What to do if you are blocked from editing Wikipedia

What does a block on Wikipedia actually do?

It stops the blocked account, temporary account or IP address from editing, either across the whole site or on a defined set of pages. Wikipedia's blocking policy describes blocking as the method by which administrators technically prevent users from editing. A block can be set for a fixed time or with no end date, and it can cover every page or only some of them, which is known as a partial block. Blocked users can still read Wikipedia, and a user under a site-wide block can usually still edit their own user talk page, which is where appeals are made.

The policy is clear about purpose. Blocks are there to protect the project from disruption, not to punish, and they should not be used if there is no current conduct problem. That shapes everything that follows: an appeal succeeds by showing that the block is no longer needed, not by arguing that the original conduct was excusable.

Since 4 November 2025, people editing without logging in are no longer shown publicly by IP address. Their edits are attributed instead to an automatically created temporary account, tied to a browser cookie, which lasts at most 90 days. Blocks can be placed on those temporary accounts as well as on IP addresses and registered accounts.

Blocks are common. The banning policy notes that in 2024 more than 70,000 accounts were blocked at least once, and it distinguishes blocks from bans: a block is a technical setting, a ban is a formal decision that someone may no longer edit all or part of Wikipedia.

Why do accounts and IP addresses get blocked?

Mostly for disruption, for activity that puts people or the project at risk, or because the account itself breaks a rule. The blocking policy groups the common reasons as follows.

Warnings are expected first in most cases. The policy says users acting in good faith should normally be told about the rules and given a chance to change before they are blocked. It also says warnings are not required for accounts whose main or only use is forbidden activity, such as vandalism or sockpuppetry.

Two rows catch out people connected to an article's subject. An account editing only to promote a person or company falls into the disruption-only group. And Wikipedia's username policy does not allow a username that is a company's name, or that implies several people share the account. Accounts that combine a promotional username with promotional editing are usually blocked sooner than those that do only one.

Can you be blocked without doing anything wrong?

Yes. Wikipedia's guideline on appealing blocks opens with a warning that some blocks apply to a whole IP range instead of one user, and do not always mean the blocked user did anything wrong. The usual causes are:

• Autoblocks. When an account is blocked with this option on, the IP address it last used is blocked automatically, and so is any address it tries to edit from. Anyone sharing that address is caught. Autoblocks expire after 24 hours, but a new one starts if the blocked account tries again.
• Shared networks. Schools, universities, companies and some mobile networks route many people through a few addresses, and those addresses are often blocked for vandalism by one person.
• Range blocks. Administrators can block a whole range of addresses. The policy on blocking IP addresses notes that a single range block can affect up to 65,536 IPv4 addresses and urges that such blocks be kept as brief as possible.
• VPNs and privacy relays. Wikipedia's help page for blocked users notes that iCloud Private Relay is treated as an open proxy, and its open proxies policy mentions Microsoft Edge Secure Network as another common cause. Turning the service off for Wikipedia usually solves it.

The fix is usually to log in. Most IP blocks affect only people editing without an account, so a registered account in good standing can normally edit through them. If account creation is also blocked on your network, Wikipedia's request an account process exists for exactly this case. Registered users in good standing caught by an IP block can ask for it to be softened so that it affects only logged-out editors, and people with a demonstrated need to edit through a proxy can request an IP block exemption.

The help page is candid about the limits: requests to unblock an IP address, even from someone innocent, will generally not be granted. Wikipedia prefers that you log in.

How do you tell what kind of block you have?

Read the block notice, then check the block log and your talk page. The blocking policy requires administrators to give a clear and specific reason, in plain language where possible, and to leave a message on the blocked user's talk page. The notice shown when you try to edit gives the reason, the administrator and the expiry.

Some quick checks:

• To see whether a site-wide block is still in force, Wikipedia's appeal guideline suggests trying to edit the sandbox. That test does not show partial blocks, which appear on your contributions page and in the public block list.
• A notice that names a different user, or calls the block an autoblock, means you have been caught by a block aimed at someone else.
• A note that a block is a CheckUser block, an Oversight block or an arbitration enforcement block means ordinary administrators cannot lift it on their own. CheckUser blocks need a CheckUser's approval, and Oversight blocks are appealed by email to the oversight team or the Arbitration Committee.
• A global block or lock comes from the stewards and applies across Wikimedia projects. A global lock cannot be overridden on English Wikipedia and is appealed by email to the stewards.

How do unblock requests on Wikipedia work?

You post a request on your own talk page and a different, uninvolved administrator reviews it. The appeal guideline names the unblock template on your talk page as the preferred route, and the unblock wizard builds the request for you by asking a few questions about your situation. Saving the request places it in a queue that administrators watch.

What happens next, according to the guideline and the blocking policy:

1. The reviewing administrator reads the block reason, your editing history and your request.
2. They often ask the blocking administrator for comment, and other editors may add views on your talk page.
3. Clear cases are decided by one administrator. The process can take hours or a few days, and major discussions can take a week or more. Requests left for two weeks without an answer to questions put to you may be declined as stale.
4. If accepted, you may be unblocked on conditions, such as staying away from a topic or using only one account.

