User talk:Msh210/Archive/Roslyn

This page is an archive of old discussion. Please don't edit this page. If you wish to communicate with me (msh210), you can do so at User talk:Msh210. Thanks!

User:Roslyn

Hey, Special:Contributions/Roslyn is appealing their block (from a long time ago). Based on a brief reading of their actions I can see why you chose to block them, but they are probably right that it didn't need to be indefinite. What are your thoughts? - TheDaveRoss 14:51, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Having read the ticket and reviewed the blocked editor's actions, I still see no reason that they should not remain blocked. They never listened to anyone else, and seem intent on continuing where they left off. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 18:32, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

@Metaknowledge: There are a number of problems I see with this scenario.

1. The users first block was indefinite, despite that their edits could easily be construed as good-faith attempts by a person unfamiliar with our standards and practices.
2. They re-added reverted material a number of times, but that may well have been because nobody bothered to communicate what was happening to their edits until a couple of days into the conflict.
3. Prior to being blocked, they attempted to initiate conversations with other editors about the changes they proposed and were met with silence.

We assume too often that the people on the other end of conflicts are as experienced as we are, and we assume that poor edits are also bad-faith edits. While I don't think that this person's attempted contribution was correct, our collective handling of the situation was miserable. This is a case study in how not to treat new editors, and is also an excellent example of the Wiktionary welcoming committee.

Perhaps this conversation should move to the BP if Msh is not around and we want to discuss it further. I am interested to hear from others about whether I am off-base in my reading of the situation as well. - TheDaveRoss 18:47, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping, TDR. I just reviewed Roslyn's contributions and surrounding discussion. I don't see the appeal you speak of; if it seems (from the appeal) that the new editing will be accompanied by better practices than those of nearly half a decade ago, then I see no reason not to unblock with the understanding that a repeat performance will have the same result as last time, and fast. Pinging also Metaknowledge.​—msh210℠ 20:48, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, that was unclear, they appealed via OTRS. - TheDaveRoss 00:41, 16 August 2017 (UTC)