Wikipedia:Arbitration policy/Proposed amendment
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The below is proposed as a set of alterations to the Arbitration policy which, together, form an amendment designed to speed up the Arbitration Committee's work.
It is subject to a ratification vote, active from November 14, 2004 – November 28, 2004.
Contents |
[edit] Jurisdiction
Change Line 3
- 2. Where a dispute has not gone through Mediation, the Arbitrators may refer the dispute to the Mediation Committee if it believes Mediation is likely to help.
... to:
- 2. Where a dispute has not gone through Mediation, or the earlier steps in the dispute resolution process, the Committee may reject, suggesting that such steps should be taken first, if they believe that it is likely to help.
Add Line 8
- 7. The Committee has jurisdiction over the official mailing list "WikiEN-l" and the English Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/) only; its jurisdiction does not cover the IRC channels, private email exchanges, nor any other arena of conflict or dispute.
Additional amendment to Line 8 [added by Snowspinner]
: IRC evidence and evidence gathered from private e-mails may, however, be used to support a claim being made about actions on Wikipedia itself.
Add Line 9
- 8. As a body reporting to the Wikimedia Foundation Board, which has the ability to direct the Committee to reach a verdict or otherwise act in a particular way, the Committee has no jurisdiction over the members of the Board.
[edit] Requests
Change Line 2
- The Arbitrators will accept a case if four or more Arbitrators have voted to hear it. The Arbitrators will reject a case if one week has passed without this occurring AND four or more Arbitrators have voted not to hear it. Individual Arbitrators will provide a rationale for their vote if so moved, or if specifically requested.
... to:
- The Arbitrators will accept a case if four or more Arbitrators have voted to hear it. The Arbitrators will reject a case if four or more Arbitrators have voted not to hear it. Individual Arbitrators will provide a rationale for their vote if so moved, or if specifically requested.
[edit] Hearing
Change Line 1
- Litigants involved in cases heard by the Arbitration Committee will present their cases and evidence on a page titled something like "Case of [Username]". Litigants shall be defined as the user or users named in the case or any advocates they identify.
... to:
- Litigants involved in cases heard by the Arbitration Committee will present their cases and evidence as directed on a sub-page of the case page, itself a sub-page of Requests for Arbitration, titled as "[Username]" or "[UsernameA] vs. [UsernameB]" or the like, at the discretion of the Arbitrator responsible for opening the case. Litigants shall be defined as the user or users named in the case or any advocates they identify.
[edit] Judgment
Rename Section to "Judgement" (oops)
Change Line 1
- Once the hearing has ended, the Arbitrators will release one or more detailed Arbitrators' opinions on the case. The Arbitrators will also release a judgment detailing their resolution to the dispute, which will be binding. The Arbitrators will seek to reach consensus amongst themselves on this remedy. If consensus can not be reached, a vote will be taken, with the view of the majority of the Arbitrators prevailing. Majority shall be defined as a decision supported by more than 50% of all Arbitrators who were active at the time the decision was made (see Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee for the current number of active members). If no option has majority support, no decision will be made, and no action will be taken.
... to:
- Once the hearing has ended, the Arbitrators will construct a consensus opinion made out of Principles (general statements about policy), Findings of Fact (findings specific to the case), Remedies (binding Decrees on what should be done), and Enforcements (conditional Decrees on what can further be done if the terms are met). Each part will be subject to a simple-majority vote amongst active non-recused Arbitrators, the list of active members being that listed on Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee. Dissenting votes for and opinions on parts that pass will be noted. In the event of no options for action gaining majority support, no decision will be made, and no action will be taken.
[edit] Amendment
Add Section "Amendment"
Add Lines 1+
- Amendments to the policy are subject to the following rules:
- Exact suggested wording changes should be suggested on a page, and the presence of the page made well known.
- Discussion should continue for at least a fortnight.
- A small straw-poll should be taken of those discussing the suggested amendment; if there is strong support (>70%) for this amendment to go to a vote, a widely-announced full vote should be taken.
- The vote shall be considered passed when at least 100 users have voted, and at least 80% of the votes are in support
- When the vote has passed, the Arbitration policy shall be altered to reflect the amendment. This should be widely noted.
- No changes, no matter how small or insignificant, may be made to the policy without the due process of an amendment being made in the above manner.
