Jump to content

Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard

Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by L235 (talk | contribs) at 17:01, 18 April 2018 (→‎Motion: Misuse of Administrator Tools: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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.

Announcement archives:
  • 0 (2008-12 – 2009-01)
  • 1 (to 2009-02)
  • 2 (to 2009-05)
  • 3 (to 2009-06)
  • 4 (to 2009-07)
  • 5 (to 2009-12)
  • 6 (to 2010-12)
  • 7 (to 2011-12)
  • 8 (to 2012-12)
  • 9 (to 2013-12)
  • 10 (to 2015-12)
  • 11 (to 2018-04)
  • 12 (to 2020-08)
  • 13 (to 2023-03)
  • 14 (to present)

Community comment requested – ArbCom discretionary sanctions procedure modification

The Arbitration Committee is considering adopting the following change to the Committee's discretionary sanctions procedures to allow the community to consider a discretionary sanction prior to an appeal directly to the Arbitration Committee:

  • In the section Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Discretionary_sanctions#Appeals by sanctioned editors, insert below the existing text:
  • In the section Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Discretionary_sanctions#Important notes, in the second bullet point: While asking the enforcing administrator and seeking reviews at AN or AE are not mandatory prior to seeking a decision from the committee, Once the committee has reviewed a request, further substantive review at any forum is barred. The sole exception is editors under an active sanction who may still request an easing or removal of the sanction on the grounds that said sanction is no longer needed, but such requests may only be made once every six months, or whatever longer period the committee may specify.

The community is encouraged to provide any comments on the motion page. For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 18:16, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Discuss this at: Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions#Motion:_Discretionary_sanctions_appeals_update

An arbitration case regarding civility in infobox discussions has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

  1. Any uninvolved administrator may apply infobox probation as a discretionary sanction. See the full decision for details of infobox probation.
  2. Standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all discussions about infoboxes and to edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes.
  3. Cassianto is indefinitely placed on infobox probation.
  4. The Arbitration Committee recommends that well-publicized community discussions be held to address whether to adopt a policy or guideline addressing what factors should weigh in favor of or against including an infobox in a given article and how those factors should be weighted.
  5. All editors are reminded to maintain decorum and civility when engaged in discussions about infoboxes, and to not turn discussions about a single article's infobox into a discussion about infoboxes in general.
  6. For canvassing editors to this case, Volvlogia is admonished. They are warned that any further instances of canvassing related to arbitration processes will likely result in sanctions.

For the arbitration committee, GoldenRing (talk) 08:57, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Archived discussion at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard/Archive 37#Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility in infobox discussions closed

GoldenRing confirmed as a full clerk

The Arbitration Committee is pleased to confirm trainee clerk GoldenRing (talk · contribs) as a full clerk of the Arbitration Committee.

We also express our thanks and gratitude to the arbitration clerks for their diligent assistance with the arbitration process. The arbitration clerk team is often in need of new members, and any editor who would like to join the clerk team is welcome to apply by e-mail to clerks-l@lists.wikimedia.org.

For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 10:08, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Archived discussion at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard/Archive 37#GoldenRing confirmed as a full clerk

MapSGV topic ban lifted

The discretionary sanctions appeal by MapSGV is sustained, and the topic-ban imposed on MapSGV on March 2, 2018 is lifted. MapSGV remains on notice that the India/Pakistan topic-area is subject to discretionary sanctions, and is reminded to edit in accordance with all applicable policies.

Passed 6 to 2 with 1 abstention by motion at 17:35, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
Archived discussion at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard/Archive 37#MapSGV topic ban lifted

For the Arbitration Committee, Miniapolis 17:50, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Motion: Misuse of Administrator Tools

The Arbitration Committee has resolved by motion that:

The Arbitration Committee reminds administrators that they should generally not use administrative tools in situations where good-faith editors disagree about how a content policy should be applied and the administrator holds a strong opinion on the dispute. Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs) is admonished for edit-warring in support of their preferred version of Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity/Outreach/April 2018 ([1][2][3]). He is advised that future similar conduct may result in sanctions.

For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 17:01, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Motion: Misuse of Administrator Tools