Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Party Guide/Introduction: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 02:12, 4 August 2024

Latest revision as of 02:45, 31 January 2025

Line 7:

== Features of Arbitration Cases ==

* '''Act as a last resort:''' Arbitration Cases are designed to be the final stage of Wikipedia dispute resolution. This means a problem has normally been discussed at other places and by the community as a whole before it becomes an Arbitration Case. When this hasn't happened, the Arbitration Committee will normally decline to hear the case. An exception to this is certain kinds of misconduct from administrators. The Arbitration Committee continues to be a last resort in this case, but because it is the only group which may remove an administrator it will sometimes hear a case about administrators without prior steps in the dispute resolution process.

* '''Examine conduct not content:''' The Arbitration Committee only handles the behavior of editors and does not get to have the final say about content in articles. There are times when the editor misbehavior may be about content, but the process is still about the behavior of the editor, not about the content. For example, an editor who lies about what a source says may be sanctioned for the lie.

* '''"Break the back" of the dispute''': Because it's a last resort, a dispute may come to arbitration after many months, or even years of conflict. Some disputes are related to a long-term, real-life controversy or dispute. Many disputants, perhaps including you, will be frustrated with the dispute. Arbitrators will aim to clarify the issues among themselves and establish the case's history, then take action so that the dispute becomes easier for the community to resolve or to manage on an ongoing basis. Arbitration will rarely resolve a situation completely.

* '''Not be a legal process''': With no fixed approaches to problems, all actions, conduct, and relevant evidence may be taken into account.{{NoteTag|The exception to this is private evidence, which is normally evidence which happens off-wiki. The arbitrationArbitration committeeCommittee may decline to hear private evidence in a case.}} A person's general manner, past actions, and the impressions of them by reasonable people will be used to guide the arbitrators into establishing how best to de-escalate the dispute.

* '''Intended to serve Wikipedia''': Arbitrators focus on the risk and benefits for the future, not on past issues. Arbitration aims to find the best way to move users beyond the dispute. For this reason, the committee is more likely to consider if a user can change, or what restrictions would be of benefit to the project, than on who said what in the past.