Wikipedia:Arbitration/Policy: Difference between revisions

Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→‎Hearing: Update a link: that policy page was moved some time ago.
ds is no longer a thing, the whole contentious topics procedure is includeded in ARBCOM/Procedures
 
(69 intermediate revisions by 38 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Policies for the Arbitration Committee}}
<noinclude>{{pp-semi-protected|small=yes}}</noinclude>
<noinclude>{{pp-semi-protected|small=yes}}</noinclude>
{{redirect|WP:AP|article probation|Wikipedia:General sanctions|attack pages|Wikipedia:Attack page|the Amusement Parks WikiProject|Wikipedia:WikiProject Amusement Parks|the autopatrolled userright|Wikipedia:Autopatrolled}}
{{message box|message=''Please note that a draft revised version of this policy is available for comment at '''[[WP:Arbitration/Policy/Draft]]'''''.|backgroundcolor=cyan}}
{{policy|WP:AP|WP:ARBPOL|subcategory=procedural|textoverride='''This page documents a formally ratified English Wikipedia [[Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines|policy]].'''<br><div style="font-size:90%;">Any changes must be proposed through the [[#Ratification and amendment|formal amendment process]].</div>}}
{| class="messagebox"
|-
| [[Image:Green check.png|30px]]
| This page documents the operating rules adopted by English Wikipedia's '''[[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee|Arbitration Committee]]'''. It should not be edited without considerable forethought and consensus among Committee members.
| {{shortcut|WP:AP}}
|}
{{procedural policy}}
{{ArbCom navigation}}
{{ArbCom navigation}}
{{redirect|WP:AP|article probation|Wikipedia:General sanctions|attack pages|Wikipedia:Attack page|Amusement Parks WikiProject|Wikipedia:WikiProject Amusement Parks}}


This policy governs the Arbitration Committee, arbitration proceedings and arbitration processes. It was ratified by the community on 13 June 2011 and last amended on 23 May 2023. An extension of the arbitration policy, for [[Wikipedia:CheckUser|CheckUser]] and [[Wikipedia:Oversight|Oversight]] permissions, is at [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/CheckUser and Oversight]].
The '''Arbitration policy''' acts as a guideline for the workings of the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee|Arbitration Committee]] (ArbCom). These policies are now fully adopted, but subject to amendment. See the [[Wikipedia talk:Arbitration policy/Archive 1|Arbitration policy comments]], the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration policy ratification vote|Arbitration policy ratification vote]], and the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration rationale|Arbitration rationale]].


Procedures that supplement and implement this policy are at [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures]] and [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Clerks/Procedures]].
It has been indicated elsewhere (see ''e.g.'' the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration policy ratification vote#What will be the effects of this vote?|Arbitration policy ratification vote]]) that the "''Arbitration Policy may be tweaked as the Committee gains experience and learns better ways of doing things.''"


== The Arbitration Committee ==
Several important decisions have been made in previous cases that may have an impact on current cases; see [[/Past decisions]].


== Scope ==
{{anchor|Scope}}
=== Scope and responsibilities ===
The Committee reserve the right to hear or not hear any dispute, at their discretion. The following are general guidelines which will apply to most cases, but the Committee may make exceptions.


