Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/Header: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 06:04, 6 September 2020

Latest revision as of 14:53, 8 May 2025

(27 intermediate revisions by 15 users not shown)

Line 1:

<div class="plainlinks" style="text-align: center; width: auto; margin: .5em 15%; padding: .5em0 1em; border: solid #aaaaaaaaa 1px;">
<span style="font-size: 125%;">'''[{{fullurl:Special:NewSection/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement|preload=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/preload&editintro=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/editintro}} Click here to add a new enforcement request]'''</span><br/>'''For appeals: [[Special:NewSection/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement|create a new section]] and use the template {{tl|Arbitration enforcement appeal}}'''<br/> See also: [[Wikipedia:Arbitration enforcement log|Logged AE sanctions]]

</div>

<div class="plainlinks" style="margin: 1px;">

Line 5 ⟶ 6:

| type = delete

| image =

| style = alignbackground-color: center; var(--background:-color-destructive-subtle, #ffeeeeffe9e5); border: 2px solid #cc0000c00; margin: 6px; color: inherit;

| text = <span style="font-size: 1.3em; text-decoration: underline;">'''Important information'''</span>{{shortcut|WP:AE|WP:ARE}}

Please use this page <u>{{emu|only</u>}} to:

*request administrative action against editorsan editor violating a remedy (not merely a principle) or an injunction in an Arbitration Committee decision, or a [[WP:AC/DSCT|discretionarycontentious topic sanctionrestriction]] imposed by an [[Wikipedia:Administrators|administrator]],

*request discretionarycontentious sanctionstopic restrictions against a [[Wikipedia:AC/DSCT#Awareness andof alertscontentious topics|previously alerted]] editorseditor who engageengages in misconduct in a [[Wikipedia:AC/DS#Current areas of conflict|topic area subjectdesignated toas discretionarya sanctions]]contentious topic,

*request [[Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Discretionary_sanctionsContentious topics#Page_restrictions|page restrictions]] (e.g. revert restrictions) on pages that are being disrupted in topic areas subjectdesignated toas discretionarycontentious sanctionstopics, or

*[[Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Procedures#Standard_provision:_appeals_and_modifications|appeal arbitration enforcement actions]] (including discretionarycontentious sanctionstopic restrictions) to uninvolved administrators.

For all other problems, including content disagreements or the enforcement of community-imposed sanctions, please use the other fora described in the [[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution|dispute resolution process]]. To appeal Arbitration Committee decisions, please use [[WP:ARCA|the clarification and amendment noticeboard]].

'''Only [[WP:autoconfirmed|autoconfirmed]] users may file enforcement requests here;'''; requests filed by IPs or accounts less than four days old or with lessfewer than 10 edits will be removed. All users are welcome to comment on requests except where doing so would violate an active restriction (such as an [[WP:ECR|extended-confirmed restriction]]). If you make an enforcement request or comment on a request, your own conduct may be examined as well, and you may be sanctioned for it. '''Enforcement requests and statements in response to them may not exceed ''500 words and 20 diffs''''', except by permission of a reviewing administrator. [http://wordcounttools.com/ (Word Count Tool)] Statements must be made in separate sections. Non-compliant contributions may be removed or shortened by administrators. Disruptive contributions such as [[WP:NPA|personal attacks]], or groundless or [[WP:VEXBYSTERANG|vexatious]] complaints, may result in blocks or other sanctions.

[[File:Symbol information vote.svg|frameless|15px|link=|alt=]] {{emu|'''The scope of a discussion is limited to the conduct of two parties''': the filer and the user being reported.}} If additional editors are to be reported, separate AE reports must be opened for each. AE admins may waive this rule if the particular issue warrants doing so.

To make an enforcement request, click on the link above this box and supply all required information. Incomplete request may be ignored. Requests reporting diffs older than one week may be declined as stale. To appeal a discretionary sanction or other enforcement decision, please create a new section and use the template {{tl|Arbitration enforcement appeal}}.

