Talk:Men's rights movement/Article probation

Community discussion
A community discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents has placed Men's rights-related pages on article probation - effective as of 13:25, 20 October 2011 (UTC) Please direct all discussions of this remedy to Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Remedy
Pages related to Men's rights (broadly construed) are subject to the following terms of article probation:
 * Any editor may be sanctioned by an uninvolved administrator for disruptive edits, including, but not limited to, edit warring, personal attacks, incivility and assumptions of bad faith.
 * Sanctions imposed may include restrictions on reverts or other specified behaviors, bans from editing the Men's rights pages and/or closely related topics, blocks of up to 1 year in length, or any other measures the imposing administrator believes are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project.
 * For the purpose of imposing sanctions under this provision, an administrator will be considered "uninvolved" if he or she is not engaged in a current, direct, personal conflict on the topic with the user receiving sanctions (note: enforcing this provision will not be considered to be participation in a dispute).
 * Sanctions imposed under this provision may be appealed to the imposing administrator or the appropriate administrators' noticeboard
 * Administrators are not to reverse such sanctions without either (1) approval by the imposing administrator, or (2) community consensus
 * All sanctions imposed are to be logged below.
 * To place an entire article under probation, use on the article talk page. To place portions of an article under probation, use  on the article talk page.

How to avoid being subject to remedies

 * Do not edit-war;
 * Interact civilly with other editors;
 * Follow all Talk page guidelines;
 * Avoid comments unrelated to bettering the article;
 * Avoid making repeated comments about the subject of the article;
 * Avoid discussing other editors, discuss the article instead;
 * Very little leeway is allowed in pages under probation, so contributors need to show themselves to be model Wikipedians;
 * We actually know when we cross the line; we are all intelligent people;
 * If you do cross the line, redacting your comments and apologizing before it causes too much of a stir tends to help your situation. Just don't do it habitually, the admins aren't gullible.
 * Don't get worked up when you get subjected to remedies such as a temporary block or ban. Take a break and come back refreshed.
 * Leave room for differences, having different points of view represented is why we're so good at creating articles with a Neutral point of view!

Notifications
Users may be individually notified about the article probation before any remedy is applied to them, but this does not preclude the use of emergency measures. '''Anyone who edits this page is automatically considered to be on notice. Please remove duplicates from the list.'''

Note: Listing here indicates only that an editor has been notified. Listing here should not be taken to mean that the user's edits were in violation of the article probation.


 * Note: you can use three tildes to sign and five  to timestamp your entry. You can use the template:uw-probation to alert anyone to article probation and post a "diff" showing the warning.  Please use that template civilly, as a simple notice rather than an accusation of probation violation.

Notification:

Blocks:

Log of sanctions
Log any block, ban or extension under any remedy in this decision here. Minimum information includes name of administrator, date and time, what was done and the basis for the sanctions.
 * indef blocked for making personal threats. See threats here and subsequent edits (now hatted); credible given recent incidents (an editor has been threatened at his place of employment.) KillerChihuahua ?!? 22:42, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I fail to see the personal attack by this user. where would I go to get this sanction reviewed? Kyleshome (talk) 07:37, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * KC's talk page followed by, I suppose, ANI. Given the context of Mag's comment when it was made, I doubt you'd find a sysop in the world ready to overturn it, let alone community consensus to do so. Additionally, block appeals normally aren't made without the blocked user requesting them. Kevin Gorman (talk) 16:07, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually, Courcelles reblocked this editor due to abuse of talk page privileges, so I think Courcelles would be the appropriate first stop, as the most recent blocking admin. KillerChihuahua ?!? 21:37, 23 August 2012 (UTC)


