Jump to content

Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee election requests for comment

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Every year in November and December, the community conducts an election to determine which editors should become members of the Arbitration Committee. In September, before the election procedures begin, it has become customary to hold a pre-election request for comment (RfC) to provide the community an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of that year's Arbitration Committee election. This RfC usually runs from September 1 to September 30.

Examples of discussion topics

[edit]
  • Number of arbitrators to appoint in the election[a]
  • Eligibility criteria to stand as a candidate in the election, beyond the ones specified by Wikipedia:Arbitration/Policy#Selection and appointment[b]
  • Eligibility criteria to vote in the election[c]
  • How should the election be advertised to the community[d]
  • The authority of members of the Electoral Commission[e]
  • Other procedural questions affecting the election process
ACERFC decisions to date (WP:ACERULES)
ACERFC decisions to date (WP:ACERULES)
See also: Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee election requests for comment
  • Election: There will be 15 arbitrators, seven seats on "Tranche Alpha" and eight seats on "Tranche Beta" from the 2019 elections.[1] A maximum eight 2-year terms are up for elections each year,[2] with the eighth seat switching tranche if necessary.[3] Any expected midterm vacancy, announced before voting begins and taking effect prior to 1 January,[4] that brings the total number of vacancies above eight will be filled by a 1-year term.[2] A minimum 50% support is required to be elected for a 1-year term, and a minimum 60% support is required for a 2-year term.[5] Successful candidates with the lowest support percentages are given the 1-year term if any.[6] If there are more vacancies than candidates with the required minimum, the extra seats will remain unfilled until a special or the next regular election.[1] Vacancies arising between elections will remain unfilled until a special or the next regular election.[7]
  • Special Election: An interim special election which is called by the Arbitration Committee in accordance with the Arbitration Policy shall be conducted on an abbreviated timeline.[8]
    • Electoral Commission: The previous Election Commission shall be reappointed unless they are unable or unwilling to perform the job, in which case members of the current functionaries team who are not arbitrators or WMF staff will be asked to volunteer without the need for confirmation. The Election Commission is empowered to resolve by majority vote situations unforeseen in the previous election RfC that may prevent emergency or interim elections from being held.
    • Nominations period: One week.
    • Voting period: As soon as possible after the close of nominations.
    • Terms of office: To the end of the year.
    • Number of vacancies: Up to the size of the committee authorized in the previous election RfC.[α]
  • Candidates: Registered account with 500 mainspace edits[9] that is not prevented from submitting their candidacy by a block or ban,[10][11] meets Foundation's Access to nonpublic personal data policy,[β] and has disclosed alternate accounts (or disclosed legitimate accounts to Arbcom).[12][13] Arbitrators may not serve as members of either the Ombuds Commission or the WMF Case Review Committee while serving as arbitrators.[14] Withdrawn or disqualified candidates will be listed in their own section on the candidates page[15] unless their candidate page can be deleted under WP:G7.[16]
  • Electoral Commission: An RFC to appoint 3 Electoral Commission officials who will solve disputes and problems during the election.[17] Open to any extended-confirmed editor who is over 18, meets Foundation's Access to nonpublic personal data policy, and is not blocked or banned from the Wikipedia or Wikipedia talk namespaces.[18] Officials will not be allowed to assess private matters and/or have access to voter data, and/or related permissions, and will instead defer private matters to the current ArbCom and/or the WMF as needed.[β][19] Commissioners, and reserve commissioners, may not run for election to the Arbitration Committee during their term.[20]
  • Timeline: In the event of significant technical or other issues affecting the election, the election commissioners may adjust the deadline of the affected part(s) of the election process, and/or any subsequent parts, by a commensurate amount.[21]
    • ACE RFC: (30 days of September)
    • Electoral Commission RFC: 7 days nominations during a pre-RfC drafting process,[22] 7 days evaluation, selection by 7 days after close of evaluation.[γ][23] (October)
    • Nominations: first Sunday of November (10 days)[24]
      • Nomination is hard deadline for creation and transclusion of nomination statement. How to handle any site-wide disruption is at the discretion of the Electoral Commission.[25] The self-nomination will only be considered completed if both the nomination page has been created, and the page has been properly transcluded to the candidates page prior to the cut-off time as recorded by the server. Candidate directions should suggest not attempting to perform this activity very close to the cut-off time, so there will be time to recover should any user or technical errors occur.[26]
    • Fallow period: (5 days)[27]
    • Voting period: (14 days)[27]