A few rules apply throughout. Keep only one request open at a time, since later ones are procedurally declined while the first is pending. If your talk page access has been removed, you can appeal through the Unblock Ticket Request System instead. Partial blocks can also be appealed at the administrators' noticeboard. And for short blocks, the guideline warns that the usual answer is to wait for the block to expire.

The guide to appealing blocks is direct on one point. Write the request yourself, without using an AI tool. Requests that appear to be written by a large language model are highly likely to be rejected, and can lead to the loss of talk page access, because the reviewer needs to hear that you understand the problem. The guideline also allows appeals by third parties but generally discourages them.

What makes an unblock request succeed?

Showing that the block is no longer needed, or never was. Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks says the blocked editor has to convince administrators of one of three things: that they understand why they were blocked, will not repeat it and will contribute productively; that the block was not needed to prevent disruption; or that their conduct had nothing to do with the block.

The guide's advice for the first of those is practical:

• Read the policies linked in the block reason before writing anything. If you still do not understand, ask the blocking administrator first, outside the request.
• Address the administrator's concern directly and say what you will do differently.
• Talk about yourself, not other editors. Complaints about the people you were in dispute with belong in dispute resolution after you are unblocked.
• Do not make legal threats or attempt to pressure anyone. That leads to longer blocks, not shorter ones.

Some block reasons have their own expectations. An account blocked as advertising-only will not be unblocked, the guide says, unless the person says they will stop the promotional activity and shows they intend to make useful contributions unrelated to the subject they were promoting, with examples. For edit warring blocks, the guide notes that long requests full of diffs arguing there was no breach often take longer to review than the block itself lasts, and that being right is not an exception to the three-revert rule.

What happens with sockpuppetry blocks?

They are among the hardest to lift. Wikipedia's sockpuppetry policy starts from one editor, one account, and forbids using extra accounts to mislead, create an illusion of support, avoid scrutiny or get around a block. Sockpuppet accounts are blocked indefinitely, and the main account may be blocked as well. The guide to appealing blocks says plainly that people blocked for sockpuppetry are rarely unblocked, since they have acted dishonestly.

The policy reaches beyond multiple accounts held by one person. Recruiting others to edit or join a discussion on your side, known as meatpuppetry, is prohibited, and new accounts that behave the same way in the same context may be treated as one user. People who share a network with other editors they know are advised to declare the connection, because closely connected accounts can otherwise be mistaken for socks.

There is a defined way back. Under what Wikipedia calls the standard offer, a blocked sockpuppeteer can appeal after making no edits to English Wikipedia at all, from any account or logged out, for at least six months, and must appeal from their original account. Anyone appealing a sockpuppetry or meatpuppetry block they believe is mistaken is told to disclose anything relevant, including whether they were asked to edit by others or were paid to edit.

Repeat cases end in a ban. The policy says editors confirmed by a CheckUser to have used sockpuppets on at least two occasions after an indefinite block are considered banned by the community.

Why does creating a new account make a block worse?

Because Wikipedia applies blocks to people, not accounts, and treats a new account used to get around a block as block evasion. Wikipedia's help page for blocked users warns against creating a new account to appeal or to carry on editing, and says the new account will usually be blocked. The blocking policy allows administrators to reset the original block and extend it if the person behaves badly while evading it.

The consequences go further than the new account:

• Anyone may revert edits made in breach of a block without giving a further reason, and those reverts do not count towards the three-revert rule.
• Pages created in breach of a block, with no substantial edits by others, can be speedily deleted under criterion G5.
• Other editors are not permitted to make edits at the direction of a blocked editor unless they can show the changes are productive and that they have their own independent reasons for making them. Wikipedia calls this proxying.

That last rule matters to anyone who is blocked while trying to change an article about themselves or their organisation. Asking a colleague, a friend or an agency to make the same edits does not get around the block, and new accounts that pursue the same aim in the same way can be dealt with as if they were the blocked editor.

Who should write an unblock appeal?

The person who is blocked. Wikipedia's guidance is explicit that the reviewer wants to hear from you directly, that requests which appear AI-written are likely to be rejected, and that appeals by third parties are generally discouraged. An appeal drafted for someone else, in someone else's voice, works against them. If your block is an autoblock, a range block or a username block, you can almost always resolve it yourself in a few minutes using the routes above.

Where experience helps is in the reading. A block log entry, a talk page warning and a closed noticeboard thread together say a good deal about what the reviewing administrator will be looking for, and a blocked subject often misreads them, usually by arguing the content when the block was about conduct. The article that led to the block also still exists. If it has a genuine problem, that problem has to be raised through Wikipedia's ordinary processes by editors acting on their own judgement, which is a separate matter from the appeal.

We can read the record with you and explain what it shows, and we can assess whether the article itself needs repair on its own merits. We do not write appeals on anyone's behalf or make edits a blocked editor has been prevented from making. For the wider picture of what blocks and other failed attempts leave behind, see our guide to the public record, or start with a free page health check.