|呢篇文或者呢段要 翻譯（或者由 en:Wikipedia:Blocking policy 加料）。|
如果你想挑戰一個封鎖嘅決定，可以去睇Wikipedia:Appealing a block。
A user may be blocked when necessary to protect the rights, property or safety of the Wikimedia Foundation, its users or the public. A block for protection may be necessary in response to:
- persistently making personal attacks;
- making personal, professional or legal threats (including outside the Wikipedia site);
- performing actions that place users in danger;
- disclosing personal information (whether or not the information is accurate);
- persistently violating copyrights;
When blocking in response to disclosing personal information or actions that place users in danger, consider notifying the Arbitration Committee (by email) about the block and contacting someone with oversight permissions to request permanent deletion of the material in question.
A user may be blocked when his or her conduct severely disrupts the project; that is, when his or her conduct is inconsistent with a civil, collegial atmosphere and interferes with the process of editors working together harmoniously to create an encyclopedia. A block for disruption may be necessary in response to:
- persistent vandalism;
- persistent gross incivility;
- persistent harassment;
- persistently posting unsourced or poorly sourced contentious biographical material about living persons;
- persistent spamming;
- edit warring or revert warring;
- breaching the sock puppetry policy;
Disagreements over content or policy are not disruption, but rather part of the normal functioning of Wikipedia and should be handled through dispute resolution procedures. Blocks for disruptive behaviour should not typically be used in response to isolated instances of behaviour, but in response to persistent patterns of behaviour.
Users who aggressively and repeatedly violate fundamental policies may be blocked if there is a consensus among uninvolved users that it is necessary. Such persons should be dealt with kindly and patiently, but should be prevented from wreaking havoc over the period of weeks or months it would take to process an obvious Arbitration request. Remember to note the case on The Administrators' incident noticeboard. Be kind.
Furthermore, some types of user accounts are considered disruptive and may be blocked:
- public accounts (where the password is publicly available or shared with a large group);
- accounts with inappropriate usernames;
- bots operating without approval or outside their approval;
- accounts that appear, based on their edit history, to exist for the sole or primary purpose of promoting a person, company, product, service, or organization in apparent violation of Conflict of interest or anti-spam guidelines, should be warned that such edits are against Wikipedia policy. If after the warning such edits persist, and the account continues to be used primarily or solely for the purpose of promotion, any uninvolved admin may block the account.
A Wikipedia ban is a formal revocation of editing privileges on all or part of Wikipedia. A ban may be temporary and of fixed duration, or indefinite and potentially permanent.
Blocks may be used to enforce bans. Such blocks are based on the particular terms of the ban. Except for partial bans, banned users are customarily blocked for the duration of the ban.
Non-static IPs or hosts that are otherwise not permanent proxies typically warrant blocking for a shorter period of time, as the IP is likely to be transferred, the open proxy is likely to be closed, or the IP is likely to be reassigned dynamically.
It does happen that an account is compromised, meaning that some else than the account's owner has for whatever reason gained access to the password. This is particularily serious when it happens to an account with administrator privileges, since the damage it can do with the deletion and block buttons is quite serious. If there is evidence that this has happened the account may be blocked (and if applicable, have its adminship priveleges removed) as an emergency measure. The account may be subsequently unblocked if the owner can provide evidence that he or she has regained access to the account.
To prevent this from happening, all users are advised to choose passwords which are difficult to guess, and should never reveal their password to anybody else.
Evasion of blocks改
An administrator may reset the block of a user who intentionally evades a block, and may extend the duration of the block if the user engages in further blockable behaviour while evading the block. User accounts or IP addresses used to evade a block may also be blocked.
When blocking may not be used改
Administrators must not block users with whom they are engaged in a content dispute; instead, they should report the problem to other administrators.
An exception is made when dealing with unsourced or poorly sourced contentious biographical material about living persons. Administrators may enforce the removal of such material with page protection and blocks, even if they have been editing the article themselves. (See the BLP policy.)
Brief blocks solely for the purpose of "cooling down" an angry user should not be used, as they inevitably serve to inflame the situation.
Recording in the block log改
Blocks should not be used solely for the purpose of recording warnings or other negative events in a user's block log. The practice, typically involving very short blocks, is often seen as punitive and humiliating.
However, very brief blocks may be used in order to record, for example, an apology or acknowledgment of mistake in the block log in the event of a wrongful or accidental block, unless the original block has not yet expired (in which case the message may be recorded in the unblocking reason).