      • Voting starts at 00:00 UTC on the second business day of the week in San Francisco (in San Francisco local time, 4 PM on the first business day of the week).[28]
    • Scrutineering: No deadline for releasing or announcing the results.[29]
  • Guides: Allowed[30] but with some strong suggestions.[31] Must be allowed reasonable visibility.[32][33] In the case of dispute about the content of an election guide, the election commissioners are empowered to make a binding decision for the purpose of ensuring a fair election and compliance with acceptable uses of election guides. Such decisions are to be based on core Wikipedia policies and guidelines, Arbitration Committee Election RFC decisions and their own discretion.[34] The electoral commissioners can remove content from guides, including (partially) blanking a guide, add official commentary to guides, and remove a guide from the official templates and/or categories.[35] Candidates do not have an explicit right of reply to comments about them made in election guides.[36] The content of election guides must comply with all relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, including but not limited to Wikipedia:No personal attacks and Wikipedia:Civility.[37] Any editor may add guides to official templates or categories for guides.[38] A candidate who writes a guide must declare in the guide that they are a candidate.[39]
  • General Guide: Wikipedia:5 Minute guide to ArbCom Elections created and advertised.[40]
  • Voter Suffrage: A voter needs 150 mainspace edits on English Wikipedia by 1 November, 10 live edits on English Wikipedia (in any namespace) within one year of 1 November, and to have registered an account before 1 October,[41] not currently sitewide[42] blocked at the time of voting.[43][44] These requirements must be met from the same named account.[45] Vanished or renamed users carrying the name "Vanished" or "Renamed" are excluded from eligibility to vote.[46] Bots are excluded from eligibility to vote.[47]
  • Voting System: Voting system of (Support/Abstaim/Oppose) will be used[48][49] with percentages calculated via Support/(Support + Oppose).[50] Secret ballots[51] via SecurePoll will be used.[δ] If a candidate withdraws from the election between the start of voting and the end of voting, then the final results will be calculated as if the withdrawn candidate never ran.[52]
  • Scrutineering: 3 functionaries[ε] from outside en.wiki as scrutineers.[53] Scrutineers will strike all the votes cast by any sockmaster who voted multiple times, independent of whether the editor was blocked before or after casting the votes.[54]
  • Ordering: The order of candidates is shuffled randomly whenever the page is purged.[55][ζ] Candidates are also ordered randomly on the ballot.[56]
  • Warning: Potential candidates are warned of risks from standing for election with message similar to that on WP:CUOS2015 to be incorporated into the candidate instructions page.[57]
  • Questions: No standard questions for every candidates.[58] There is a limit of 2 questions per editor per candidate, with reasonable[η] follow-up questions.[59] Questions can only be posed to candidates after the nomination period is over.[60] Candidates are not obligated to answer every question.[61] Electoral Commission (as a group, not individually) have the discretion to remove offensive (e.g. WP:POLEMIC-style statements) or off-topic questions from question pages, following discussion among the Electoral Commission members,[62] but has no authority to reword questions to the candidate.[63] Any candidate that feels a question should be removed/reviewed should contact the electoral commission to review the question, and not take action themselves.[64] While other editors can obviously remove clear vandalism, egregious personal attacks, etc., the determination of what is inappropriate or off-topic is clearly to be left to the Commission.[62] Guidelines for content allowed and disallowed on candidate pages was introduced, with the electoral commission empowered to make decisions on inclusion or removal of related content, inappropriate questions are only to be removed by their author or members of the electoral commission.[65]
  • Advertising: Traditional notices posted to various community noticeboards,[66] watchlist notice,[67] and, optionally, central notice banner at the discretion of the election commission[67][68] for the election in general (not individual candidates);[69] the Site Notice should not be used;[67] Mass Message – eligible voters, have edited last 12 months before nominations,[70] but excluding site[71]-blocked users where the block duration extends past the the elections, globally b/locked accounts, bots, and accounts in Category:All Wikipedia bots, Category:Wikipedia alternative accounts, Category:Wikipedia doppelganger accounts, and Category:Deceased Wikipedians.[72] Extra care should be taken in wordings of advertising to make sure it is neutral.[73]
  • Blocking: Blocking policy applies normally, but a candidate shouldn't be disqualified for being blocked (except for sockpuppetry) after nominating themselves.[74]
  1. ^ As the number of arbitrators cannot be increased, this procedure is only applicable when arbitrators resign or are removed from their position.
  2. ^ a b WMF's policy.
  3. ^ No community evaluation is allowed until the RFC has been opened.[22]
  4. ^ De facto since 2009.
  5. ^ Stewards de facto since pre-2012
  6. ^ Consensus found on the 2020 ACE is repealed due to the technical inability to apply it.
  7. ^ In the case of dispute about what is a reasonable follow-up question the Election Commissioner's decision is final.[59]

