Misplaced Pages

:Arbitration/Requests/Case: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Arbitration | Requests Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 14:36, 2 May 2016 view sourceCourcelles (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Administrators434,776 edits Brahmaguptas Multan connection: Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter: d 0/10/0/0← Previous edit Revision as of 20:31, 2 May 2016 view source Liz (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators760,290 edits Removing request for arbitration: declined by the CommitteeNext edit →
Line 6: Line 6:
<noinclude>{{ArbComOpenTasks|acotstyle=float:right}}</noinclude>{{NOINDEX}} <noinclude>{{ArbComOpenTasks|acotstyle=float:right}}</noinclude>{{NOINDEX}}
{{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Header<noinclude>|width=53%</noinclude>}} {{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Header<noinclude>|width=53%</noinclude>}}

== Brahmaguptas Multan connection ==
'''Initiated by ''' ] (]) '''at''' 12:38, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

=== Involved parties ===
<!-- Please change "userlinks" to "admin" if the party is an administrator -->
*{{userlinks|Xinjao}}, ''filing party''
*{{userlinks|Kautilya3}}

;Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request
<!-- All parties must be notified that the request has been filed, immediately after it is posted, and confirmation posted here. -->
*

;Confirmation that other steps in ] have been tried
* https://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Xinjao#April_2016
* Link 2

=== Statement by Xinjao ===
I added reference to Multan as the residence of historical figure, ]. Party2 removed the reference citing the lack of a source. I added a source, a book by an Indian author. It appeared that he accepted the source at first but then later removed the reference again.

=== Statement by Kautilya3 ===
This is evidently a content dispute that doesn't belong here. -- ] (]) 13:17, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

=== Statement by Robert McClenon ===
If this were a Third Opinion request or a request for ], it would be declined because there has been inadequate talk page discussion. There has been inadequate talk page discussion and there has been no attempt to use any content resolution procedure, as as ], moderated dispute resolution, ], or a ]. Also, ArbCom is for conduct disputes that the community cannot deal with. (Also, if there is a conduct dispute, it has already been arbitrated, and ends with Arbitration Enforcement.) I see no claims of conduct dispute, let alone any efforts to deal with a conduct dispute. This case should be declined and the filing party should be admonished for wasting time.

=== Statement by Mz7 ===
Have we ever considered allowing arbitrators to unilaterally decline obviously premature requests? Or perhaps requiring an ANI discussion prior to an arbitration request for disputes not involving administrators (since this is supposed to be the court of last resort for such matters)? We seem to be getting a lot of premature requests, and I feel like shortening the process would save some time and hopefully get disputes resolved more quickly, rather than waiting to get to a majority. ] (]) 18:26, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

:{{ping|L235}} Ah, thanks for clarifying. I don't think this request is deliberately "frivolous" or "meaningless" more than it is one user who is simply inexperienced with the Misplaced Pages dispute resolution process. We shouldn't be admonishing these users, but counseling them on how we do things. With that being said, time and efficiency are also important, and I think we can give advice to these users without having to wait for 8 inevitable oppose votes. ] (]) 21:18, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

=== Statement by {Non-party} ===
<!-- * Please copy this section for the next person. * -->
Other editors are free to make relevant comments on this request as necessary. Comments here should address why or why not the Committee should accept the case request or provide additional information.
<!-- * Please copy this section for the next person. * -->
=== Clerk notes ===
:''This area is used for notes by the clerks (including clerk recusals).''
*{{re|Mz7}} Arbs can already unilaterally decline cases under ], "Regarding frivolous or meaningless cases". Oftentimes (e.g. here), for whatever reason, they choose not to use that procedure (which is simply instructing a clerk to remove a case request under that section). (We've not received any instructions or other mail wrt this case request, and far be it from us clerks to question the wisdom of arbs.) ''']''' (<small>aka</small> ]&nbsp;'''·'''&#32; ]&nbsp;'''·'''&#32; ]) 19:08, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

=== Brahmaguptas Multan connection: Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter <0/10/0/0> ===
{{anchor|1=Brahmaguptas Multan connection: Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter}}<small>Vote key: (Accept/decline/recuse/other)</small>
*'''Decline''' as a. premature and b. a content dispute. ] (]) 14:00, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
*'''Decline''' per Salvio. ] (]) 15:27, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
*'''Decline''' per Salvio. ] ] 17:04, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
*'''Decline''' - content dispute with no attempted dispute resolution. ] (]) 21:02, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
*'''Decline''' per all above. ] (]) 21:28, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
* '''Decline''' ]<sup>(]) </sup> 22:53, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
*'''Decline''' per all above. ] (] '''·''' ]) 22:53, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
*I'm sorry I'm late to this party. '''Accept'''. I'm kidding: '''decline''' and will y'all PLEASE try to work stuff out among yourselves. ] (]) 23:29, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
*'''Decline''' as above. ''']''' (]) 00:00, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
*'''Decline''' ] (]) 14:35, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:31, 2 May 2016

Shortcut


Requests for arbitration

Arbitration Committee proceedings Case requests

Currently, there are no requests for arbitration.

