Wikipedia:Keep off my talk page!

When two editors frequently disagree, it is not uncommon for one to ask the other to stay off the first user’s talk page. The reasons editors do this may vary, but often it takes the form of a unilateral, total, permanent demand to the second editor to "Keep off my talk page!"

While this can be an effective means of stemming what you perceive as a "net minus" to discussion involving you, this approach is not without its problems. These demands can lie in an ambiguous area from a policy perspective, especially when the demand itself takes a combative or uncivil tone, and particularly when they are total and open-ended. Most significantly, these demands can complicate dispute resolution efforts, which often call for contacting the other editor on his or her user talk page as a first step, or require notification upon entering the process.

The degree to which such demands are enforceable varies. While the best practice would probably be to accede to such requests as best possible, there is no clear policy or guideline requiring adherence to such requests. At the same time, refusing to leave an editor alone despite his or her request to do so can and has resulted in community sanctions on a variety of grounds, such as harassment. Generally speaking, the actual circumstances of the request, the behavior of the editors involved, and the nature of the contact claimed to have violated the request will dictate the community outcome, if any.

Overview
Telling another editor to keep off your user talk page is, without question, an unfriendly act. The standard for behavior on Wikipedia being civility, however, suggests that unfriendliness, when necessary to preserve a civil environment, may be acceptable. Thus, requesting that another editor keep off your user talk page may be an acceptable action where the other editor's continued presence on your user talk page would prevent a civil environment from existing.

The reverse situation, where another editor has requested that you stay off his or her user talk page, can be perplexing. Often, the request comes seemingly without warning, almost as a shot across the bow. While it is usually clear that you and the other editor are not getting along, an open-ended "go away!" can come as a surprise. It can also complicate matters if you believe you should report the editor to a noticeboard or file a dispute resolution request involving the other editor, since these processes generally require you to notify the other editor involved.

Why not to do it

 * You lose a way to talk through your differences with the other user.
 * It might only upset the other user, or just make them even angrier with you.
 * It's not your page, it's a way of talking to other users on this project, which the Wikimedia Foundation lets us use.
 * I know you're perfect, but if you do make a mistake, they can't point it out.
 * If you run into a dispute with this editor crossing multiple pages—that is, where no single article talk page can really be used to resolve it—this forecloses an important stage of the dispute resolution process.

What you should do
Should another user ask you to stay off his or her user talk page, your first action should be to stop and think. What is the situation? Why have you been told to stay away?

In most situations, especially ongoing content disputes, it does little harm to step back for a time. It does not constitute an acceptance of the demand on your part. However, if communication with this editor will be unavoidable in the near future, it may be necessary to clarify the demand. Even then, it can be productive to step away. Bear in mind the principle of DefendEachOther: Especially when you are both established editors, it is highly likely that other editors will notice a dispute on their watchlists. They may see fit to intervene. If you are involved in ongoing dispute resolution, another participant will likely see what is happening.

Be wary of wikihounding, or giving the appearance that you are engaged in wikihounding.

Policy on these requests
Questions exist as to whether unilateral demands—as opposed to mutual keep-off agreements or interaction bans—are enforceable, or should be enforced. As of June 2014, there was no consensus as to this in policy, though general practice indicates a willingness of administrators to enforce such demands.

That said, there seems to be a loose consensus that such unilateral demands are not absolute: as with other editing restrictions, reversion of vandalism or BLP violations seem to be exceptions. Accidental notifications would logically be exceptions as well (e.g., nominating an article for deletion and sending an automated notification), though it also seems likely that repeated "accidental" notifications would stop being credible after awhile.

It may be the case that the demand to keep off could be used as evidence of unreasonableness or incivility of the editor making the demand. This might especially be true if such demands are made often, made rapidly after a first encounter with an editor, or made in response to actions that cannot objectively reasonably be considered offensive.

In short, the enforceability of and consequences for violating these sorts of demands seems to be very much a case-by-case determination.