Jump to content

Global requests committee

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
There was a 2010 RfC about this proposed committee: Requests for comment/Global requests committee
This page is currently a draft.

More information pertaining to this may be available on the talk page.

A global requests committee (GRC) is a body that would facilitate the resolution of disputes across multiple projects, and processes requests for global blocks and bans, as well as supervise steward elections and controversial requests on Steward requests/Global (SRG). The committee will work towards conflict resolution, will give advice to projects without internal conflict handling devices and will mediate in conflicts involving more than one project.


  1. Facilitating and closing discussions of controversial cross-project requests
    • Controversial requests made at SRG, and RFC, including global [un]blocks and [un]locks (i.e., cross-project behavior problems)
    • Controversial requests at SRGP, including investigation of abuse of global rights (including steward and global sysop rights, excluding global rollback)
  2. Facilitating other global processes
    • Supervising steward elections, replacing the ad-hoc steward election committee
    • Identifying cross-project community requests emerging from global discussions
  3. Helping communities to establish internal means of conflict resolution and discussion
    • Disputes on projects that do not yet have mediation or dispute resolution mechanisms (e.g., no active admins), or where these mechanisms are themselves part of the dispute
    • Disputes involving an entire small project (or a majority of its contributors) where there are no impartial observers from that community

Stewards will continue to handle uncontroversial requests on SRG and SRGP, but have the choice to direct requests to the committee if they are controversial or disputed. Meta contributors will continue to handle uncontroversial RFCs, but will have the same choice.

Choosing members[edit]

Initial members would be appointed by the Board after a public nomination process. They would organize the policies of the committee including how to choose and replenish members each year, which would then be approved by the Board.


The initial members will have to organize their work as they see fit, defining a charter that lays out duties and procedures. They should work closely with the Ombudsmen to find ways to coordinate or combine efforts as needed.