Open cases
Case name Links Evidence due Prop. Dec. due
Palestine-Israel articles 5 (t) (ev / t) (ws / t) (pd / t) 21 Dec 2024 11 Jan 2025
Recently closed cases (Past cases)

No cases have recently been closed (view all closed cases).

Clarification and Amendment requests

Currently, no requests for clarification or amendment are open.

Arbitrator motions
Motion name Date posted
Arbitrator workflow motions 1 December 2024
Shortcuts

About this page

Use this page to request the committee open an arbitration case. To be accepted, an arbitration request needs 4 net votes to "accept" (or a majority).

Arbitration is a last resort. WP:DR lists the other, escalating processes that should be used before arbitration. The committee will decline premature requests.

Requests may be referred to as "case requests" or "RFARs"; once opened, they become "cases". Before requesting arbitration, read the arbitration guide to case requests. Then click the button below. Complete the instructions quickly; requests incomplete for over an hour may be removed. Consider preparing the request in your userspace.

To request enforcement of an existing arbitration ruling, see Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement. To clarify or change an existing arbitration ruling, see Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment.


File an arbitration request


Guidance on participation and word limits

Unlike many venues on Misplaced Pages, ArbCom imposes word limits. Please observe the below notes on complying with word limits.

  • Motivation. Word limits are imposed to promote clarity and focus on the issues at hand and to ensure that arbitrators are able to fully take in submissions. Arbitrators must read a large volume of information across many matters in the course of their service on the Committee, so submissions that exceed word limits may be disregarded. For the sake of fairness and to discourage gamesmanship (i.e., to disincentivize "asking forgiveness rather than permission"), word limits are actively enforced.
  • In general. Most submissions to the Arbitration Committee (including statements in arbitration case requests and ARCAs and evidence submissions in arbitration cases) are limited to 500 words, plus 50 diffs. During the evidence phase of an accepted case, named parties are granted an automatic extension to 1000 words plus 100 diffs.
  • Sectioned discussion. To facilitate review by arbitrators, you should edit only in your own section. Address your submission to arbitrators, not to other participants. If you wish to rebut, clarify, or otherwise refer to another submission for the benefit of arbitrators, you may do so within your own section. (More information.)
  • Requesting an extension. You may request a word limit extension in your submission itself (using the {{@ArbComClerks}} template) or by emailing clerks-l@lists.wikimedia.org. In your request, you should briefly (in 1-2 sentences) include (a) why you need additional words and (b) a broad outline of what you hope to discuss in your extended submission. The Committee endeavors to act upon extension requests promptly and aims to offer flexibility where warranted.
    • Members of the Committee may also grant extensions when they ask direct questions to facilitate answers to those questions.
  • Refactoring statements. You should write carefully and concisely from the start. It is impermissible to rewrite a statement to shorten it after a significant amount of time has passed or after anyone has responded to it (see Misplaced Pages:Talk page guidelines § Editing own comments), so it is often advisable to submit a brief initial statement to leave room to respond to other users if the need arises.
  • Sign submissions. In order for arbitrators and other participants to understand the order of submissions, sign your submission and each addition (using ~~~~).
  • Word limit violations. Submissions that exceed the word limit will generally be "hatted" (collapsed), and arbitrators may opt not to consider them.
  • Counting words. Words are counted on the rendered text (not wikitext) of the statement (i.e., the number of words that you would see by copy-pasting the page section containing your statement into a text editor or word count tool). This internal gadget may also be helpful.
  • Sanctions. Please note that members and clerks of the Committee may impose appropriate sanctions when necessary to promote the effective functioning of the arbitration process.

General guidance

  • This page is for statements, not discussion.
  • Arbitrators or clerks may refactor or delete statements, e.g. off-topic or unproductive remarks, without warning.
  • Banned users may request arbitration via the committee contact page; don't try to edit this page.
  • Under no circumstances should you remove requests from this page, or open a case (even for accepted requests), unless you are an arbitrator or clerk.
  • After a request is filed, the arbitrators will vote on accepting or declining the case. The <0/0/0> tally counts the arbitrators voting accept/decline/recuse.
  • Declined case requests are logged at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Index/Declined requests. Accepted case requests are opened as cases, and logged at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Index/Cases once closed.