WMF Global Ban Policy/procedure

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Other languages:
English • ‎español • ‎français • ‎العربية • ‎مصرى • ‎हिन्दी • ‎中文 • ‎日本語

This is a list of processes typically followed, pursuant to the WMF Global ban policy.

WMF Global ban process[edit]

While specific processes vary according to individual cases, the Foundation global ban review process is subject to some consistent internal protocols and policies. In brief this includes the following steps:

1. Acknowledge
Once a request for a global ban is received, it is acknowledged by one of the Foundation’s Support & Safety team members.

2. Prioritise
It is then added to an internal queue/list of community requests and prioritised according to the severity of the issue in comparison to other outstanding matters and the level to which it affects individual contributors to the Wikimedia projects or the projects as a whole.

3. Evaluate
The details of the request are evaluated by a Community Advocate through a lengthy investigation process. This part of the process may require an extended period of time and may involve outreach to the original reporter or other affected individuals and review of Foundation sites or publications and other sites. While one Advocate is generally assigned to lead, others may assist.

4. Review
Once the evaluation is completed by a Community Advocate with a recommendation for appropriate actions, it is then reviewed by each of the following in turn, who may request additional research or open discussion about modifications to the recommended approach:

  • Trust and Safety team manager,
  • Support & Safety Director,
  • Community Engagement Chief Director.

If an agreement is not obtained about modifications to the approach, divergences are noted and explained in the documentation for review by the next level.

5. Recommendation: No actions
If the recommendation has been to take no action and all necessary parties agree, the review process may terminate here. Case notes are retained, along with the reason action was not taken, in case of further developments.

6. Recommendation: Actions
If the recommendation has been to take action, whether global ban or otherwise, the review process continues to the General Counsel or the General Counsel’s delegate. The General Counsel may request additional research or may recommend modifications to the approach. Only with the agreement of the General Counsel does the recommended action proceed.

7. ED Notice
The Executive Director is always notified before action is taken and given an opportunity to respond, but explicit authorization of the Executive Director is only requested in particularly complex cases or where appropriate action is less clear. The Communications team may also be notified, as appropriate.

8. Implementation
Once all appropriate individuals are consulted, the recommended action approved by the General Counsel (or delegate) and Community Engagement Chief Director is implemented. A very broad description of the above process is also included in the Office actions procedures page.


A very broad description of the above process is also included in the Office actions procedures page.