Lock appeal guidelines

Note: These 'guidelines' are initially drafted by current and ex stewards, but they are not strictly set policy. Stewards exercise discretion case by case. However this page should provide useful advice for those seeking to appeal a lock, depending on the nature of the lock. In all cases the appeal message must be civil, clear (including all context and necessary information: no one-sentence wonders inviting lengthy discourse to find out the issue) and address the circumstances of the lock as well as identify who was locked. Depending on the nature of the lock, more information is needed; consult the section that best resembles your circumstance.

==Self requested locks== Message a Steward be it by email (stewards@) or using a messaging platform (IRC, Discord). Ideally you should be 'known' and if emailing, the email preferably links to the account requested. Note that this, like the decision to request a lock, should be taken seriously - you may be refused if you treat this like turning an account on and off arbitrarily. This is strongly preferred over creating another account because you realize you wanted to do something but had requested your own lock.

For the most part it's best to simply log out, and not request that you are locked in the first place as this feature is meant to address severe issues and not be used arbitrarily. Accounts that are not being used anymore are free to be left alone indefinitely. This saves time if you just want to edit from time to time in the future, too.

==Appealing locks made in error== This includes protesting locks that were made too hastily, when other steps (ie a warning) would have been merited. Other appeal reasons would be:
 * Mistaken identity (locked as a sockpuppet when you had no association). This is difficult as such locks are made with confidence and technical evidence, and unfortunately the onus is on you to prove there is evidence or context we missed.
 * Severe errors in policy/process; based on clear policies from meta that were not followed, ie, an overly aggressive lock for Username Policy violation without proper warning or a hasty lock for Code of Conduct issues without sufficient warning/an extreme enough circumstance
 * Other errors, based on the locking message, applicable policy from Miraheze Meta and how your circumstance doesn't fit

In all cases you must present who you were on the wiki, the circumstances of the lock, and why the lock was processed incorrectly. This should be no less than a paragraph but it doesn't need to be an essay. Ideally it is as clear as possible so the circumstances can be reviewed and if the error is valid, the issue is resolved on the spot.

==Appealing locks by Trust and Safety and/or based on the Terms of Use== This process cannot be handled by Stewards. Instead see the appeals section on the Trust and Safety page for requirements.

==Appealing locks through lenience, promise of change, etc== This covers all appeals made when you know what you did; the measure was taken according to policy and best practice. This covers clear sockpuppets, users locked for severe conduct issues/a history of such after multiple incidents and warnings, and other cases based on leniency and not error in handling.

In order to appeal on the basis that you've changed and learned from the experience, there needs to be strong demonstration that whatever caused you to be locked is gone. Since locks are typically made for abuse of multiple accounts we will use this example.

Simply saying you have changed is not sufficient: preferably this is accompanied by examples of how you have changed. Useful facts include:
 * Having not evaded your lock for six months or more, and making the appeal after that time. Appeals coming sooner or with repeated slips and contact proving that you're 'dwelling' or continuing the behavior nearby (ie, acting poorly on the Discord server or related platforms) drastically reduce the image of sincerity and chances of success. Move on and make something of yourself in other places.
 * Proof that you are an asset elsewhere, such as clearly linked history on another wiki farm where you have kept your nose clean with an identity clearly traced to you. Take the absence, and back it with proof you haven't just been a problem elsewhere.
 * Acknowledging and assuring against the behavior that lead to the initial lock. The Stewards need to know that you know what the problem was, and how you have moved on.
 * Substance in the appeal. One or two sentences will not be considered since they cannot cover the above requirements. Points should be clear, not stretched out for the illusion of length = substance. For cases of significant abuse and multiple prior appeals, you must not stretch for the minimums. You must go past them. If you are just trying to satisfy the requirements and nothing else then you have already failed.

If these elements are clearly addressed and satisfied, the appeal will have a far higher (but not absolute!) chance of success.