This is an old revision of this page, as edited by NewsAndEventsGuy (talk | contribs) at 19:49, 10 March 2013 (ARB - Climate Change - Notification process). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

• WP:ARCA

• recent changes
• purge this page
• view or discuss this template

Currently, there are no requests for arbitration.

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

Requests for clarification and amendment

Use this page to request clarification or amendment of a closed Arbitration Committee case or decision.

• Requests for clarification are used to ask for further guidance or clarification about an existing completed Arbitration Committee case or decision.
• Requests for amendment are used to ask for an amendment or extension of existing sanctions (for instance, because the sanctions are ineffective, contain a loophole, or no longer cover a sufficiently wide topic); or appeal for the removal of sanctions (including bans).

Submitting a request: (you must use this format!)

1. Choose one of the following options and open the page in a new tab or window:
   • Click here to file a request for clarification of an arbitration decision or procedure.
   • Click here to file a request for amendment of an arbitration decision or procedure (including an arbitration enforcement action issued by an administrator, such as a contentious topics restriction).
   • Click here to file a referral from AE requesting enforcement of a decision.
   • Click here to file a referral from AE appealing an arbitration enforcement action.
2. Save your request and check that it looks how you think it should and says what you intended.
3. If your request will affect or involve other users (including any users you have named as parties), you must notify these editors of your submission; you can use {{subst:Arbitration CA notice|SECTIONTITLE}} to do this.
4. Add the diffs of the talk page notifications under the applicable header of the request.

Please do not submit your request until it is ready for consideration; this is not a space for drafts, and incremental additions to a submission are disruptive.

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-llists.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

• Arbitrators and clerks may summarily remove or refactor discussion without comment.
• Requests from blocked or banned users should be made by e-mail directly to the Arbitration Committee.
• Only arbitrators and clerks may remove requests from this page. Do not remove a request or any statements or comments unless you are in either of these groups.
• Archived clarification and amendment requests are logged at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Index/Clarification and Amendment requests. Numerous legacy and current shortcuts can be used to more quickly reach this page:

• WP:ARCA
• WP:ARA
• WP:A/R/C&A
• WP:A/R/CL
• WP:A/R/A
• WP:A/R/CA
• Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and .../Amendment

Clarification request: Climate change

Initiated by NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) at 19:47, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

List of any users involved or directly affected, and confirmation that all are aware of the request:

• NewsAndEventsGuy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) (initiator)
• Elvey (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Cybersaur (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Dave Souza (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)
• KillerChihuahua (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)

Statement by NewsAndEventsGuy (initiator)

Intro

Hi, There is a broken link in the instructions in the current lead at ARBCC which has created some confusion as evidenced by this and this.

The relevant text, with the link text just underlined here, now reads

"Please do not edit this page directly unless you are either 1) an Arbitrator, 2) an Arbitration Clerk, or 3) adding yourself to this case. * * * Once the case is closed, editors may add to the #Log of blocks, bans, and restrictions as needed, but this page should not be edited otherwise."

The broken link was discovered when I and others were pondering exactly what regular editors may, and may not, edit on this page.

Ways to read the ambiguity

INTERPRETATION OPTION 1) Regular editors can ONLY add to the sanctions log after they have been imposed. Clarification needed on notification procedure.

INTERPRETATION OPTION 2) In the spirit of "prevention, not punishment" any regular editor can post ARBCC notices and add to the notifications log as well as the sanctions log.

INTERPRETATION OPTION 3) Other?

Insights from case version history

To best of my knowledge the only relevant text from the case history is

• June 12 2010 Link in lead about what reg eds can tweak (#Log of blocks, bans, and restrictions) now works.

• Oct 14 2010 Relevant tweak A Link in lead about what reg eds can tweak (#Log of blocks, bans, and restrictions) was accidentally broken when section heading was deleted during initial case closure.

• Oct 14 2010 Relevant tweak B Section heading restored but with different wording so link in lead is still broken. HOWEVER a link in logging section (#Log of blocks, bans, and sanctions) does work.

• Oct 15 2010 TOC level 2 heading for "Notifications" section added under level 1 heading "Log of blocks, bans, and sanctions". Lead link is still broken but logging link to #Log of blocks, bans, and sanctions still works, and appears to encompass the notifications section

I don't think there have been any other relevant changes to the section headings or links.

REPEAT THE QUESTION: Can reg eds post ARBCC notices to other users' talk pages, and then log the posting here?

Conclusion

• 1. Regardless what ya'll think, the busted lead link needs to be fixed;
• 2. My own opinion is that in the spirit of "prevention, not punishment" any editor should be allowed to spread the word of ARBCC and post names and notices here.
• 3. If ya'll agree, then suggest you change the section heading itself to Log of NOTICES, blocks, bans, and sanctions and then fix the lead link to point to that.
• 4. The above edit history looks like this is what was supposed to happen in the first place.

Thanks for your attention and direction. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:31, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Statement by other user

Clerk notes

This area is used for notes by the clerks (including clerk recusals).

Arbitrator views and discussion