The Arbitration Committee of the English Wikipedia has the following duties and responsibilities:
# The Committee will hear disputes that have been referred to Arbitration by [[Wikipedia:Mediation Committee|the Mediation Committee]].
# To act as a final binding decision-maker primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve;
# Where a dispute has not gone through [[Wikipedia:Mediation|mediation]], or the earlier steps in the [[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution|dispute resolution process]], the Arbitrators may refer the dispute to the Mediation Committee if it believes mediation is likely to help.
# To hear appeals from blocked, banned, or otherwise restricted users;<ref group=note>The Arbitration Committee resolved by [[Special:Permalink/1207074962#Motion:_appeals_of_CheckUser_blocks_generally_not_heard|motion]] on 14 February 2024 to hear appeals from editors who are (a) blocked for reasons that are unsuitable for public discussion, or (b) blocked or banned by Arbitration and Arbitration Enforcement decisions. Examples of reasons that are unsuitable for public discussion include blocks (i) marked as an [[Wikipedia:Blocking_policy#Oversight_blocks|Oversight block]], or (ii) based on CheckUser evidence, and where there exists disagreement between checkusers as to the interpretation of the technical evidence. It is expected that blocks marked as a [[Wikipedia:Blocking_policy#CheckUser_blocks|CheckUser block]] are by default appealed on-wiki; however, the Arbitration Committee may hear appeals of such blocks if there are compelling reasons to hear an appeal in private.</ref>
# The Committee will occasionally request advice from [[User:Jimbo Wales|Jimbo Wales]] on whether to hear a particular dispute.
# To handle requests (other than self-requests) for removal of administrative tools;<ref group=note>Following a [[Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/suspend sysop rights of inactive admins|request for comment]] in July 2011, the community resolved that administrator accounts which had been inactive for over a year (defined as making "no edits or administrative actions for at least 12 months") may also be [[Wikipedia:Administrators#Procedural removal for inactive administrators|desysopped by a community process]] independent of the Committee.</ref>
# The Committee will primarily investigate interpersonal disputes.
# To resolve matters unsuitable for public discussion for privacy, legal, or similar reasons;{{anchor|scopeprivate}}
# The Committee will hear or not hear disputes according to the wishes of the community, where there is a consensus.
# To approve and remove access to (i) [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/CheckUser and Oversight|CheckUser and Oversight tools]] and (ii) mailing lists maintained by the Arbitration Committee.
# The Committee will not hear disputes where they have not been requested to rule.
# The Committee has no jurisdiction over official actions of the Wikimedia Foundation.


=== Selection and appointment ===
== Rules ==
Members of the Committee are appointed following [[WP:ACE|annual elections]] organized and run by the community. Candidates must:
# Meet the Wikimedia Foundation's [[wmf:Access to nonpublic personal data policy|criteria for access to non-public personal data]] and confirm in their election statement they will fully comply with the criteria; and
# Disclose any alternate accounts in their election statements. [[WP:SOCK#LEGIT|Legitimate]] accounts which have been declared to the Arbitration Committee prior to the close of nominations need not be publicly disclosed.
In exceptional circumstances, the Committee may call interim elections, in a format similar to that of the regular annual elections, if it determines that arbitrator resignations or inactivity have created an immediate need for additional arbitrators.


=== Conduct of arbitrators===
The Committee will decide cases according to the following guidelines, which they will apply with common sense and discretion, and an eye to the expectations of the community:
{{policy shortcut|WP:ARBCOND}}
Arbitrators are expected to:
# Act with integrity and good faith at all times;
# Respond promptly and appropriately to questions from other arbitrators, or from the community, about conduct which appears to conflict with their trusted roles;
# Participate conscientiously in the Committee's activities and deliberations, advising the Committee of upcoming inactivity if that inactivity will likely last more than a week; and
# Preserve in appropriate confidence the contents of private correspondence sent to the Committee and the Committee's internal discussions and deliberations.
Any arbitrator who repeatedly or grossly fails to meet the expectations outlined above may be suspended or removed by Committee resolution supported by two-thirds of all arbitrators excluding:
# The arbitrator facing suspension or removal, and;
# Any inactive arbitrator who does not respond within 30 days to attempts to solicit their feedback on the resolution through all known methods of communication.


=== Recusal of arbitrators ===
# Established Wikipedia customs and common practices.
{{policy shortcut|WP:RECUSAL}}
# Wikipedia's "laws": terms of use, submission standards, bylaws, general disclaimer, and copyright license.
An arbitrator may [[wikt:recusal|recuse]] from any case, or from any aspect of a case, with or without explanation and is expected to do so where they have a significant conflict of interest. Typically, a conflict of interest includes significant personal involvement in the substance of the dispute or significant personal involvement with one of the parties. Previous routine editor, administrator or arbitrator interactions are not usually grounds for recusal.
# Sensible "real world" laws.


An editor who believes an arbitrator should recuse will first post a message on the arbitrator's talk page asking the arbitrator to recuse and giving reasons. Should the arbitrator not respond, or not recuse, the user may refer the request to the Committee for a ruling. Requests for recusal after a case has entered the voting stage will not be granted, except in extraordinary circumstances.
Former decisions will [[Wikipedia:No binding decisions|not be binding]] on the Committee – rather, they intend to learn from experience.