References

  1. ^ a b 2019#Number of arbitrators
  2. ^ a b 2013#Length of terms
  3. ^ 2013#Handling of the 8th Vacant Seat
  4. ^ 2012#How should vacancies be handled?; 2022 talk page discussion
  5. ^ 2018#Percentage support needed for appointment
  6. ^ 2012#How many seats should be 2-year terms, and how many 1-year terms?
  7. ^ 2019#Runners-up to step up to fill vacancies
  8. ^ 2019#Procedures for emergency elections
  9. ^ 2023#"Candidates" bullet point
  10. ^ 2013#Blocking candidates
  11. ^ 2023#Blocks and bans which disqualify candidates
  12. ^ 2012#What should the requirements be for candidates to run for the election?
  13. ^ 2014#Disclosure of Previous/Alternate Accounts of the candidates
  14. ^ Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Archive 159 § RFC: Multiple roles for active arbitrators
  15. ^ 2019#Withdrawn/disqualified candidates
  16. ^ 2020#Withdrawn candidates
  17. ^ 2012#How should we deal with unforeseen problems?
  18. ^ 2024 § Proposal 3: Change qualifications for the Electoral Commission
  19. ^ 2019#Electoral commission's scope of purview/access
  20. ^ 2012#How should we deal with unforeseen problems?
  21. ^ 2020#Deadlines
  22. ^ a b 2020#Commission2a
  23. ^ 2014#How should the selection of the election commission be conducted?
  24. ^ 2024 § Proposal 2: Start nomination process one week earlier
  25. ^ 2015#How should nomination deadlines be handled?
  26. ^ 2020#Nomination timing
  27. ^ a b 2013#Schedule
  28. ^ 2021#Voting start date
  29. ^ 2012#Deadline for releasing the results
  30. ^ 2020#Guides7a
  31. ^ 2012#How should voter guides be handled for the election?
  32. ^ 2014#Should voter guides be included in the official template?
  33. ^ 2020#Guides8a
  34. ^ 2020#Guides2a
  35. ^ 2020#Guides3
  36. ^ 2020#Guides4a
  37. ^ 2020#Guides5a
  38. ^ 2020#Guides6a
  39. ^ 2021#Guides written by candidates
  40. ^ 2018#Write a short general guide to voting
  41. ^ 2019#Voter activity requirements
  42. ^ 2021#Partially blocked voters
  43. ^ 2012#What should the requirements be to vote in the election?
  44. ^ 2011#What should the requirements be to vote in the election?
  45. ^ 2020#Suffrage2a
  46. ^ 2020#Voter suffrage
  47. ^ 2021#Voter suffrage - exclude bots
  48. ^ 2017#Should_oppose_votes_be_abolished?
  49. ^ 2024 § Proposal 1: Rename neutral option to abstain
  50. ^ 2012#What should the method of voting be?
  51. ^ 2012#Secret balloting?
  52. ^ 2021#Withdrawn candidates
  53. ^ 2015#Should adjustments be made to expedite the election results?
  54. ^ 2022#Striking of votes by sockpuppeteers
  55. ^ 2022#List of candidates on the Candidates page is shuffled randomly when it is purged (current status quo)
  56. ^ 2016#Should the names of candidates appear in randomized order, and if not, how should they be ordered?
  57. ^ 2016#Should we warn the candidates about the risks involved?
  58. ^ 2014#The standard questions
  59. ^ a b 2020#Questions to candidates
  60. ^ 2022#Start questions to candidates after nomination period ends
  61. ^ 2014#Should there be a limit to the number of questions posed to candidates?
  62. ^ a b 2017#Should election committee members be allowed to remove questions where appropriate?
  63. ^ 2019#Questions to candidates must be phrased neutrally
  64. ^ 2019#Dealing with possibly inappropriate questions
  65. ^ 2020#CandidateQs3a
  66. ^ 2012#Advertising
  67. ^ a b c 2021#Remove Central Notice / Site Notice advertisement options
  68. ^ 2016#Should we continue or modify the practice of notifying eligible voters by mass message?
  69. ^ 2015#Should there be a change in the methods of publicity for the election?
  70. ^ 2018#Mass message
  71. ^ 2021#Advertisements to such
  72. ^ 2019#Mass message
  73. ^ 2014#Should the site notice be changed when voting begins?
  74. ^ 2013#Blocking candidates

