 | This vote has not yet opened. Please do not vote yet! Discussion is underway on the talk page |
This is a poll of the suggested policy changes generated during the RfC process to assess if they have community support. Changes that are ratified in this vote will become part of the current English Wikipedia Arbitration Policy. These suggested changes were generated as part of the Request for Comments on the Arbitration Committee.
Discussion about how this ratification should work and the precise form of the proposals is taking place on the talk page.
| Voting will take place on this page; all discussion of the contents of the proposals should take place on the provided sub-pages for each group of proposals. |
Eligibility to vote
Any editor eligible to vote in the parallel Arbitration Committee elections may vote on these proposed policy changes. Editors who are not eligible to vote are still welcome to participate in discussions, but should not cast votes for or against - these will be removed before counting.
Ratification
A Policy Change will be ratified by the community when all of the following are satisfied:
- More than forty eligible voters cast supporting votes,
- At the conclusion of the voting period, it has net support (more supporting votes than opposition votes),
- There is no contradicting policy change with a greater net support.
Discussion
Discussion of the proposals, including general comments and extended explanations of support or oppose votes, should be placed on the linked discussion pages for each group of proposals. Lengthy comments or discussion placed with a vote on this page will be removed.
Voting
Please mark your votes to '''Support''' or '''Oppose''' once for each proposal you wish to vote for or against. You may vote for any, all, or none of the proposals. You may vote support for one or more contradictory proposals. In the case of a tie vote between contradictory proposals, the deciding vote will be cast by the arbitration committee after the newly elected members have been seated.
Information on these proposals Discuss these proposals
Number of members returned per election
- 2008 Proposal 1
| “ | Each election will appoint 7 members to the Arbitration Committee. | ” |
- Note: This would increase each Tranche to 7 members, from 5 currently.
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse, you may mark your vote to be withdrawn if 2.d passes. - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
Term of office, and frequency of election
 | The policy changes in this section are contradicting. The option with the greatest net support will be enacted. |
- 2008 Proposal 2.a
| “ | The term of office for an Arbitration Committee Member is 24 months. Members are elected in two groups of seven members, staggered over two elections twelve months apart. | ” |
- Note: This change would remove Tranche Gamma, and increase Tranches Alpha and Beta to seven members.
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
- 2008 Proposal 2.b
| “ | The term of office for an Arbitration Committee Member is 18 months. Members are elected in three groups staggered over three elections six months apart. | ” |
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
- 2008 Proposal 2.c
| “ | The term of office for an Arbitration Committee Member is 12 months. Members are elected in three groups staggered over three elections four months apart. | ” |
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
- 2008 Proposal 2.d
| “ | The term of office for an Arbitration Committee Member is 24 months. Members are elected in four groups staggered over four elections six months apart. | ” |
- Note: This change would create an additional Tranche, Tranche Delta, with five new members.
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
- 2008 No Proposal 2.x
| “ | No change to term of office, and frequency of election at this time. | ” |
- Note: Maintains the status quo in this area.