== Transparency ==
=== Transparency and confidentiality ===
* Arbitrators with [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet#Alternate_accounts|multiple accounts]] on Wikipedia will disclose the usernames of those accounts to the rest of the Committee, and to [[user:Jimbo Wales|Jimbo Wales]], but are not required to disclose them publicly.
* Each Arbitrator will make their own decision about how much personal information about themselves they are willing to share, both publicly, and with the rest of the Committee.
* Arbitrators take evidence in public, but reserve the right to take some evidence in private in exceptional circumstances.
* Deliberations are often held privately, but the Committee will make detailed rationale for all their decisions related to cases public.


Committee deliberations are often held privately, though the Committee will make public detailed rationales for decisions related to cases, unless the matter is unsuitable for public discussion for privacy, legal or similar reasons. The Committee treats as private all communications sent to it, or sent by a Committee member in the performance of their duties.
== Requests ==
The Arbitration Committee accepts [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration|requests for Arbitration]] from anyone, and will decide whether to accept cases based on its Jurisdiction as described previously.


=== Procedures and roles ===
For a case to be considered accepted and therefore opened by a [[WP:AC/C|Clerk]], it must meet the following criteria:
* The request must have four net votes to accept, or have an [[absolute majority]] of arbitrators voting to accept.
* The request must have received its first instance of four net votes to accept more than 24 hours ago.
* The request must have been filed more than 48 hours ago.
If all of these criteria are met, the case can be opened. This procedure is ignored where a case is directly referred to the Committee by Jimbo Wales, or where an expedited open is explicitly requested by a sufficient number of Arbitrators with due cause.


The Committee may create or modify its procedures, provided they are consistent with its [[#Scope|scope]]; and may form subcommittees or designate individuals for particular tasks or roles. Where appropriate, the Committee may invite community comment on intended changes prior to implementing them.
In the case of users whose editing privileges on Wikipedia have been revoked, they can request Arbitration by emailing a member of the Committee.


The Committee maintains a [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Clerks|panel of clerks]] to assist with the smooth running of its functions. The clerks' functions include the administration of arbitration cases and management of all the Committee's pages and subpages; enforcing Committee decisions; implementing procedures; and enforcing good standards of conduct and decorum on the Committee's pages.
== Who takes part? ==
All Arbitrators will hear all cases, barring any personal leaves or [[Wiktionary:Recuse|recusals]]. If an Arbitrator believes they have a conflict of interest in a case, they shall recuse themselves immediately from participation in the case. Users who believe an Arbitrator has a [[conflict of interest]] should post an appropriate statement during the Arbitration process. The Arbitrator in question will seriously consider it and make a response. Arbitrators will not be required to recuse themselves for trivial reasons &ndash; merely reverting an edit of a user involved in a case undergoing Arbitration, for example, will likely not be seen as a serious enough conflict of interest to require recusal.


== Hearing ==
== Arbitration proceedings ==
Participants 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 [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration|requests for arbitration]], titled as "[Article name]" or "[Username]" or "[UsernameA]&ndash;[UsernameB]" or the like, at the discretion of the Arbitrator or Clerk responsible for opening the case. ''Parties'' shall be defined as the user or users named in the case or any advocates they identify.


=== Jurisdiction ===
Evidence and brief arguments may be added to the case pages by disputants, interested third parties, and the Arbitrators themselves. Such evidence is usually only heard by the Committee if it has come from easily verifiable sources – primarily in the form of Wikipedia edits ("[[meta:Help:Diff|diffs]]"), log entries for [[Special:Log|MediaWiki actions]] or web server access, posts to the [[Wikipedia:Mailing lists|official mailing lists]], or other Wikimedia sources. The Committee reserves the right to disregard certain items of evidence or certain lines of argument, most notably if they are unverifiable.


The Committee has jurisdiction within the English Wikipedia.
Due to the [[WP:MC/P#The_privileged_nature_of_mediation|privileged nature of mediation]], editors' behavior and comments during [[WP:MEDCOM|official]] [[WP:RFM|mediation attempts]] may not be used against them in any resulting Arbitration case.


