Open main menu
This page is a translated version of a page Commons:Blocking policy and the translation is 26% complete. Changes to the translation template, respectively the source language can be submitted through Commons:Blocking policy and have to be approved by a translation administrator.

Outdated translations are marked like this.

Shortcut: COM:BP

Other languages:
Bahasa Indonesia • ‎Deutsch • ‎English • ‎Esperanto • ‎català • ‎dansk • ‎español • ‎français • ‎italiano • ‎polski • ‎português • ‎português do Brasil • ‎svenska • ‎русский • ‎українська • ‎עברית • ‎العربية • ‎فارسی • ‎বাংলা • ‎中文 • ‎日本語 • ‎한국어

Pengurus diberikan kemampuan untuk melakukan pemblokiran kepada pengguna bila diperlukan. Pengguna yang diblokir dibatasi untuk melakukan penyuntingan dan mengunggah berkas, dan hal-hal lain. Dalam keadaan umum, pemblokiran merupakan upaya terakhir untuk tingkah laku yang berpotensi merusak Commons atau mengganggu pengguna lain. Dengan cara ini, pemblokiran dibuat untuk pencegahan dan bukan sebagai hukuman; pemblokiran "cool-down" tidak dimaafkan.

Contents

Penggunaan

Pemblokiran dapat diterapkan karena beberapa alasan. Alasan umum adalah sebagai berikut:

  • Vandalisme. Suntingan atau unggahan mengganggu dapat menyebabkan pemblokiran. Contohnya:
    • Memasukkan konten porno tanpa alasan
    • Memasukkan informasi palsu dengan sengaja (seperti sumber gambar palsu)
  • Perang suntingan.
  • Melanggar hak cipta. Mengunggah media dengan lisensi yang tidak tepat berulang kali menjadi alasan pemblokiran sebuah akun. Penjelasan dan peringatan yang jelas mengenai kebijakan Commons harus dilakukan terlebih dahulu sebelum dan sesudah memblokir seorang pengguna karena masalah lisensi.
  • Menyerang pengguna lain. Akun dan alamat IP yang digunakan untuk membuat keadaan yang agresif bagi pengguna lain dapat diblokir. Akan tetapi, asumsi niat baik antara pengguna harus dibawa k Warung kopi untuk mendapat masukan dari luar. Melacak kontribusi seorang pengguna karena pelanggaran kebijakan bukan merupakan tindakan pelecehan.
  • Akun bot yang tidak mendapatkan izin atau tidak merespons. Akun bot yang tidak memperoleh izin untuk dijalankan oleh komunitas Commons tidak diizinkan untuk digunakan di Wikimedia Commons, dan suntingan seperti bot yang diragukan yang tidak dapat dijelaskan oleh pengguna tersebut haruslah diblokir hingga diskusi berlangsung. Proposal bot dapat didiskusikan di Commons:Bots atau Commons:Village pump. Bot tidak boleh dijalankan di Commons tanpa izin khusus (yang dapat diminta di Commons:Bots/Requests).
  • Akun bot yang mendapatkan izin yang sementara malafungsi. Ini untuk mencegah kerusakan lebih lanjut hingga pemilik bot dapat menyelesaikan masalah tersebut.
  • Nama akun yang tidak layak.
  • Menghindari pemblokiran. Seorang pengurus dapat mengatur ulang pemblokiran seorang pengguna yang dengan sengaja menghindari pemblokiran dan dapat memperpanjang durasi pemblokiran bila pengguna tersebut terlibat dalam tindakan pemblokiran ketika menghindari pemblokiran. Akun atau alamat IP pengguna yang digunakan untuk menghindari pemblokiran juga dapat dan harus diblokir.
  • Menyalahgunakan beberapa akun untuk menyesatkan, menipu, merusak, atau memutarbalikkan konsensus atau untuk menghindari pemblokiran atau sanksi. Akun kedua umumnya diblokir selamanya. Akun utama dapat atau tidak menjadi pertimbangan untuk diperpanjang durasinya tergantung dari keadaan.