To make an enforcement request, click on the link above this box and supply all required information. Incomplete requestrequests may be ignored. Requests reporting diffs older than one week may be declined as stale. To appeal a discretionarycontentious sanctiontopic restriction or other enforcement decision, please create a new section and use the template {{tl|Arbitration enforcement appeal}}.

{{cot|Important: Appeals and administrator modifications of sanctions}}

The [[WP:Arbitration Committee|Arbitration Committee]] [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions|procedures]] relating to modifications of discretionary sanctions state the following:<!-- Last amended 13 Dec 2018 -->

{{cot|Appeals and administrator modifications of contentious topics restrictions}}

The [[WP:Arbitration Committee|Arbitration Committee]] [[Wikipedia:Contentious topics|procedures]] relating to modifications of contentious topic restrictions state the following:<!-- Last updated 18 Jan 2023 -->

{{ivmbox|1=All contentious topic restrictions (and [[#Warnings|logged warnings]]) may be appealed. Only the restricted editor may appeal an editor restriction. Any editor may appeal a page restriction.

The appeal process has three possible stages. An editor appealing a restriction may:

#ask the administrator who first made the contentious topic restrictions (the "enforcing administrator") to reconsider their original decision;

#request review at the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] ("AE") or at the [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]] ("AN"); and

#submit a [[WP:ARCA|request for amendment]] ("ARCA"). If the editor is blocked, the appeal may be made by [[User:Arbitration Committee|email]].

Appeals submitted at AE or AN must be submitted using the [[Template:Arbitration enforcement appeal|applicable template]].

A rough consensus of administrators at AE or editors at AN may specify a period of up to one year during which no appeals (other than an appeal to ARCA) may be submitted.

;Changing or revoking a contentious topic restriction

An administrator may only modify or revoke a contentious topic restriction if a formal appeal is successful or if one of the following exceptions applies:

* The administrator who originally imposed the contentious topic restriction (the "enforcing administrator") affirmatively consents to the change,{{efn|1=The administrator may indicate consent at any time before, during, or after imposition of the restriction.}} or is no longer an administrator;{{efn|This criterion does not apply if the original action was imposed as a result of rough consensus at the arbitration enforcement noticeboard, as there would be no single enforcing administrator.}} or

* The contentious topic restriction was imposed (or last renewed) more than a year ago and:

** the restriction was imposed by a single administrator, or

** the restriction was an indefinite block.

A formal appeal is successful only if one of the following agrees with revoking or changing the contentious topic restriction:

*a '''clear''' consensus of uninvolved administrators at AE,

*a '''clear''' consensus of uninvolved editors at AN,

*a majority of the Arbitration Committee, acting through a motion at ARCA.

Any administrator who revokes or changes a contentious topic restriction out of process (i.e. without the above conditions being met) may, at the discretion of the Arbitration Committee, be desysopped.

; Standard of review

; On community review

Uninvolved administrators at the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] ("AE") and uninvolved editors at the [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]] ("AN") should revoke or modify a contentious topic restriction on appeal if:

# the action was inconsistent with the contentious topics procedure or applicable policy (i.e. the action was out of process),

# the action was not reasonably necessary to prevent damage or disruption when first imposed, or

# the action is no longer reasonably necessary to prevent damage or disruption.

;On Arbitration Committee review

Arbitrators hearing an appeal at a [[WP:ARCA|request for amendment]] ("ARCA") will generally overturn a contentious topic restriction only if:

# the action was inconsistent with the contentious topics procedure or applicable policy (i.e. the action was out of process),

# the action represents an unreasonable exercise of administrative enforcement discretion, or

# compelling circumstances warrant the full Committee's action.}}

{{notelist}}

{{cob}}

{{cot|Important: Appeals and administrator modifications of other arbcom sanctions}}

{{ivmbox|1=

The [[WP:Arbitration Committee|Arbitration Committee]] [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctionsProcedures|procedures]] relating to modifications ofand discretionary sanctionsappeals state the following:<!-- Last amendedupdated 1318 DecJan 20182023 -->

;Appeals by sanctioned editors

Line 45 ⟶ 90:

::is required. If consensus at AE or AN is unclear, the status quo prevails.