The Committee has no jurisdiction over: (i) official actions of the [[Wikimedia Foundation]] or its staff; (ii) Wikimedia projects other than the English Wikipedia; or (iii) conduct outside the English Wikipedia.
There is usually a grace period of one week between the opening of the case and the beginning of deliberations by the Committee.


The Committee may take notice of conduct outside its jurisdiction when making decisions about conduct on the English Wikipedia if such outside conduct impacts or has the potential to impact adversely upon the English Wikipedia or its editors.
== Injunctions ==
At any time between the opening of a case and its closure, Arbitrators may propose temporary injunctions, which are binding decisions that shall be in effect until a case closes. Such injunctions take the form of remedies outlined below and are enforceable by blocks of appropriate length (usually no more than 24 hours for a first offense) against parties violating the injunction.


The Committee retains jurisdiction over all matters heard by it, including associated enforcement processes, and may, at its sole discretion, revisit any proceeding at any time.
An injunction is considered to have passed when four or more Arbitrators have voted in favor of it, where a vote in opposition negates a vote in support. A grace period of twenty-four hours is usually observed between the fourth affirmative vote and the enactment of the injunction; however, Arbitrators may, in exceptional circumstances, vote to implement an injunction immediately if four or more Arbitrators express a desire to do so in their votes, or if a majority of Arbitrators active on the case have already voted to support the injunction.


== Final decision ==
=== Requesting arbitration ===
During deliberations, the Committee 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. Arbitrators who abstain from a particular part will be treated as having recused from that part of the decision, which may lower the majority needed to pass that part. In the event of no options for action gaining majority support, no decision will be made, and no action will be taken.


Requests for arbitration must be presented in the manner designated by the Committee. The Committee may accept or decline any matter at its sole discretion; it will take into account, but will not be bound by, the views of the parties to the request and other interested users.
Principles are general statements of policy on Wikipedia, and need not assume any particular format; they will, however, reference appropriate Wikipedia policy pages where applicable.


=== Forms of proceeding ===
Findings of fact will be of a form similar to:
; Standard proceedings{{anchor|Standard proceedings}} : By default, hearings are public and follow the procedures published on the relevant arbitration pages.
* XXX has/has not engaged in YYY behavior [in violation of ZZZ rule]. ''(diff of incident 1)'' ''(diff of incident 2)'' ''(further diffs)''
; Summary proceedings{{anchor|Summary proceedings}} : Where the facts of a matter are substantially undisputed, the Committee may resolve the dispute by motion.
; Private hearings{{anchor|Private hearings}} : In exceptional circumstances, typically where significant privacy, harassment, or legal issues are involved, the Committee may hold a hearing in private. The parties will be notified of the private hearing and be given a reasonable opportunity to respond to what is said about them before a decision is made.
; {{anchor|appeals}}Appeals : Appeals by blocked, banned, or similarly restricted users are usually conducted by email.


=== Participation ===
Remedies will be of a form similar to:
* "User X is cautioned against making personal attacks even under severe provocation."
* "User X is limited to one revert per twenty four hour period on article A."
* "User X is placed on personal attack parole for a period of Y; if user X engages in edits which an administrator believes to be personal attacks, they may be banned for a short period of time of up to Z."
* "User X is prohibited from editing group Y of articles for a period of Z."
* "User X is banned from editing Wikipedia for a period of Y."


Decisions are reached by a majority vote of active, non-recused arbitrators. An arbitrator whose term expires while a case is pending may remain active on that case until its conclusion. Newly appointed arbitrators may become active on any matter before the Committee with immediate effect from the date of their appointment.
Enforcements will be of a form similar to:
* "If User X edits group Y of articles, they may be banned for a short period of time of up to one week."


Statements may be added to case pages by any interested editor. Editors are expected to respond to statements about themselves; failure to do so may result in decisions being made without their participation. All editors are required to act reasonably, civilly, and with decorum on arbitration case pages, and may face sanctions if they fail to do so.
Remedies and enforcements, once the case has closed as described below, may be enforced by intervention by [[Wikipedia:administrators|administrators]], usually in the form of [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocks]] on accounts and IP addresses.


