Scope

A "Request for Banning" is only needed for:

• Project-wide site bans
• Bans which involve an article which is not in an ArbCom enforcement area. ArbCom enforcement bans may be imposed by any uninvolved administrator. If a non-admin (or involved admin) wishes to request an ArbCom discretionary ban on another user, all that is needed to request it is to either contact an uninvolved administrator directly, or start a thread with the request at the Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard.

Possible types of bans

Bans may fall into one of the following types:

• Article bans - the user may not edit or be involved in discussion relating to a specific article.
• Topic bans - the user may not edit or be involved in discussion relating to a specific topic area of articles.
• Category bans - the user may not edit or be involved in discussion relating to pages in a a specific category.
• Process bans - the user may not participate in a specific process, such as MedCab or XfD.
• Namespace bans - the user may not edit any pages in a particular namespace.
• Editing bans (also known as a site ban) - the user may not edit any pages on Wikipedia, including their own talkpage
• Revert bans - users are limited, beyond the general 3RR, on their right to revert - anything from a general 0RR to a topic-related 1RR per week per article.

Some bans may involve a combination of the above types. For example, a user may be banned from posting on the talkpage of certain other editors, and also banned from editing a certain article, but still allowed to post on the talkpage of that article.

Process

Conditions to file

A Request for Banning may only be filed if the following conditions exist:

• A certified request for comment on user conduct, on the user in question, has been open and certified for at least ten days;
• There are no pending requests for arbitration or arbitration cases on the user in question;
• The user is not currently indefinitely blocked as the result of an arbitration case or by Jimmy Wales.

Who may file

An RfBan may be filed by any user who has not certified a request for comment on user conduct against the individual in question. It must be endorsed by another individual who has not certified a request for comment on user conduct against the individual in question.

How to file

A qualified individual should use the below template to file the initial request for banning, indicating the individual to be banned, evidence of an existing RfC, the type of ban sought, and the period of the ban. A notice should be posted to the RfC, to the user's talk page, the Administrators' noticeboard, and to the Proposals Village pump.

The request may cover any area that is reasonable, but should not otherwise be unreasonably wider. A site ban withdraws all editing privileges from the user (other than their own userspace, if not abused). Bans on specific matters may cover (but are not limited to) specific articles, themes, categories, users, dispute areas, or topic areas, specific processes, specific namespaces, or anything else, as needed.

Ban requests should be worded thoughtfully to prevent the behavior repeating. For example a tendentious user banned from editing an article may argue they are not prevented from editing a very similar article, or the same topic in another article.

After filing

Other users may propose bans of different lengths and types. Comments should continue to be made at the RfC and new evidence introduced if it becomes available there. User may comment in support or opposition of each proposed ban and may comment multiple proposal. After the RfBan has been open for ten days, an uninvolved bureaucrat or arbiter will close the RfBan, indicating which proposal, if any, has community consensus. They will record the ban at Wikipedia:List of banned users.

Discussion close

Subject to discussion, see talk page

The discussion close should be broadly based upon the following principles:

• Consensus, not vote count -- as with various other consensus processes, issues such as canvassing, stacking, and poor quality reasons should be devalued by the closer.
• Uninvolved views carry more weight -- users who may be perceived to be "too close" (to the issue, or with "history" with the user, or routinely support/oppose others closely involved in the debate) may be well informed, but also carry the risk of coming to the debate with semi-fixed positions that do not reflect the actual circumstances under discussion. The closer may need to consider this in some cases.
• Evidence of problem -- user is clearly in breach of communal norms, and any legitimate issue they may have is steadfastly not being discussed appropriately or taken to an appropriate means of solution. Both should be well evidenced.
• No lesser solution -- lesser solutions unlikely to work or have been tried properly but failed.
• Leeway within reason -- users are assumed able to learn, and to actively aim to follow and respect site norms; leeway is granted on the good faith assumption they will try to do so. A user who repeatedly fails to do so, should not be unduly protected from the consequences of their decision.

Appeals

As bans are not decided unilaterally or lightly by a minority, neither should unbans be.

A closed RfBan may be appealed directly to the Arbitration Committee or Jimmy Wales. A request for alteration of a ban may be filed by any user after one-half the period of ban has elapsed, or in the case of an indefinite ban, after six months have elapsed.

Resumption of editing following unbanning

A user who returns to editing after a long ban (typically more than 2-3 months), or following serious issues, may be required to accept strict conditions for their return if they wish to resume editing privileges. These are intended to allow gradual resumption of editing by a user whose past actions caused concern, and protection of the user, other users, and the project.

The protective periods may be quite lengthy (up to a year or more is not uncommon), and may include (by way of example):

• Restrictions related to areas, topics, themes, namespaces or people not to be engaged without further discussion
• Mentorship, probation or specific directions, related to conduct issues
• Reinstatement or extension of ban if conditions broken