Wikipedia talk:Dispute resolution/Mediation and Arbitration proposal

Mediation and Arbitration for problem users at Wikipedia

The basic philosophy of Wikipedia (probably inherent in wiki based social software) is to try and reach a consensus in decision-making; this allows for the creation and maintenance of a stable knowledge base.

In line with these principles a discussion has been going on regarding the establishment of a system of mediation and arbitration. This system is proposed to resolve issues of users who have repeatedly violated Wikipedia's policies, most specifically Wikipedia's etiquette towards other users as stated at Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines and Wikipedia:Wikiquette.

Mediation

The first step that should be undertaken to resolve all disputes is to put such individuals who face such disputes to the review of a mediator. Any user or group of users may request mediation for some who may be a problem user. If a group the group should pick one person to represent them. That person should contact the Wikipedia:Mediation Committee. That committee will appoint someone to act as a mediator. That mediator will contact the user who is engaging in problematic behavior and inform the user that mediation has been requested. See also: meta:mediation and Wikipedia:Requests for mediation

Procedure for mediation

Mediation is a private process. Anything that is said or discussed in mediation may not be used later in any arbitration proceeding or any other proceeding. The mediator is there to help the different sides of the disagreement to express their point of view and hopefully the parties will be able to understand the point of view of the opposing side. The hope is that through mediation some kind of agreement will be reached and the parties shall follow that agreement.

There are no standardized procedures for mediation. If the parties can agree it can take any form. It may be done by email, by instant messenger, by telephone or by any other mutually agreed upon means.

While the mediator is initially neutral the goal is to reach some kind of mutually agreeable solution, so the mediator may appear to be taking sides during the mediation. It is important to remember that the mediator cannot force any party to the mediation to come to a particular decision and if that has been done any agreement may not be respected as being entered into under duress or undue influence.

If the parties agree to a course of action as a solution, i.e. the problem user agrees to not do certain things, if the problem user does those actions they can be banned immediately. Such agreements shall be posted on the Mediation Committee's pages and also linked to the user's talk page, displayed in a predominant position.

Arbitration

If mediation fails (no agreement is reached) then the parties will be directed to the Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee. At this point the person representing the group of users making the complaint about the user to be banned shall review all the complaints made by users about the alleged problem user. That person will make a written complaint to the committee that states with particularity (links to the relevant pages) the type of behaviour complained of and a request for a temporary (of a specified limited duration) or permanent ban.

The Arbitration Committee shall give this representative a list of arbitrators who are available to take on a new case, that representative will chose one arbitrator. The Arbitration Committee will then forward the complaint to the alleged violator along with the name of the chosen arbitrator. At this point the alleged violator may choose a volunteer advocate among available volunteers who are willing to help the accused user present the best possible defense to the Arbitration Committee. At this point the alleged violator may accept the single arbitrator or may request a three member arbitration panel. In the three memeber arbitration panel the alleged violator will chose the second arbitrator and then the third arbitrator will be chosen by the two arbitrators that have been chosen by the two sides.

The arbitration shall be done in writing to maintain a record (this may be done by email, . The submissions (as the record of the proceeding) will not be available to the Wikipedia community until after the arbitration has been completed and a reasoned decision published, which must be within thirty days from the arbitration request. The arbitrator(s) may make any additional rules for that specific case as he/she/they see fit; and the representative who brings any charges may request specific written submissions from any registered (not anonymous) user on Wikipedia. If any such submissions are requested, the alleged violator or their advocate will be also allowed to pose questions to the same user. All users must reasonably cooperate with the Arbitration Committee and any user representative or volunteer advocate and respond to their questions within reasonable deadlines.

The record of arbitration shall be posted on one of the pages of the Arbitration Committee and may not be deleted except by authority of Jimmy Wales. It will be the job of Jimmy Wales to implement the decision of the arbitrators. Users (including the alleged violator) may privately appeal to Jimmy Wales and seek to have the decision of the Arbitration Committee overturned if the committee comes to a decision banning a user. In no case may Jimmy Wales impose a ban if the Arbitration Committee has made a decision in the alleged violator's favour.

If a complaint has been made and an arbitration completed and the case is dismissed and the user is not banned any future behaviour by the accused violator may be placed before the mediation and arbitration committee's again including the behaviours that had been previously reviewed. If the user is banned and later is allowed to come back to Wikipedia, none of the user's prior behaviours can be used against them again since they had received a punishment for those behaviors and had completed their punishment. See: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration

de:Wikipedia:Vermittlungsausschuss