=== Admissibility of evidence===
Once a decision has been compiled, and a sufficient number of Arbitrators have reviewed the case and cast their votes, a non-recused Arbitrator may initiate a motion to close the case. A motion to close shall be considered to have passed once four Arbitrators have voted in favour of closing the case; each opposing vote shall negate one supporting vote. A grace period of a minimum of twenty-four hours shall be observed between the fourth net vote to close the case and the going into effect of those remedies passed in the case, unless four or more Arbitrators vote to close the case immediately, or if a majority of Arbitrators active on the case have voted to close the case.


In all proceedings, admissible evidence includes:
In due course, the Committee will review the possibility of additional software-based security measures, but will not request such features at the present time, relying instead on decrees.
# All Wikipedia edits and log entries, including deleted or otherwise hidden edits and log entries;
# Edits and log entries from Wikimedia projects other than the English Wikipedia, where appropriate; and
# Posts to [[Wikipedia:Mailing lists|official mailing lists]].


Evidence from [[Wikipedia:Mediation Committee|official mediation]] is admissible only with the express prior written consent of the Mediation Committee.<ref group=note>The Mediation Committee was disbanded on November 12, 2018 as a result of [[Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Archive_154#RFC:Close_MedCom?|an RfC]].</ref>
Remedies and enforcement actions may be appealed to, and are subject to modification by, [[Jimbo Wales]]. An exception is that if a case involves review of one of Jimbo's own administrator or steward actions, Jimbo has agreed to accept the Committee's decision as binding.


Evidence based on private communications (including, but not limited to, other websites, forums, chat rooms, IRC logs, email correspondence) is admissible only by prior consent of the Committee and only in exceptional circumstances.
== Unresolved issues ==

Deliberately left unspecified at this time.
Evidence may be submitted privately, but the Committee normally expects evidence to be posted publicly unless there are compelling reasons not to do so. The Committee will decide whether to admit each submission of private evidence on its own merits and, if admitted, the evidence will be considered at a [[#Private hearings|private hearing]].
See the sub-pages for discussion:

* [[Wikipedia:Arbitration policy/Election of Arbitrators|Election of Arbitrators]]
=== Temporary injunctions ===
* [[Wikipedia:Arbitration policy/Procedure for changing this policy|Procedure for changing this policy]]

At any time between the request for a case being made and the closure of the case, the Committee may issue temporary injunctions, restricting the conduct of the parties, or users generally, for the duration of the case.

=== Format of decisions ===

Decisions are written in clear, concise standard English and usually: (i) outline the salient principles, (ii) make findings of fact, (iii) set out remedies and rulings, and (iv) specify any enforcement arrangements. Where the meaning of any provision is unclear to any arbitrator, the parties, or other interested editors, it will be clarified upon request.

=== Policy and precedent ===

The arbitration process is not a vehicle for creating new policy by fiat. The Committee's decisions may interpret existing policy and guidelines, recognise and call attention to standards of user conduct, or create procedures through which policy and guidelines may be enforced. The Committee does not rule on content, but may propose means by which community resolution of a content dispute can be facilitated.

While the Committee will typically take into account its earlier decisions when deciding new cases, previous decisions do not create binding precedent. As community policies, guidelines and norms evolve over time, previous decisions will be taken into account only to the extent that they remain relevant in the current context.

=== Appeal of decisions ===

Any editor may ask the Committee to reconsider or amend a ruling, which the Committee may accept or decline at its discretion. The Committee may require a minimum time to have elapsed since the enactment of the ruling, or since any prior request for reconsideration, before reviewing it.

== Ratification and amendment ==

Once adopted by the Committee, this policy will undergo formal ratification through a community referendum and will enter into force once it receives majority support, with at least one hundred editors voting in favour of adopting it. Until this policy is ratified, the existing arbitration policy remains in effect.

Amendments to this policy require an identical ratification process. Proposed amendments may be submitted for ratification only after being approved by a majority vote of the Committee, or having been requested by a petition signed by at least one hundred editors in good standing.

