Talk:Banned user membership on lists of Wikimedians

About this essay

I wrote this essay in my own user space, and solicited input from some other Wikimedians. I got a lot of helpful feedback, and I believe the essay strikes a good balance, and makes some recommendations that could be useful in complex and challenging situations. I welcome input. However, this is clearly a case where one's own background is relevant; if you have input and are yourself a user who has been banned or sanctioned in a Wikimedia project, I think it would be helpful if you clearly disclose that when making any comments or edits. -Pete F 20:27, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Translation

I see that this page has been requested for translation. We don't usually place translation requests for essays and there's no clear policy for the new translation system, but I think all pages should be able to use it so I'll try to do it as the page seems stable enough. However, if possible I'll clearly mark it as a very low priority translation. Thanks, Nemo 16:11, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Nemo, I am not too familiar with the process around translation; I thought it might be worthwhile to have some non-English speakers' perspectives on the ideas presented here. Thanks for cleaning it up. I have no expectation that it would be very high priority. -Pete F (talk) 19:26, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Evidence that this is actually causing problems

Is there evidence that these scenarios are actually occurring, or is it just a hypothesis? Leucosticte (talk) 12:17, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Solution: unban some people, and/or don't ban so many people in the first place

If projects would apply the standard offer more often, there wouldn't be so many banned users around, since people would be able to come back after six months. I wonder, if that were done, what the eventual success rate would be — i.e., how many of them would become regular contributors who don't keep getting re-banned? Heck, even if they said that people have to wait five years before coming back, it would be better than the current system, under which people can basically never come back, in many cases. Leucosticte (talk) 12:28, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Why Wikinews here? Why is this female?

The number of female editors involved behind the scenes on English Wikinews is about 1, maybe 2. Further, the situation documented is almost certain to never happen on English Wikinews. This really, really should be changed... at the very least, the genders should be changed to better reflect the reality that the problem people are likely to be male editors and it should be changed to Wikipedia, where this is much more likely to be a problem. --LauraHale (talk) 06:47, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

The example isn't meant to be gender- or project-specific, or representative in any way. How about you just make those changes? -Pete F (talk) 04:22, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

The problem is the example is gender specific and project specific because of the fact that there are 2 active female English Wikinewsies. Could you please make the changes to be more general (Male and Wikipedian) in order to be more gender and project neutral? --LauraHale (talk) 14:06, 9 April 2014 (UTC)