User:Robertinventor/Designated space for editors to give and seek advice about topic bans and other sanctions

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Draft of an RfC (not sure which template to use to label it)


Should we establish an information noticeboard for helping editors who have been sanctioned on wikipedia? This page would work more or less like RSN and NPOVN, providing editors with non-binding information about how topic bans work, expectations, etiquette, filing complaints and appeals. The goal of this page would be to help topic-banned editors continue or return to constructive editing on wikipedia, as well as to help each other in a constructive way here. A mockup of the proposed page can be found here. The full-length Inspire Campaign proposal is here.

  • Option A) Yes, establish this page here at Meta-Wiki.
  • Option B) Establish this page but not here at Meta-Wiki.
  • Option C) No, do not establish this page.

RfC discussion[edit]

  • Support A) here at Meta-Wiki as proposer The rules on wikipedia prohibit topic banned editors to mention their topic, even to ask for help, throughout wikipedia and it would probably be hard to get an exception granted for a single board there, especially without a pilot of some sort to show how it works.

    Here seems perfect. We wouldn't need to add any new rules. Editors can already mention their banned topic. The rules in WM:NOT are also exactly what we need to keep such discussions in check. It would also help that it's a different project, to help separate the banned editors from the environment in which they were banned, to permit calmer and clearer discussions.

    Also, we would want to start slowly. If we can help one or two editors, giving them individual attention, that's a better pilot than if we have a flood of editors and we can't manage them. Later on, once we have worked through teething problems, we could see if we can get the new board added as a support link to the topic ban notice. Perhaps initially, we'd ask for this for a short trial period, say, a week, then do other longer trials if the board is a success. It seems to be a gray area in the meta guidelines here, neither explicitly mentioned, nor excluded, which is the reason for this RfC. There seems to be a clear need for this somewhere, and we haven't yet come up with any other way to get it started as a pilot scheme. We have given as much thought as we can into ways to ensure that it runs smoothly, and are now interested to know what others here think about the ideas. Robert Walker (talk) 22:43, 17 July 2016 (UTC)