List of past pre-election RfCs

[edit]
Main category: Wikipedia Arbitration Committee elections requests for comment

Notes

[edit]
Footnotes
  1. ^ During the pre-election RfC, the community may decide to adjust the size of the Committee by appointing more or fewer arbitrators. Currently, the community tries to appoint however many arbitrators needed to have 15 members of the Arbitration Committee (was changed from 15 to 13 in WP:ACERFC2018 and back to 15 in WP:ACERFC2019). However, the arbitration policy does not prescribe any maximum or minimum number of arbitrators that may sit on the Committee in a given year.
  2. ^ Currently, the community has adopted the following criteria from past pre-election RfCs. An editor is eligible to stand as a candidate if the editor:
    1. has a registered account and has made at least 500 mainspace edits before 1 November in the year of the election
    2. is not prevented from submitting their candidacy by a block or ban,
    3. meets the Wikimedia Foundation's criteria for access to non-public data, is willing to sign the Foundation's non-public information confidentiality agreement, and
    4. has disclosed any previous or alternate accounts in their election statements (legitimate accounts which have been declared to the Arbitration Committee before the close of nominations do not need to be publicly disclosed).
  3. ^ Currently, the community has adopted the following criteria from past pre-election RfCs. An editor is eligible to vote if the editor:
    1. has registered an account before 00:00, 28 October in the year of the election
    2. has made at least 150 mainspace edits before 00:00, 1 November in the year of the election and,
    3. is not blocked from the English Wikipedia at the time of their vote.
  4. ^ From past-election RfCs, the following practices have been adopted: watchlist notices, notices on village pumps and other highly visible noticeboards, mass-message to all eligible candidates who have made at least 1 edit in the 12 months preceding the election, publicity in the Signpost. Candidate-specific "ads" are disallowed.
  5. ^ According to the 2017 selection process, "The mandate of the Electoral Commission is to deal with any unforeseen problems that may arise in the 2017 Arbitration Committee election process, and to adjudicate any disputes during the election. However, members of the Election Commission should intervene only when there is a problem that needs resolving, and either discussion is not working, the rules are unclear, or there isn't time for a lengthy discussion."
References
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_election_requests_for_comment&oldid=1255797428"