{{anchor|own_policies}}
The Committee is responsible for formulating its own [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures|processes and procedures]] under this policy, which do not require ratification.


== See also ==
== See also ==
* [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee]]
* [[Wikipedia:Arbitration guide]]
* [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration]]
* [[Meta:Arbitration Committee]]
* [[Meta:Arbitration Committee]]
* Arbitration policy (April 2004): [[Special:PermaLink/3123103|Ratified ArbPol 9 April 2004]], [[Wikipedia:Arbitration rationale|Arbitration rationale]], [[Wikipedia talk:Arbitration policy/Archive 1|Policy comments]], [[Wikipedia:Arbitration policy ratification vote|Ratification vote]], [[Wikipedia:Arbitration policy/Election of Arbitrators|Election of Arbitrators]]
* Arbitration policy update (June 2011): [[Special:PermaLink/431872433#Arbitration policy update|Adoption by the Committee 31 May 2011]], [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Policy/Update and ratification|Referendum and closure 13 June 2011]]
* Arbitration policy amendment (April 2019): [[Special:PermaLink/891590475#Version 2|Adoption by the Committee 8 April 2019]], [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Policy/Proposed amendment (April 2019)|Ratification 16 April 2019]]
* Arbitration policy amendment (May 2023): [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Policy/Petition (May 2023)|Proposed by the community 16 May 2023]], [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Policy/Proposed amendment (May 2023)|Ratification 23 May 2023]]
* [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a moot court]]


== Notes ==
[[Category:Wikipedia policy|{{PAGENAME}}]]
{{reflist|group=note}}
[[Category:Wikipedia procedural policy]]

[[Category:Wikipedia policies|{{PAGENAME}}]]
[[Category:Wikipedia procedural policies]]
[[Category:Wikipedia dispute resolution|{{PAGENAME}}]]
[[Category:Wikipedia dispute resolution|{{PAGENAME}}]]
[[Category:Wikipedia arbitration|Policy]]
[[Category:Wikipedia arbitration|Policy]]

[[ar:ويكيبيديا:سياسة مجلس التحكيم]]
[[cs:Wikipedie:Pravidla arbitráže]]
[[fa:ویکی‌پدیا:سیاست داوری]]
[[fr:Wikipédia:Comité d'arbitrage/Règlement]]
[[id:Wikipedia:Arbitrase/Kebijakan]]
[[hu:Wikipédia:Wikitanács/Irányelvi javaslat (nyenyec-féle, 2007)]]
[[nl:Wikipedia:Arbitragecommissie/Reglementen]]
[[pl:Wikipedia:Komitet Arbitrażowy/Polityka arbitrażu]]
[[pt:Wikipedia:Conselho de arbitragem/Regulamento]]
[[fi:Wikipedia:Välityskäytäntö]]
[[sv:Wikipedia:Engelska Wikipedias skiljedomspolicy]]

Latest revision as of 01:41, 3 March 2024

"WP:AP" redirects here. For article probation, see Wikipedia:General sanctions. For attack pages, see Wikipedia:Attack page. For the Amusement Parks WikiProject, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Amusement Parks. For the autopatrolled userright, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled.
Wikipedia Arbitration
Open proceedings
Active sanctions
Arbitration Committee
Audit
Track related changes

This policy governs the Arbitration Committee, arbitration proceedings and arbitration processes. It was ratified by the community on 13 June 2011 and last amended on 23 May 2023. An extension of the arbitration policy, for CheckUser and Oversight permissions, is at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/CheckUser and Oversight.

Procedures that supplement and implement this policy are at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures and Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Clerks/Procedures.

The Arbitration Committee

Scope and responsibilities

The Arbitration Committee of the English Wikipedia has the following duties and responsibilities:

  1. To act as a final binding decision-maker primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve;
  2. To hear appeals from blocked, banned, or otherwise restricted users;[note 1]
  3. To handle requests (other than self-requests) for removal of administrative tools;[note 2]
  4. To resolve matters unsuitable for public discussion for privacy, legal, or similar reasons;
  5. To approve and remove access to (i) CheckUser and Oversight tools and (ii) mailing lists maintained by the Arbitration Committee.

