Epstein Files Full PDF

This is an essay on the banning policy and the blocking policy. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article or a Wikipedia policy, as it has not been reviewed by the community.

Shortcuts WP:SOWP:SO WP:STANDARDWP:STANDARD WP:OFFERWP:OFFER

This page in a nutshell: A user may appeal a block or ban after a period (usually six months) without sockpuppetry. The purpose of the period is to demonstrate that they can follow simple, clear instructions so they may be more likely to abide by community rules.

When an editor gets hit with a site ban or an indefinite block, they may wonder where things go from that point. Is there any way to return to good standing? Or are they on the outs forever?

The standard offer is not binding; however, it is usually the first step before the community will consider an unblock.

It's simple:

1. Wait at least six months without sockpuppetry or block evasion; i.e. having made no edits using a named or temporary account on the English Wikipedia.
2. Promise to avoid the behavior that led to the block/ban.
3. Don't give people reasons to object to your return.

• After you have waited six months, contact an administrator or experienced editor (via your user talk page, email, #wikipedia-en-unblock ^connect or WP:UTRS) (list of administrators).
• If they agree a review is appropriate, they'll open a thread at an administrative noticeboard (ideally Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard).
• The discussion usually takes several days.

Apologies and other expressions of remorse aren't necessary, but basic courtesy and a willingness to move forward productively are.

This is not a get-out-of-jail-free card, and administrators are not forced to unblock you, especially if you have not provided any reason why you should be unblocked other than your avoidance of Wikipedia for six months. You should still provide a clear reason why you should be unblocked. Banned users may request that they go through the {{2nd chance}} procedure, to show their ability to edit and improve articles according to Wikipedia's policies.

Per the banning policy, "Editors who are or remain indefinitely blocked after due consideration by the community are considered 'banned by the Wikipedia community'". For a banned user, this makes no difference as they were already subject to a ban. But to a user who is already blocked but was not banned, receiving a community ban converts a block – which can be appealed to any individual administrator – into a ban which can only be appealed to the community at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard.

The standard offer applies to community-based indefinite blocks and bans in situations where things didn't work out: normal people, short fuses, etc. It doesn't extend to extremes, and it is ultimately up to the administrative community (on a case-by-case basis) whether the blocked or banned editor is eligible at all. Bans placed by the Arbitration Committee or the Wikimedia Foundation are ineligible for the standard offer.

The six-month threshold can be adjustable under special circumstances. If an editor shows unusually good insight into the circumstances that led to the block and sets out a credible proposal for how they will deal with those issues in future, then a return might be considered sooner.

On the other hand, if the indefinitely blocked/banned user continues to be especially disruptive, or has engaged in particularly serious misconduct, then some administrators may become unwilling to consider a return for a much longer time or ever.

Banned users seeking a return are advised to make significant and useful contributions to other WMF projects prior to requesting a return to the English Wikipedia per this offer. Many unban requests have been declined due to the banned user simply waiting six months without making any contributions to other projects.