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
Consecutive Term Restriction
- 2008 Proposal 3
| “ | No Arbitration Committee Member may serve two terms consecutively. No editor who is currently serving a term as an Arbitration Committee Member may stand for election to the Arbitration Committee; past members of the Committee may stand in any election not immediately following their own term. | ” |
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
Information on these proposals Discuss these proposals
Dispute Resolution
- 2008 Proposal 4
| “ | Arbitration is the final step in dispute resolution. Except for emergency situations such as wheel wars, or appeals of community sanctions and other circumstances where dispute resolution is impractical, no case will be accepted that has not already progressed through dispute resolution. | ” |
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
No Secret Trials
- 2008 Proposal 5
| “ | While the Arbitration Committee may accept confidential evidence, proceedings must be as open as they can be. The Arbitration Committee may not convene in secret, or conduct proceedings entirely in private. | ” |
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
Informing Editors
- 2008 Proposal 6
| “ | Editors are to be informed if the Arbitration Committee is discussing their behaviour via closed methods (such as the mailing list). Ideally, they will be informed via email. No Arbitration Committee decision - secret or otherwise - will be made without users directly named in the decision being given the chance to state their case. | ” |
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
Information on these proposals Discuss these proposals
Evidence
- 2008 Proposal 7
| “ | Except in exceptional circumstances, at least one week will be given for evidence preparation before any voting takes place (excluding temporary injunctions). | ” |
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
No New Policy
- 2008 Proposal 8
| “ | The Arbitration Committee will not create binding rulings that institute new Wikipedia processes or policy, nor substantially alter current Wikipedia processes or policy except by striking sections incompatible with Wikimedia Foundation requirements. | ” |
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
No Secret Votes
- 2008 Proposal 9
| “ | Votes on all Arbitration Committee decisions by the members must always be made on a public Wikipedia page, with the signatures of the arbitrators attached and available for verification through the history log. | ” |
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
Remedies
- 2008 Proposal 10
| “ | Remedies may only be voted on by the Arbitration Committee if they are in the form of direct sanctions on persons listed as parties to the case. | ” |
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
Information on these proposals Discuss these proposals
Clear Communication
- 2008 Proposal 11
| “ | Legalese, Latin terms (legal or otherwise), abbreviations, and other such unclear English are to be avoided wherever possible. Clear and concise communication that all can understand should be a priority of the Committee. | ” |
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
Official Statements
- 2008 Proposal 12
| “ | Arbitrators will only make official statements on their own behalf, or joint statements from a group of Arbitrators who all agree with the statement. Dissenting Arbitrators should be given an opportunity to voice their dissents in public if they wish. | ” |
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
Redress
- 2008 Proposal 13
| “ | Should a significant portion of the community hold concerns over the activity, conduct or capability of a sitting Arbitrator, a Request for Comment may be opened. Their fellow Arbitrators are encouraged to participate. If the Arbitrator in discussion fails to engage in the process, the RFC continues, regardless. The arbitrator under discussion may simply be required to amend their behaviour, however, should the community conclude categorically that an Arbitrator is unsuitable to continue in the position, the Arbitrator is expected and encouraged to step down amicably. | ” |
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
| This vote has not yet opened. Please do not vote yet! Discussion is underway on the talk page |
This is a poll of the suggested policy changes generated during the RfC process to assess if they have community support. Changes that are ratified in this vote will become part of the current English Wikipedia Arbitration Policy. These suggested changes were generated as part of the Request for Comments on the Arbitration Committee.
Discussion about how this ratification should work and the precise form of the proposals is taking place on the talk page.
| Voting will take place on this page; all discussion of the contents of the proposals should take place on the provided sub-pages for each group of proposals. |
Eligibility to vote
Any editor eligible to vote in the parallel Arbitration Committee elections may vote on these proposed policy changes. Editors who are not eligible to vote are still welcome to participate in discussions, but should not cast votes for or against - these will be removed before counting.
Ratification
A Policy Change will be ratified by the community when all of the following are satisfied:
- More than forty eligible voters cast supporting votes,
- At the conclusion of the voting period, it has net support (more supporting votes than opposition votes),
- There is no contradicting policy change with a greater net support.
Discussion
Discussion of the proposals, including general comments and extended explanations of support or oppose votes, should be placed on the linked discussion pages for each group of proposals. Lengthy comments or discussion placed with a vote on this page will be removed.
Voting
Please mark your votes to '''Support''' or '''Oppose''' once for each proposal you wish to vote for or against. You may vote for any, all, or none of the proposals. You may vote support for one or more contradictory proposals. In the case of a tie vote between contradictory proposals, the deciding vote will be cast by the arbitration committee after the newly elected members have been seated.
Information on these proposals Discuss these proposals
Number of members returned per election
- 2008 Proposal 1
| “ | Each election will appoint 7 members to the Arbitration Committee. | ” |
- Note: This would increase each Tranche to 7 members, from 5 currently.
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse, you may mark your vote to be withdrawn if 2.d passes. - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
Term of office, and frequency of election
|
| The policy changes in this section are contradicting. The option with the greatest net support will be enacted. |
- 2008 Proposal 2.a
| “ | The term of office for an Arbitration Committee Member is 24 months. Members are elected in two groups of seven members, staggered over two elections twelve months apart. | ” |
- Note: This change would remove Tranche Gamma, and increase Tranches Alpha and Beta to seven members.