Selection and appointment

Members of the Committee are appointed following annual elections organized and run by the community. Candidates must:

  1. Meet the Wikimedia Foundation's criteria for access to non-public personal data and confirm in their election statement they will fully comply with the criteria; and
  2. Disclose any alternate accounts in their election statements. Legitimate accounts which have been declared to the Arbitration Committee prior to the close of nominations need not be publicly disclosed.

In exceptional circumstances, the Committee may call interim elections, in a format similar to that of the regular annual elections, if it determines that arbitrator resignations or inactivity have created an immediate need for additional arbitrators.

Conduct of arbitrators

Shortcut

Arbitrators are expected to:

  1. Act with integrity and good faith at all times;
  2. Respond promptly and appropriately to questions from other arbitrators, or from the community, about conduct which appears to conflict with their trusted roles;
  3. Participate conscientiously in the Committee's activities and deliberations, advising the Committee of upcoming inactivity if that inactivity will likely last more than a week; and
  4. Preserve in appropriate confidence the contents of private correspondence sent to the Committee and the Committee's internal discussions and deliberations.

Any arbitrator who repeatedly or grossly fails to meet the expectations outlined above may be suspended or removed by Committee resolution supported by two-thirds of all arbitrators excluding:

  1. The arbitrator facing suspension or removal, and;
  2. Any inactive arbitrator who does not respond within 30 days to attempts to solicit their feedback on the resolution through all known methods of communication.

Recusal of arbitrators

Shortcut

An arbitrator may recuse from any case, or from any aspect of a case, with or without explanation and is expected to do so where they have a significant conflict of interest. Typically, a conflict of interest includes significant personal involvement in the substance of the dispute or significant personal involvement with one of the parties. Previous routine editor, administrator or arbitrator interactions are not usually grounds for recusal.

An editor who believes an arbitrator should recuse will first post a message on the arbitrator's talk page asking the arbitrator to recuse and giving reasons. Should the arbitrator not respond, or not recuse, the user may refer the request to the Committee for a ruling. Requests for recusal after a case has entered the voting stage will not be granted, except in extraordinary circumstances.

Transparency and confidentiality

Committee deliberations are often held privately, though the Committee will make public detailed rationales for decisions related to cases, unless the matter is unsuitable for public discussion for privacy, legal or similar reasons. The Committee treats as private all communications sent to it, or sent by a Committee member in the performance of their duties.

Procedures and roles

The Committee may create or modify its procedures, provided they are consistent with its scope; and may form subcommittees or designate individuals for particular tasks or roles. Where appropriate, the Committee may invite community comment on intended changes prior to implementing them.

The Committee maintains a panel of clerks to assist with the smooth running of its functions. The clerks' functions include the administration of arbitration cases and management of all the Committee's pages and subpages; enforcing Committee decisions; implementing procedures; and enforcing good standards of conduct and decorum on the Committee's pages.

Arbitration proceedings

Jurisdiction

The Committee has jurisdiction within the English Wikipedia.

The Committee has no jurisdiction over: (i) official actions of the Wikimedia Foundation or its staff; (ii) Wikimedia projects other than the English Wikipedia; or (iii) conduct outside the English Wikipedia.

The Committee may take notice of conduct outside its jurisdiction when making decisions about conduct on the English Wikipedia if such outside conduct impacts or has the potential to impact adversely upon the English Wikipedia or its editors.

The Committee retains jurisdiction over all matters heard by it, including associated enforcement processes, and may, at its sole discretion, revisit any proceeding at any time.

Requesting arbitration

Requests for arbitration must be presented in the manner designated by the Committee. The Committee may accept or decline any matter at its sole discretion; it will take into account, but will not be bound by, the views of the parties to the request and other interested users.

Forms of proceeding

Standard proceedings
By default, hearings are public and follow the procedures published on the relevant arbitration pages.
Summary proceedings
Where the facts of a matter are substantially undisputed, the Committee may resolve the dispute by motion.
Private hearings
In exceptional circumstances, typically where significant privacy, harassment, or legal issues are involved, the Committee may hold a hearing in private. The parties will be notified of the private hearing and be given a reasonable opportunity to respond to what is said about them before a decision is made.
Appeals
Appeals by blocked, banned, or similarly restricted users are usually conducted by email.

