UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration

Shortcut:
A/A

While the wiki community attempts to work on the basis of encouragement and cooperation, there are occasions where wiki users find themselves unable to reach accord. In the event of this happening, the Arbitration Team may be called upon to intervene, and attempt to find a reasonable compromise that, while perhaps not satisfying both parties, may at least assist in defusing the situation, thanks to the unbiased third party.

Guidelines for Arbitration Requests

In assisting in Arbitration, we generally suggest that both parties agree to the Arbitration. This is not, by any means, a requirement, but we do require that both parties be represented in proceedings.

Any Arbitration request should provide at least the following:

• The aggrieved parties. Either person vs person, or [list of people] vs [list of people].
• The reason for the arbitration. This should very specifically be without reference to people, as that information has already been provided. It should be a short paragraph indicating the causes of the aggrievement, and why both parties feel it requires arbitration
• Any pages affected by the aggrievement. This should be a simple list of links.

Once the Arbitration commences, the Arbitrator will request statements from all parties involved. Any evidence to back up one's statement should be provided in link form. Each party will then have an opportunity to rebut their opponent's statement. After these two steps, the Arbitrator will then consider the case, and reach a conclusion, and determine the outcome that is required. It's the duty of the Arbitrator to move a case he accepted to a subpage of UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration, and to update the status of the arbitration case in the Arbitration Cases in Progress section.

As a note, by requesting an Arbitration, all parties are thus obliged to accept the outcome of the Arbitration. Not doing will be considered Vandalism, and such vandalism attempts will be treated as if the vandal has already received two warnings.

After the Arbitration is over, it will then be moved to an archive page. As publicly accessible pages, they may be used to establish precedent in further, applicable cases.

Current Arbitrators

For guidelines on how to arbitrate, see Arbitration Guidelines.

The following users have placed their hand up as users who are willing to be contacted to act as an Arbitrator. The role of Arbitrator is not restricted to the Administration Team; any user can be contacted as an Arbitrator (even if not listed below) and use this page for the arbitration, so long as both parties agree to the Arbitrator. Users who wish to place their hand up as an Arbitrator should place their name below on the list, using *{{usr|YourUserPage}}

Also note that not all listed Arbitrators are active on the Wiki.

edit Volunteer Arbitrators in Alphabetical Order
DanceDanceRevolution	Rosslessness

Arbitration Cases Currently Under Consideration

Administration Notice

Use this header to create new arbitration cases. Once all sides have chosen an arbiter, move the case to a sub-page of UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration and update its status in the Arbitration Cases in Progress section.

There are currently no cases under consideration

User:Cornholioo versus User:Devorac

Hello,

Sorry if I'm doing this wrong. I was told I could report someone on this page. So, a user called Devorac has been causing vandalism to the Battle of Krinks page. He has been re-adding subjective texts after I've removed them. See also this link: http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Battle_of_Krinks&diff=1677678&oldid=1677674 Could anyone please give him a warning or something?

Thanks in advance,

Cornholioo.

This is not a subjective text. The Philosophe Knights Have declared our position in the Battle of Krinks. We will be joining the battle. Unless the meaning of subjective has changed while I was gone this is in no way "Subjective". I would like to file a counter-case against Cornholioo for constantly editing material pertaining to the Battle of Krinks. If possible I would like to have a neutral arbitrator appointed to the page, rather than have 48/63 page edits made by the same person, even if no bias is meant it is sure to be imparted. -Devorac 18:17, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Right, well Arbitration isn't about "warning" people or "reporting" them. It's about solving the underlying issues under page disputes, and ensuring that there aren't problems about. It's essentially in the form of discussion between the involved parties led by a neutral arbitrator (who the sides will agree on before the case begins). At the end, the arbitrator will make a ruling based on the discussion, designed to resolve the issues at hand. For instance, in your case, it'll likely involve a ruling on what should happen to the page in question, and will likely include a ruling to stop you contacting each other to stir up more problems.

As such, I volunteer to arbitrate this case. There's also a list of other users who might be willign to arbitrate above. Both parties should, if they are willing to proceed, nominate users who they would accept to arbitrate the case.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 19:00, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

I accept Yonnua Koponen as arbitrator for the case. -Devorac 19:02, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

I offer to arbitrate. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 19:51, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

As you're a Philosophe Knight, I feel you should probably note the fact that you're an associated party to one side.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 19:52, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

I think the very clear link in my sig might give it away. Also, my Knight is a non-combatant and will not be taking part in this Krink's business, he's busy at the mansion. So much for your involved party argument. However I do have experience in resolving disputes between diametrically opposed parties, including BB2, MT09, the Knights to name but a few. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 19:55, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

I know, I just feel you should let them know before a group member of one of the party's arbitrates the case.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 19:58, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Have you disclosed that you are in fact a dirty communist in real life? -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 20:02, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Arbitration Cases in Progress

Active cases

User:Iscariot versus User:Ravenium

Ravenium has:

1. engaged in a smear campaign against the Militant Order of Barhah
2. refused to provide any proof of his allegations
3. edited to remove all credit of MOB (even when allowed by NPOV guidelines) from danger reports
4. refused to listen to basic logic and proof that has been provided by other users
5. engaged in edit wars in bad faith to try and force his pro-survivor view on contested pages

I contest his edits to the Pole Mall danger report and seek to have these matter resolved by an arbitrator.

I will accept User:Revenant, User:Grogh, User:Amber Waves of Pain or User:Rosslessness as arbitrator. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 02:38, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Having seen this edit war in progress, I'll vouch for Izzy's side of things. Ravenium has been heavy-handedly biased in labelled others as 'griefers' and reverting NPOV reports. 02:48, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

I realize Iscariot has named those he would like, however, if they decline I will volunteer myself to arbitrate. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 06:32, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Sure I'll arby. Thats my only comment on the case I'll make, to avoid bias.--Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 09:38, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

I shove my hand in the air, in case this user does not accept anyone from Iscariot's list.--Big Cat 10:10, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Recently Concluded cases

Cheveyo vs Rosslessness

Involved Users	Cheveyo vs. Rosslessness
Arbitrator	Maverick Farrant
Created	09:38, 21 January 2010 (UTC) by Cheveyo
Status	Completed
Summary	Dispute over Zerging Allegations

Taco2 vs Iscariot

Involved Users	Taco2 vs. Iscariot
Arbitrator	None
Created	19:51, 27 December 2009 (UTC) by Taco2
Status	Archived.
Summary	Taco2 was unsatisfied and offended by Iscariot's behaviour around her.

Zombie Lord vs Bob Boberton

Involved Users	Zombie Lord vs. Bob Boberton
Arbitrator	Yonnua Koponen
Created	23:04, 1 January 2010 (UTC) by Yonnua Koponen
Status	Completed.
Summary	Zombie Lord wants Bob to stop commenting on his DS suggestions.

Lelouch vs Zombie Lord

Involved Users	Lelouch vs. Zombie Lord
Arbitrator	SA
Created	00:34, 31 December 2009 (UTC) by Lelouch
Status	Completed
Summary	Dispute over Developing Suggestions

Archives

• List of Arbitration Cases