 * topic banned for one week, to include talk page and relate pages. -- KillerChihuahua ?!? 01:04, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
 * topic banned for one month, to include talk page and related page, for battleground/ABF/BLP violations, most recently in . -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:37, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Confirmed here 10 February 2012. KillerChihuahua ?!? 15:53, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
 * restricted to the talk pages of articles for approximately two months; sanction to end with the year. Repeated disruptive editing, including poor sourcing (non-rs), content not supported by sourcing, POV, OR, SYNTH. KillerChihuahua ?!? 17:15, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
 * blocked for 1 week for this edit in violation of the above topic ban. KillerChihuahua ?!? 22:46, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
 * blocked for 1 week for edit warring after being warned about the article probation.--v/r - TP 16:19, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Editor unblocked per agreement to an article ban not to edit Men's_rights_movement for 1 week until 16:10, 17 January 2013 UTC. This extends only to the article and not the talk page.--v/r - TP 23:22, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * blocked for edit-warring, for 72 hours. Please see block explanation. Drmies (talk) 17:25, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * blocked for edit-warring for 1 week after already being warned days earlier about edit warring.--v/r - TP 23:18, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * warned against NPA, talk page misuse. Killer Chihuahua 15:45, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * topic banned from MRM for 1 month until April 26, 2013.--v/r - TP 01:22, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * topic banned from MRM article and talk page for 1 month until May 23, 2013.--v/r - TP 20:06, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * for NPA, basically, pursuant the wild statements made in these two edits: blocked for a week. Drmies (talk) 03:23, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * blocked for two weeks for violating WP:1RR based on report at WP:ANEW.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:45, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
 * blocked for one month for violating WP:1RR at Masculism.--Bbb23 (talk) 03:58, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
 * blocked for 36 hours for violating WP:1RR at Men's rights movement.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:00, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
 * topic-banned for three months. He is prohibited from editing any men's rights movement article or talk page, broadly construed. The bases for the ban are described here.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:01, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
 * blocked one week for this edit. Killer Chihuahua 07:02, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
 * unblocked as unwarranted. As noted in my unblock request review, the edit in question was a mistake and the alleged infraction was completely unintentional. --  tariq abjotu  02:32, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
 * topic-banned for three months. Memills is prohibited from editing any men's rights movement article or talk page, broadly construed. The bases for the ban are described here.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:15, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
 * blocked for 48 hours for edit warring, incivility, and assumptions of bad faith at Men's rights movement.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:47, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * blocked for 24 hours for violating WP:1RR in the MRM section of Controversial Reddit communities.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:28, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * blocked for 24 hours for violating WP:1RR at Men's rights movement.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:35, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
 * topic-banned for six months. Memills is prohibited from editing any men's rights movement article, section of article, or talk page, broadly construed. Memills is also prohibited from discussing the topic on any page at Wikipedia unless it is in the context of an appeal of the ban itself. The bases for the ban are described here.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:30, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
 * blocked for three months for edit warring and gaming WP:1RR at Men's movement.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:45, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
 * blocked for 24 hours for violating WP:1RR at Men's rights movement.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:35, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * blocked for 48 hours for violating WP:1RR and for general disruptive editing at A Voice for Men.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:27, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
 * blocked for 24 hours for violating WP:1RR at A Voice for Men.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:27, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Shortly after I blocked Kyohyi, I unblocked them based on what I deemed to be a valid WP:BLP exemption to edit warring.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:44, 9 June 2014 (UTC)


 * blocked for 31 hours for disruptive editing against consensus at Men's rights movement.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:41, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
 * indefinitely topic-banned from editing any page at Wikipedia regarding men's rights, broadly construed. This ban is based on the history outlined in this post and the user's history.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:18, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
 * The ban was clarified to also prohibit Memills from discussing the topic of men's rights on any page at Wikipedia unless it is in the context of an appeal of the ban itself.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:49, 24 August 2014 (UTC)


 * blocked for a year for tendentious editing (see diff for full rationale). HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  15:01, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Block appealed to AN/I. Consensus in the discussion was to retain the block. Euryalus (talk) 05:00, 24 September 2014 (UTC)


 * blocked for six months for violation of his topic ban.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:35, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
 * topic-banned indefinitely (with provision for review after three months); see diff for full rationale. HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  13:20, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
 * blocked for 48 hours for edit warring at A Voice for Men.--Bbb23 (talk) 04:58, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
 * blocked for one week for resuming edit warring at A Voice for Men after expiration of last block.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:24, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * blocked for one year for violating topic ban. Keilana&#124;Parlez ici 05:16, 30 July 2015 (UTC)