User talk:Atcovi/Custodianship Folder/Growth

That Draubb became Goldenburg111 should be mentioned.

The sequence where you requested custodianship should also be included. Were there other socks active during that? I know that it was claimed, at one point, that there were others in your family editing. If that is what happened, say so!

Not a great idea, to be sure, to encourage other family members to support your candidacy, if that happened. If they had disclosed the relationship, it might have been okay. Notice how suspicion and harm arise when there isn't clear talk about what is actually happening!

For others who may read this, Draubb/Goldenburg111 began here as an "immature user," and is still quite young, it is not our business *how young*. What he did is what would not be uncommon, though, with a very bright and very young user. He discovered, for example, that, if blocked, easy peasy, he could just reboot his modem and start editing again with a new account! Not a problem!

Essentially, he didn't know what he was doing. I.e., he was normal for his level of experience.

Since Wikiversity is for education, which includes learning by doing, not just the creation of "educational materials," I worked to engage him and develop his ability to cooperate with us, and he did just that. I consider this a great example of how you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. Obviously, we don't know the full end of this story, but it looks to me like Goldenburg is headed for a fine future as an editor, or whatever else he sets his mind on doing. All he has to do is keep learning from his mistakes, and keep practicing what works, and I'll be along, applauding.

I have seen other editors create a page like this, but only when forced to do so, by threats. Goldenburg was not forced, though he was invited. —Abd (discuss • contribs) 22:23, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Welcomes
There are some users who have welcomed all editors with any edits at all, without any regard for the content or appropriateness of the edits. Being welcomed says nothing about the editor who his welcomed. I have generally only welcomed users with at least a single edit that isn't vandalism or other policy violation, that looks like it might be a good faith effort to conttibute. So even with my welcomes, that's all it means. One not–bad edit or more.

But some editors have welcomed vandals and spammers. Some editors have welcomed editors upon registration, as well, without waiting to see if there are any decent edits. Thus you can find a fair number of user talk pages where the user has no edits at all. I have suggested that this is harmful practice.

Now that Goldenburg has done, I think, some substantial Recent Changes review, he may understand what we do: we look through recent changes for edits from an editor with a redlinked talk page. We look at the edits. We quickly find a lot of vandalism that way. This is not reliable, and some vandals know to edit their own talk page, but, I'll repeat, it does quickly catch a lot of vandalism. If the user has been welcomed, then, there is a bit less attention to those first edits.

This has to be the funniest welcome in Wikversity history, and it does show how some welcomes were done without paying a lot of attention. For some background, see also and [.

Now what about the issue here? What about blocking spammers and vandals with no warning? There are many different opinions about this, but those blocks did not prevent talk page access. I would today probably have a block notice prepared that can simply be copied or templated onto the page. It would invite constructive editing, and would provide instructions on how to appeal a block. The length of the block is not necessarily important. A user can easily create a new account after a short time anyway, and most users who start out with vandalism or apparent spam would probably want to do that anyway.

Goldenburg, if you ever see a user blocked for what looks to you like, perhaps, a young user playing, if you think the block excessive, don't do what was done there by the welcoming user, which was completely useless and even misleading. Rather, comment on the user talk page, offering support, while explaining what the user might have done which was considered a problem. Remember how I handled your early edits? Remember User:Abd/Playspace? You still have some pages there. Any user can do that, it doesn't have to be a custodian. If the user responds, you may consider asking a custodian to unblock, and suggest that you will take responsibility for watching this user's edits. And then watch them!

However, I would not create a talk page to warn an editor or inform them of a block, when the editor is a cross wiki spammer, which is what was happening with Deng and Celery. It just creates another useless page, those editors will never again attempt to use those accounts. —Abd (discuss • contribs) 23:21, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Gobal lock vs global ban
None of your accounts were globally banned. If they were, you'd be violating the ban. They were locked, to prevent what was seen as vandalism, which was, of course, simply a very young user trying things.

(Only one user is actually globally banned. Users are commonly banned on local projects. The difference between blocked and banned is a local discussion. A ban cannot be the decision of a single administrator. The exact boundaries are not completely clear. A temporary block is not the sign of a ban. A ban is permanent in that it lasts until and unless it is lifted. So a "one year ban," for example, isn't a ban as I'm talking about bans. It's just a waiting period.

Technically, if an account is blocked, editing with another account may be considered block evasion. However, this is not clear and is not established. You have one or two socks on Wikiversity which were blocked, and which remain blocked. It was clearly not intended as a ban, because your main account was not blocked, and, indeed, we don't really know if those were actually you or not (remember your friends and family visiting?).

It's better to let sleeping dogs lie, is the saying.

Whatever you acknowledge now, truthfully, is far less likely to bite you in the future. You have learned much, and you are continuing to learn. --Abd (discuss • contribs) 18:58, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * thanks, I'll add that in... --Goldenburg111 20:52, 8 March 2014 (UTC)