# <li value="2"> While asking the enforcing administrator and seeking reviews at AN or AE are not mandatory prior to seeking a decision from the committee, once the committee has reviewed a request, further substantive review at any forum is barred. The sole exception is editors under an active sanction who may still request an easing or removal of the sanction on the grounds that said sanction is no longer needed, but such requests may only be made once every six months, or whatever longer period the committee may specify.

# These provisions apply only to discretionarycontentious sanctionstopic restrictions placed by administrators and to blocks placed by administrators to enforce arbitration case decisions. They do not apply to sanctions directly authorized by the committee, and enacted either by arbitrators or by arbitration clerks, or to special functionary blocks of whatever nature.

# All actions designated as arbitration enforcement actions, including those alleged to be out of process or against existing policy, must first be appealed following arbitration enforcement procedures to establish if such enforcement is inappropriate before the action may be reversed or formally discussed at another venue.}}

{{cob}}

{{cot|Information for administrators processing requests}}

Thank you for participating in this area. AE works best if there are a variety of admins bringing their expertise to each case. There is no expectation to comment on every case, and the Arbitration Committee (ArbCom) thanks all admins for whatever time they can give.

:* If you participate on this page you should be prepared to mete out potentially long term bans and you should expect reactive behavior from those banned.

:*Administrators who consistently make questionable enforcement administrative actions, or whose actions are consistently overturned by community or Arbitration Committee discussions may be asked to cease performing such activities or be formally restricted from taking such activities.

A couple of reminders:

:* The enforcement measures in arbitration cases should be construed liberally in order to protect Wikipedia and keep it running efficiently. Not all enforcement requests will show behavior restricted by ArbCom. It may, however, violate other Wikipedia policies and guidelines which you may use administrative discretion to deal with.

:* More than one side in a dispute may have Arbitration Committee conduct rulings applicable to them.

* Before commenting, please familiarise yourself with the referenced ArbCom case. Please also read all the evidence (including diffs) presented in the AE request.

:* Once an issue is resolved, enclose it between {{tl|hat}} and {{tl|hab}} tags, after which a bot should archive it in 7 days.

* When a request widens to include editors beyond the initial request, these editors must be notified and the notifications recorded in the same way as for the initial editor against whom sanctions were requested. Where some part of the outcome is clear, a partial close may be implemented and noted as "Result concerning X".

:*You can use the templates {{tl|uw-aeblock}} (for blocks) or {{tl|AE sanction}} (for other discretionary sanctions) to give notice of sanctions on user talk pages.

:* The enforcementEnforcement measures in arbitration cases should be construed liberally in order to protect Wikipedia and keep it running efficiently. Some Notof allthe behaviour described in an enforcement requestsrequest willmight shownot behaviorbe restricted by ArbCom. It mayHowever, however,it may violate other Wikipedia policies and guidelines which; you may use administrative discretion to dealresolve withit.

:* More than one side in a dispute may have Arbitration CommitteeArbCom conduct rulings applicable to them. Please ensure these are investigated.

Closing a thread:

:* Once an issue is resolved, enclose it between {{tl|hat}} and {{tl|hab}} tags, after which. aA bot should archive it in 7 days.

* Please consider [[WP:ARCA|referring the case to ARCA]] if the outcome is a recommendation to do so or the issue regards administrator conduct.

:* You can use the templates {{tl|uw-aeblock}} (for blocks) or {{tl|AE sanction}} (for other discretionarycontentious topic sanctionsrestrictions) to give notice of sanctions on user talk pages.

* Please log sanctions in the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration enforcement log|Arbitration enforcement log]].

Thanks again for helping. If you have any questions, please post on the [[WT:AE|talk page]].

{{cob}}

Line 61 ⟶ 117:

[[Category:Wikipedia arbitration templates|Requests/Enforcement/Header]]

</noinclude>

<includeonly>{{namespace detect

|wikipedia = [[Category:Wikipedia arbitration]]

[[Category:Wikipedia requests]]

}}</includeonly>