Blocks on language versions to apply here?
We've recently blocked our first user on :en for 1 month, who has been a little bit active here on shared since the block was instated. I'm of the opinion that if a user is blocked on a language version that the block should carry over to shared as well. Naturally it's in nobody's best interest to start another long and involved conversation here, but I would like to make sure that I'm not acting alone before instating the block here as well. There's no reason a user who is blocked on their language version needs access to shared during their block. If no strong dissent is voiced, I'll block at this time tomorrow – cacahuate talk 12:01, 19 January 2009 (EST)
- I think, as usual, you are being completely unfair. I just want some of my images deleted, and that was it. All I asked. Of course now it's this long conversation, which was not my intention. It probably would have looked better had I waited the month, but it's the only thing I can take care of while the ban is in place. It wouldn't matter what time, I just want the images I said deleted. It's simple. Quit making false accusations on Wikitravel like I am just doing this to disrupt Wikitravel because I'm not. Quit making rumours about me it is very rude, and I'd like you to stop. I am in no way deleting the images to get problems on Wikitravel, which I don't even see how, so you get rid of a code for some images, whupdedoo. Not to mention that thought didn't even come into my mind until you guys said it on Wikitravel. Anyways, a strong dissent was voiced. EE. —Unsigned comment by Edmontonenthusiast (talk • contribs) .
- Not all users operate only on one language version of Wikitravel; what if we block a user on :en but she is still active on :ja? LtPowers 14:06, 19 January 2009 (EST)
- Individual language versions have always been considered autonomous, so I think it's up to the users at each language version. I'm only proposing that blocks be applicable to shared, much the same as admin nominations are automatically carried over to here. I don't see any value in having to go through a second nomination process for shared if a user has been blocked on :en, and shared is a likely next step for a blocked but persistent user to continue their antics – cacahuate talk 20:12, 19 January 2009 (EST)
Cacahuate, if we just clear the whole image thing I'll voluntarily leave for 1 month. I meant to on Wikitravel, but I was busy when the ban went into place. EE. —Unsigned comment by Edmontonenthusiast (talk • contribs) .
- This isn't your nomination, I'm just working on establishing a policy, there's no need to comment here. Since you'll be away voluntarily for the next month, I assume the above comment will be the last we hear from you until your :en ban expires. Does anyone else have comments on my proposed policy? – cacahuate talk 20:41, 19 January 2009 (EST)
- Yes for scripts/spambots. Not sure about the others. --Ricardo (Rmx) 22:32, 19 January 2009 (EST)
- I'm not sure we need a general case for a single user... but in the specific case of EE, who's already throwing a temper tantrum at Shared VFD, I would support extending the ban to here as well. Jpatokal 03:18, 20 January 2009 (EST)
- I am not making a temper tantrum so quit making stuff up about me. EE.
- I've blocked the user and the anon ip that he was using, to expire at the same time as his block on :en. I still think this should become normal practice, but for now I'll settle for letting it apply to this particularly problematic user – cacahuate talk 14:26, 20 January 2009 (EST)
- I still don't like the precedent. And I think you should have at least deferred the actual blocking to another admin, since you're one of the users with whom he has a dispute. LtPowers 11:51, 22 January 2009 (EST)
- EE's attempt to turn this into a personal dispute is not IMO relevant, and I would hope you could agree and not buy that moldy cheese. I stated really clearly in my first post above what I intended to do, if you didn't think that was the right course of action, your first response, which took place before the blocking, would've been a good time to voice that opinion – cacahuate talk 12:46, 22 January 2009 (EST)
- I'll back cacahuate on this one. Texugo 19:47, 24 January 2009 (EST)
- Well, my apologies for not thinking of every possible objection. LtPowers 08:33, 26 January 2009 (EST)