Talk:Arbitration Committee
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
[edit] Revision history
- Arbitration Committee/Import Revision History until October 6, 2006. ~Kylu (u|t) 21:20, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Rewrite needed
At first glamce, I wondered what on earth this page was doing at meta since it describes the enwiki arb com, not the concept arb com more in a more general sense. Having this page at meta eems to imply that the workings and definitions of the enwiki are com defines what and how an arb com is and should act. I agree the enwiki arb com is a very important inspiration for probably all the different arb coms around, for two reasons: 1) it was the first one. 2) it was created by our almight god-king Jimbo, and so this way of dealing with things should have his approval.
The problem is bigger than this page, really. Meta has served several purposes, of which two are distinctly very different: meta discussions for English Wikipedia, and stuff above project level. If Meta is to become a functional wiki concerning things above project level (does anyone still believe in that?) I sincerely think all this enwiki stuff has to been thrown out and replaced with material which is truly above project level. // habj 13:35, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
- I agree with habj. This page needs a major re-edition. In it's actual state, it's useless for projects other than en-wiki. Jtico 13:44, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Quick report on Dutch ArbCom
The elections for the term starting 1 september 2008 have just been concluded. A central theme was how the five pillars relate to the work of the ArbCom. Over the past year there have been cases where users who raised problems in the Dutch Wikipedia by adding blatant nonsense, violating the No Original Research policy, etc, ended up before the ArbCom, with the ArbCom taking the position: "Keep up the good work. You others, leave him in peace."
Thus the question was raised if the candidates were in favor of the ArbCom taking the five pillars as a central consideration, in adjucating cases. Candidates took various positions on the matter; finally only those were elected who were opposed to the ArbCom even looking at the edits of a user in making a ruling on that user. - Brya 05:22, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
-
- A minor update: after a long period of inactivity (no cases submitted) there are now developments. Over the past month 3 out of 7 arbitrators stepped down because of internal problems, which mostly were left unspecified. There are hints of revising either the rules governing the ArbCom or their internal pocedures (direction of changes thus far also unspecified). - Brya 08:12, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