Instruksi untuk pengurus

Sebelum memblokir

  • For blocks based on disruptive behaviour, such as vandalism, repeated copyright violations and manual promotional activities, ensure that the user has been appropriately warned, preferably using a block warning template. No warning is necessary when blocking open proxies and users with inappropriate usernames. Accounts and IP addresses used solely for severely disruptive purposes such as automated spamming, serious vandalism or harassment may also be blocked without prior warning.
  • Controversial blocks may be discussed at the blocks and protections noticeboard, preferably before they are applied if at all possible. As a rule of thumb, when in doubt, do not block.
  • Range blocks are especially powerful tools, and discussion of these is particularly encouraged. Range blocks with a duration longer than 24 hours should be discussed with a checkuser to assess the likely impact.

When blocking

  • Blocks can be applied to registered users, IP addresses or address ranges.
  • As blocks are preventative rather than punitive, use a block duration that is proportional to the time likely needed for the user to familiarize themselves with relevant policies and adjust their behaviour. Also consider the user's past behaviour and the severity of the disruption. When blocking IP addresses, keep in mind that innocent third parties sharing the same addresses may be affected.
  • Provide a reason for the block. The rationale should preferably use links to relevant policies to help the blocked user understand why they have been blocked. Where appropriate, diffs or permanent links documenting the reason for the block are also helpful.
  • Account creation should be prevented in most cases, but may be allowed when blocking an inappropriate user name to allow creation of a different name.
  • Autoblocking of IP addresses used by the blocked user should typically be enabled for users who were blocked for disruptive behavior. It should be disabled in most other cases, like blocking malfunctioning bots and usernames that don't follow the username policy.
  • Only prevent the blocked user from using their talk page or sending e-mail if they are likely to abuse these privileges.

After blocking

  • Notify the blocked user, preferably using a user block template.
  • Watch the blocked user's user talk page and ensure that requests for unblock are attended to.
  • Blocks based on disruptive behaviour should be lifted if there is reason to believe that the disruptive behaviour will not resume.
  • Controversial blocks may also be discussed at the blocks and protections noticeboard after they have been applied. To avoid wheel warring, another administrator should lift a block only if there is consensus to do so, even if there is no clear consensus in favor of the original block.

Oversight blocks and bans

There may exceptionally be a need to block or ban an editor on the basis of oversighted information that cannot be shared publicly. In such a case, the available oversighters may jointly act on the basis of group consensus. If there are insufficient oversighters available or if additional input is required they may consult the Wikimedia stewards.

Except in an emergency, non-oversight administrators should not block on the basis of information known to them that has since been oversighted. An administrator believing that such a block is required should contact one of the oversighters privately or email oversight-commons lists.wikimedia.org.

Any block or ban made under this section should be reported by the oversighters to the community at the earliest opportunity, with as much background material as can reasonably be provided.

An editor who is blocked or banned under this section may not be unblocked without the approval of the oversighters. An editor who wishes to have their oversight block or ban reviewed should approach the oversighters privately, who will consider the request as a group. Public ‘appeals’ on the talk page of the blocked editor should not be used, and any that are posted may be removed.

Appealing a block

Blocked users are informed that they may request unblocking. They may do this by adding {{unblock|reason for the request}} to their own user talk page. Alternatively, they may request unblocking with an appropriate reason via e-mail to the blocking administrator or another administrator.

An appropriate reason will almost always include one of the following:

  • An acknowledgement that the block was appropriate and a credible promise that the behaviour that led to the block will not be repeated
  • An explanation of why the block is not appropriate based on this and other relevant policies and guidelines or is likely to be a mistake or an unintended side effect

An unblock request may be granted or declined. Before granting a request to lift a block placed by another administrator, the reviewing administrator should consult with the blocking administrator, except in obvious, uncontroversial cases. Requests made on user talk pages may only be declined by an uninvolved administrator. Unblock requests for blocks marked with {{checkuserblock}} will be reviewed by a checkuser.

Making repeated unblocking requests without appropriate reasons may be considered abusive. As noted above, users who have abused or are likely to abuse the ability to edit their own user talk page and/or send e-mail in this or any other way may have either or both of these privileges revoked, which also prevents these privileges from being used for unblocking requests.

See also