Template talk:Banned user

We must somehow come up with a solution to the disagreement regarding the icon for this template. The following icons were involved in the war, among others:

• 👁 The icon for a level 2 warning
  
  The icon for a level 2 warning
• 👁 A mace, resembling a mallet
  
  A mace, resembling a mallet
• 👁 An anvil
  
  An anvil
• 👁 A barrier, resembling a ban icon
  
  A barrier, resembling a ban icon
• 👁 The old texture of a failing test block
  
  The old texture of a failing test block

BigEarsQuake 2 (talk) 10:12, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

I think the barrier is best, because the red i is for warnings, which are different, and the mace being a symbol for ban hammers or mallets isn't directly obvious, and I'm not sure what the anvil is supposed to represent. I think most people don't even know what a failing test block is. --MinecraftExp123^{(talk|contribs)} 10:14, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

I think because real-life anvils are so hard they take forever to break, and so are indefinite blocks unlikely to end due to being indefinite. I don't see anvils being symbols of eternal blocking IMO. BigEarsQuake 2 (talk) 10:19, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

I think the original intent is the sound of an anvil placed is loud, which I somewhat feel like subconsiously connects to being blocked/banned, but I don't think it's a good symbol either. --MinecraftExp123^{(talk|contribs)} 10:20, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

I think the barrier is the best. ––– Aed8814 (C | T) 10:20, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

Barrier... yes, it looks good but the notice is too red for the barrier to be seen. BigEarsQuake 2 (talk) 10:47, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

Is it? I'm using light mode and it looks fine, and it also appears fine in dark mode. Also, {{d}} uses a barrier on red. --MinecraftExp123^{(talk|contribs)} 10:49, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm fairly sure you're not supposed to create user pages with this template, since its purpose isn't to tell people that the user is blocked (the yellow box would already tell them that) but instead to explain why a page has no content. I've occasionally seen banned users have their user pages created just to use this template which feels more like gravedancing, so am I correct in saying that you're not supposed to do that? If so, it should probably be stated in the documentation. 👁 Image
GameCatastrophe (talk) 16:37, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

Yes, you're not supposed to create user pages just to put this template on them. You're only supposed to use it to blank pages of blocked users, so that their user pages do not cause maintenance issues -- hence the text "This user page has been subsequently blanked so as not to clutter maintenance categories." that exists in the message box. -- 👁 Image
Mitsos [ talk | edits ] 16:40, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

Is it allowed to put this on userpages for indefinite partial blocks? Let's just say John Doe got blocked from editing the Article namespace but not all other namespaces, is it okay to put this template in his userpage? 👁 Image
Dazzle 👁 Image
19:46, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

No. Its only for Banned Users, users that will never be coming back to the wiki.  Nixinova  T ⁄ C  20:03, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

I genuinely do not understand the purpose of this template. You are not allowed to create user pages for the purpose of adding this template, so its purpose is not a general block notice, and there is no reason to preserve the history of vandal user pages since they are spam, so what is this for? - Harri / Talk 👁 Image
21:37, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

This template should be deleted along with {{Sockpuppet}}, because it's a identical copy. If it does indeed get deleted, then all userpages of banned users that contained that template must also be deleted, including userpages that have {{Sockpuppet}}. Redz (talk) 21:40, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Not all pages of banned users are spam, nor are all users banned because of vandalism. The purpose of this template is to prevent maintenance issues caused by the user page, while preserving the edit history. –Mitsos ^{[ talk | edits ]} 21:47, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

The user page of a vandal is never worth preserving, do not let vandals waste our time any more than they already do. In the exceedingly rare event that a constructive user is blocked indefinitely, we already have {{Blanked page}}. - Harri / Talk 👁 Image
21:52, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

What about users like StizzurpXDD? They used to be an active contributor, so maybe such user page is worth preserving? --MinecraftExp123^{(talk|contribs)} 23:47, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

{{Blanked page}}. - Harri / Talk 👁 Image
18:21, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

Fair enough. --MinecraftExp123^{(talk|contribs)} 22:53, 1 December 2025 (UTC)