Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard
| Wikipedia Arbitration |
|---|
 |
|
|
| Track related changes |
This noticeboard is for announcements and statements made by the Arbitration Committee. Only members of the Arbitration Committee or the Committee's Clerks may post on this page, but all editors are encouraged to comment on the talk page.
Community feedback: Proposal on case naming
The Arbitration Committee is currently considering a modification to our procedures on how case requests and arbitration cases are named. We would like community feedback before considering the proposal further.
- Current system
Currently, case requests are named by the filing parties. In theory, the Arbitration Committee or arbitration clerks can rename case requests before they are accepted, but this is rarely done in practice. If an arbitration case is accepted, the Committee chooses a name reflective of the dispute before the case is opened. This can either be the name originally provided by the filing party or a name developed by the Committee that better represents the scope of the case. The major benefit of this system is that ongoing cases are easily identifiable.
- Proposed changes
The following represents a prospective motion that would alter how cases are named.
If a case request is declined, the request will not be named. If a case request is accepted, the Committee will assign a name upon conclusion of the case. Case names will reflect the case's scope, content, and resolution. The Committee will not discuss the naming of a case prior to the case meeting the criteria for closure.
In the past, some editors have been concerned that specific case names have unintentionally biased the result of a case. While this is unproven, any such bias would be eliminated by deferring case naming until after the case was closed. The biggest drawback is that cases will be harder to identify while open. This may result in decreased participation by editors with relevant evidence.
- Notes
The Committee would like to restrict comments at this time to the proposed changes or suggestions directly related to the case naming process. Other issues related to arbitration proceedings may be addressed by the Committee at a later time.
Thank you, ~ Rob13Talk 19:23, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
Feedback from the community is welcomed at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Community feedback: Proposal on case naming.
Arbitration motion regarding Doncram
The Arbitration Committee has resolved by motion that:
Remedy 5 (SarekOfVulcan–Doncram interaction ban) of the Doncram arbitration case is suspended for a period of six months. During the period of suspension, this restriction may be reinstated by any uninvolved administrator as an arbitration enforcement action should either SarekOfVulcan or Doncram fail to adhere to Wikipedia editing standards in their interactions with each other. Appeal of such a reinstatement would follow the normal arbitration enforcement appeals process. After six months from the date this motion is enacted, if the restriction has not been reinstated or any reinstatements have been successfully appealed, the restriction will automatically lapse.
For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 23:13, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
- Archived discussion at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard/Archive 36#Arbitration motion regarding Doncram
Emergency desysop of Denelson83
Denelson83 has been temporarily desyopped because of concerns that the account may be compromised. This was done under emergency procedures and was certified by Arbitrators BU Rob13, KrakatoaKatie and Ks0stm.
For the Arbitration Committee,
Katietalk 03:08, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
- Archived discussion at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard/Archive 36#Emergency desysop of Denelson83
Community consultation: User:Rationalobserver block appeal
The Arbitration Committee has received a ban appeal from Rationalobserver (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and, after internal discussion and discussion with Rationalobserver, is considering granting their ban appeal with the following conditions:
- Indefinite mutual interaction ban with Godot13.
- Indefinite mutual interaction ban with Montanabw.
- Indefinite topic ban from the WikiCup.
- Indefinite restriction on insulting or commenting on the identity, character or motives of other editors (which may be enforced with IBANs, in addition to blocks).
For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:51, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
- Archived discussion at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard/Archive 36#Community consultation: User:Rationalobserver block appeal
Arbitration motion regarding Catflap08 and Hijiri88
The Arbitration Committee has resolved by motion that:
Remedy 5 (Hijiri88: 1RR) of the Catflap08 and Hijiri88 arbitration case is suspended for a period of six months. During the period of suspension, this restriction may be reinstated by any uninvolved administrator, as an arbitration enforcement action, should Hijiri88 fail to adhere to any normal editorial process or expectations related to edit-warring or disruptive editing. After six months from the date this motion is enacted, if the restriction has not been reinstated or any reinstatements have been successfully appealed to the Arbitration Committee, the restriction will automatically lapse.
For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 00:19, 18 February 2018 (UTC)