Administrators should not unblock users blocked by other administrators without first attempting to contact the blocking administrator and discuss the matter with them. It may not necessarily be obvious what the problem necessitating blocking was, and it is a matter of courtesy and common sense to consult the blocking administrator. If the blocking administrator is not available, or if the administrators cannot come to an agreement, then a discussion at the administrators' noticeboard is recommended.
If a block is the result of an unambiguous error and not a judgment call (for example, if the blocking administrator obviously misspelled a username), and the blocking administrator is not available, then it is not necessary to discuss prior to unblocking. Where there is ambiguity, discuss the block before removing it. Wheel warring is considered very harmful.
Altering block options改
Administrators may unblock a user in order to re-block them with different blocking options selected, where that is necessary (for example, if a block on a registered account is causing significant collateral effects to a shared IP address or a blocked user is abusing the Special:Emailuser function).
Temporary circumstances blocks改
Some types of blocks are used in response to particular temporary circumstances, and should be undone once the circumstance no longer applies:
- blocks on open or anonymous proxies should be undone once it is confirmed that they have been closed;
- blocks of unapproved or malfunctioning bots should be undone once the bots gain approval or are repaired;
- blocks for making legal threats should be undone once the threats are no longer outstanding.
Technical instructions on how to block and unblock, and information on the blocking interface, is available at Help:Block and unblock. The following is advice specifically related to blocking and unblocking on Wikipedia.
Education and warnings改
Everyone was new once, and most of us made mistakes when new. That's why we welcome newcomers and are patient with them, and assume that most people who work on the project are trying to help it, not hurt it. We also ask that newcomers make an effort to learn about our policies and guidelines so that they can learn how to avoid making mistakes.
As such, before blocking is used, efforts should be made to educate users about our policies and guidelines, and to warn them when their behaviour is in conflict with our policies and guidelines. A variety of template messages exist for convenience, although purpose-written messages are often preferable.
Warning is not a prerequisite for blocking (particularly with respect to blocks for protection) but administrators should generally ensure that users are aware of policies, and give them reasonable opportunity to adjust their behaviour accordingly, before blocking. Users who have been made aware of a policy and have had such an opportunity do not require further warning.
Duration of blocks改
The purpose of blocking is prevention, not punishment. The duration of blocks should thus be related to the likelihood of a user repeating inappropriate behaviour. Administrators should consider:
- the severity of the behaviour;
- whether the user has been blocked for engaging in that behaviour before.
Blocks on shared or dynamic IP addresses are typically shorter than blocks on registered accounts or static IP addresses made in otherwise similar circumstances, in order to limit side-effects on other users sharing that IP address.
While the duration of a block should vary with the circumstances of the block, there are some broad standards for block durations:
- blocks for all types of disruptive behaviour are typically for 24 hours, longer for successive instances;
- blocks on types of user accounts considered disruptive are typically of indefinite duration;
- blocks for protection are typically for as long as protection is necessary, which may often be indefinitely.
Setting block options改
There are several options available to modify the effect of blocks, which should be used in certain circumstances.
- autoblock should typically be disabled when blocking unapproved or malfunctioning bots (so as not to block the bot's operator), though it should be enabled when blocking malicious bots.
- prevent account creation should typically be disabled when blocking accounts with inappropriate names (to allow the user to create an account with an appropriate name), though it should be enabled when blocking malicious names (for example, clear attacks on other users).
- block e-mail will disable the user from accessing Special:Emailuser for the duration of the block. This option should not be used by default when blocking an account, but rather it should only be used in cases of abuse of the "email this user" feature. When enabled, efforts should be taken to ensure that the user's talk page remains unprotected and that the user is aware of other avenues (such as unblock-en-l) through which he can discuss the block.
A "softblock" is a block with autoblock disabled, account creation not disabled, and blocking only anonymous users enabled. The effect is to block anonymous users but allow registered users to continue editing. Softblocks are commonly used when blocking shared IP addresses.
Reasons and notification改
Administrators must supply a clear and specific block reason which indicates why a user was blocked. Block reasons should avoid the use of jargon as much as possible so that blocked users may better understand them. Administrators may also notify users when blocking them by leaving a message on their user talk page. It is often easier to explain the reason for a block at the time than it is to explain a block well after the fact.
When implementing a block, a number of pro forma block reasons are available in a drop-down menu; other or additional reasons can also be added. Users can be notified of blocks and block reasons using a number of convenient template messages — see Category:User block templates and Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace.
- Wikipedia:Blocking IP addresses & Wikipedia:Sensitive IP addresses - information relating to blocking IP addresses
- Wikipedia:Appealing a block - information about contesting a block
- MediaWiki:Blockedtext - the message shown to blocked users when they attempt to edit
- Category:User block templates