Community health initiative/Blocking tools and improvements/Feedback
Partial blocks are designed to give wiki administrators a more robust set of tools to be able to better respond to different user conflict situations. We are using block evasion and editor retention data to measure their effectiveness but we also want to hear directly from administrators and communities who use the feature to know how the tools are working and how we can possible improve them in the future.
Feedback from wiki administrators
Please include your username and the wiki where you are an administrator.
- The functionality per se might very well be OK, but at least on nl.wiktionary it is probably not something we will use any time soon. We are however blocking spammers on a daily basis. The addition of this option means it becomes necessary to scroll the page every time and that is really annoying. Would it be possible to have a few buttons high on the page to select a combination of selections that is used very frequently. Ideally the effect (and even the presence) of these buttons could be decided by the respective communities. --MarcoSwart (talk) 12:14, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
Feedback from other users who witness how partial blocks affect their community
Feedback from users who are partially blocked
Other feedback about the function and design of Special:Block
- This development is highly appreciated. I've suggested partial blocks in the recent community discussions, unaware that it was already in development. Site-wide blocks were designed for vandalism-only accounts in the early days of wikipedia, when contentious topics and disagreement between editors was not as common as nowadays.
- The purpose of blocking is to stop disruption, that usually happens in a specific area (an article / a topic / between specific users / etc.). A site-wide block unnecessarily removes the ability of a user to contribute to other, non-problematic areas, and removes the ability to communicate on-wiki, such as to participate in their own case on noticeboards, or in arbitration. This just causes problems and unnecessary debate, as seen in some of the comments in the ongoing Fram case on enwiki.
- Site-wide blocks are unnecessarily punishing in non-trivial cases, when two good-faith editors disagree, and the dispute escalates. Because of this, the threat/fear of being blocked is often present in purely content disputes, negatively influencing the neutrality of the outcome.
- I'm looking forward to partial blocks being introduced on the wikipedia projects as well. Thank you for your efforts. — Aron M (talk) 21:42, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
- Design suggestion: list of articles recently edited. It would ease the task of admins selecting the blocked pages, if a list of articles recently edited by the partially blocked user were shown in a drop-down list, when that input field is selected. This might be already implemented, but the only screenshot gives no hint about it. — Aron M (talk) 21:42, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
- Design suggestion: white-list of pages that can be edited. In case of site-wide blocks the list of pages could serve as a white-list of pages that can be edited. The default value could be the noticeboards and arbitration pages (different per project), where the user can participate in, or appeal their case. In case of a non-appealable ban, or abuse of these pages, these can be removed from the list.
- Related phabricator ticket, and another similar ticket (closed, although the "duplicate" ticket does not cover this use-case). — Aron M (talk) 23:17, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
- Also requested on talk page. — Aron M (talk) 03:07, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
- Design suggestion: pop-up editor for long lists of pages. To use partial blocks for topic bans, one has to add a great number of pages to the list, preferably in batch. This is not the primary use-case, therefore the UI necessary to do this should not be part of the basic blocking page, but rather a pop-up, that has 2 columns: the added pages on the left side, a search field and found pages on right side. Adding pages is done by double-clicking them on the right side, or by selecting more pages (with shift-, ctrl- click, or with a selection box while the mouse button is pushed), then clicking an left-pointing arrow button between the two columns. Removing pages is done similarly on the left side. Note: the next step for topic bans will be adding all pages in a category. That feature has already been requested, thus I don't elaborate on it. If that feature will be implemented, the long list editing feature will be still useful for cases, when categories don't cover the set of pages that are blocked. — Aron M (talk) 22:18, 20 September 2019 (UTC)