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.

Arbitration Cases in Progress

User:Yonnua Koponen vs. User:Misanthropy

Summary:Misanthropy has posted an obnoxiously large image on Demotions, and, after I made it smaller so that it didn't spam up the page, Misanthropy continued to revert the edit, starting an edit war.

There's case precedent here, showing that images can be reduced in size when there's massively over the top - in that case it was a talk page, but in this case it's an administrative page, where obviously there are harsher restrictions on massive images.

I ask that the image is (at a compromise) reduced to a maximum of 300 pixels, and preferably I ask that it is completely removed from the page and placed on the relevant talk page instead.

There is no reason to pointlessly spam up administrative pages just to have fun, which is what misanthropy seems to be doing.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 16:29, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

I accept this case and demand that Yon stop editing my (non-page breaking) comments without pressing reason to do so. I will accept anyone impartial, preferably Aichon given the page in question. 16:33, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Aichon would make sense, if he's willing.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 16:34, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

You're both massive tards. I'll offer my services. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 17:27, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Ross nailed it. Would also offer. --Thadeous Oakley 17:41, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Due a recent history of heated arguments between both parties I also suggest some form of restraint, possibly restricting use of talk pages. --Thadeous Oakley 17:49, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Will accept Ross. 17:48, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

If Ross is willing, I'd rather that he handle it. I've always preferred to stay out of arbies as much as possible. —Aichon— 22:53, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm in a good mood, so I'll give an alternative settlement before arbies. This: It stays for now, but is made smaller when it's archived. Deal or none?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:02, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Surely the other way round would make more sense (which I'd agree to)? Since there's no point having the bigger one reduced when the page traffic halts entirely, like. 22:07, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

No, it wouldn't, because I'm not sure if you've gathered this, it's not about page traffic, it's about the image being fucking annoying and unfunny. Ross is right. Both of you go back to the IO unit. -- LEMON #1 22:12, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, so having the smaller one now and reverting back to big when archived and not being looked at (hence "no page traffic", duh) makes more sense than big now and smaller when archived. Get back to the opticians? 22:26, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

I thought you meant traffic as in network traffic! You're all still retarded though! -- LEMON #1 22:35, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Page traffic, like people actually looking at the page. 300 wide now when it's in use, original 800 when it's archived and no one's actually looking at it. 22:41, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

I tend to agree that small now, large later, makes more sense. It preserves usability now and intent later. —Aichon— 22:53, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

In my opinion, images like that should abide by the image rules explained in the signature policy, especially on admin pages. That would be 16 px, anything larger then the sentences is just dumb.--Thadeous Oakley 22:59, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, that is what I meant, I wrote it down the wrong way round. Right, shall we have this as an unofficial arbies ruling then?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 23:00, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Sure. 23:03, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

But you'll both have to shake hands and say sowwie afterwards >:0 --Thadeous Oakley 23:03, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Right, feel free to resize it when it gets moved to the archive (I will if I archive it, but I probably won't, it's likely be DDR or Ross).--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 23:07, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Excellent. You're still both tards. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 23:14, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

demote the cunts Archive this?--Thadeous Oakley 23:21, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Recently Concluded cases

Please see Category:Arbitration Cases for older arbitration cases.

Archives

• List of Arbitration Cases