Participation

Decisions are reached by a majority vote of active, non-recused arbitrators. An arbitrator whose term expires while a case is pending may remain active on that case until its conclusion. Newly appointed arbitrators may become active on any matter before the Committee with immediate effect from the date of their appointment.

Statements may be added to case pages by any interested editor. Editors are expected to respond to statements about themselves; failure to do so may result in decisions being made without their participation. All editors are required to act reasonably, civilly, and with decorum on arbitration case pages, and may face sanctions if they fail to do so.

Admissibility of evidence

In all proceedings, admissible evidence includes:

  1. All Wikipedia edits and log entries, including deleted or otherwise hidden edits and log entries;
  2. Edits and log entries from Wikimedia projects other than the English Wikipedia, where appropriate; and
  3. Posts to official mailing lists.

Evidence from official mediation is admissible only with the express prior written consent of the Mediation Committee.[note 3]

Evidence based on private communications (including, but not limited to, other websites, forums, chat rooms, IRC logs, email correspondence) is admissible only by prior consent of the Committee and only in exceptional circumstances.

Evidence may be submitted privately, but the Committee normally expects evidence to be posted publicly unless there are compelling reasons not to do so. The Committee will decide whether to admit each submission of private evidence on its own merits and, if admitted, the evidence will be considered at a private hearing.

Temporary injunctions

At any time between the request for a case being made and the closure of the case, the Committee may issue temporary injunctions, restricting the conduct of the parties, or users generally, for the duration of the case.

Format of decisions

Decisions are written in clear, concise standard English and usually: (i) outline the salient principles, (ii) make findings of fact, (iii) set out remedies and rulings, and (iv) specify any enforcement arrangements. Where the meaning of any provision is unclear to any arbitrator, the parties, or other interested editors, it will be clarified upon request.

Policy and precedent

The arbitration process is not a vehicle for creating new policy by fiat. The Committee's decisions may interpret existing policy and guidelines, recognise and call attention to standards of user conduct, or create procedures through which policy and guidelines may be enforced. The Committee does not rule on content, but may propose means by which community resolution of a content dispute can be facilitated.

While the Committee will typically take into account its earlier decisions when deciding new cases, previous decisions do not create binding precedent. As community policies, guidelines and norms evolve over time, previous decisions will be taken into account only to the extent that they remain relevant in the current context.

Appeal of decisions

Any editor may ask the Committee to reconsider or amend a ruling, which the Committee may accept or decline at its discretion. The Committee may require a minimum time to have elapsed since the enactment of the ruling, or since any prior request for reconsideration, before reviewing it.

Ratification and amendment

Once adopted by the Committee, this policy will undergo formal ratification through a community referendum and will enter into force once it receives majority support, with at least one hundred editors voting in favour of adopting it. Until this policy is ratified, the existing arbitration policy remains in effect.

Amendments to this policy require an identical ratification process. Proposed amendments may be submitted for ratification only after being approved by a majority vote of the Committee, or having been requested by a petition signed by at least one hundred editors in good standing.

The Committee is responsible for formulating its own processes and procedures under this policy, which do not require ratification.

See also

Notes

  1. ^ The Arbitration Committee resolved by motion on 14 February 2024 to hear appeals from editors who are (a) blocked for reasons that are unsuitable for public discussion, or (b) blocked or banned by Arbitration and Arbitration Enforcement decisions. Examples of reasons that are unsuitable for public discussion include blocks (i) marked as an Oversight block, or (ii) based on CheckUser evidence, and where there exists disagreement between checkusers as to the interpretation of the technical evidence. It is expected that blocks marked as a CheckUser block are by default appealed on-wiki; however, the Arbitration Committee may hear appeals of such blocks if there are compelling reasons to hear an appeal in private.
  2. ^ Following a request for comment in July 2011, the community resolved that administrator accounts which had been inactive for over a year (defined as making "no edits or administrative actions for at least 12 months") may also be desysopped by a community process independent of the Committee.
  3. ^ The Mediation Committee was disbanded on November 12, 2018 as a result of an RfC.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Policy&oldid=1211533286"