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
- 2008 Proposal 2.b
| “ | The term of office for an Arbitration Committee Member is 18 months. Members are elected in three groups staggered over three elections six months apart. | ” |
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
- 2008 Proposal 2.c
| “ | The term of office for an Arbitration Committee Member is 12 months. Members are elected in three groups staggered over three elections four months apart. | ” |
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
- 2008 Proposal 2.d
| “ | The term of office for an Arbitration Committee Member is 24 months. Members are elected in four groups staggered over four elections six months apart. | ” |
- Note: This change would create an additional Tranche, Tranche Delta, with five new members.
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
- 2008 No Proposal 2.x
| “ | No change to term of office, and frequency of election at this time. | ” |
- Note: Maintains the status quo in this area.
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
Consecutive Term Restriction
- 2008 Proposal 3
| “ | No Arbitration Committee Member may serve two terms consecutively. No editor who is currently serving a term as an Arbitration Committee Member may stand for election to the Arbitration Committee; past members of the Committee may stand in any election not immediately following their own term. | ” |
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
Information on these proposals Discuss these proposals
Dispute Resolution
- 2008 Proposal 4
| “ | Arbitration is the final step in dispute resolution. Except for emergency situations such as wheel wars, or appeals of community sanctions and other circumstances where dispute resolution is impractical, no case will be accepted that has not already progressed through dispute resolution. | ” |
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
No Secret Trials
- 2008 Proposal 5
| “ | While the Arbitration Committee may accept confidential evidence, proceedings must be as open as they can be. The Arbitration Committee may not convene in secret, or conduct proceedings entirely in private. | ” |
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
Informing Editors
- 2008 Proposal 6
| “ | Editors are to be informed if the Arbitration Committee is discussing their behaviour via closed methods (such as the mailing list). Ideally, they will be informed via email. No Arbitration Committee decision - secret or otherwise - will be made without users directly named in the decision being given the chance to state their case. | ” |
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
Information on these proposals Discuss these proposals
Evidence
- 2008 Proposal 7
| “ | Except in exceptional circumstances, at least one week will be given for evidence preparation before any voting takes place (excluding temporary injunctions). | ” |
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
No New Policy
- 2008 Proposal 8
| “ | The Arbitration Committee will not create binding rulings that institute new Wikipedia processes or policy, nor substantially alter current Wikipedia processes or policy except by striking sections incompatible with Wikimedia Foundation requirements. | ” |
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
No Secret Votes
- 2008 Proposal 9
| “ | Votes on all Arbitration Committee decisions by the members must always be made on a public Wikipedia page, with the signatures of the arbitrators attached and available for verification through the history log. | ” |
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
Remedies
- 2008 Proposal 10
| “ | Remedies may only be voted on by the Arbitration Committee if they are in the form of direct sanctions on persons listed as parties to the case. | ” |
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
Information on these proposals Discuss these proposals
Clear Communication
- 2008 Proposal 11
| “ | Legalese, Latin terms (legal or otherwise), abbreviations, and other such unclear English are to be avoided wherever possible. Clear and concise communication that all can understand should be a priority of the Committee. | ” |
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
Official Statements
- 2008 Proposal 12
| “ | Arbitrators will only make official statements on their own behalf, or joint statements from a group of Arbitrators who all agree with the statement. Dissenting Arbitrators should be given an opportunity to voice their dissents in public if they wish. | ” |
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose
Redress
- 2008 Proposal 13
| “ | Should a significant portion of the community hold concerns over the activity, conduct or capability of a sitting Arbitrator, a Request for Comment may be opened. Their fellow Arbitrators are encouraged to participate. If the Arbitrator in discussion fails to engage in the process, the RFC continues, regardless. The arbitrator under discussion may simply be required to amend their behaviour, however, should the community conclude categorically that an Arbitrator is unsuitable to continue in the position, the Arbitrator is expected and encouraged to step down amicably. | ” |
- Sign with
#'''Support''' --~~~~to endorse - Sign with
#'''Oppose''' --~~~~to oppose