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 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.

Available Arbitrators in Alphabetical Order
AnimeSucks Axe Hack Blood Panther boxy Cheeseman Conndraka Cyberbob240 Drawde Gus Thomas	Galaxy125 hagnat Haliman111 Honestmistake Iscariot J3D Karek Kikashie Labine50 Linkthewindow	MichaelRead Nubis Sergeant William Holt SirArgo Sonny Corleone Suicidal Angel The General Toejam Z. slay3r

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.

St. Iscariot, Wiki Martyr and Mall Tour 2009 versus User:Sgt_Raiden

Given the incompetence of the sysop team in ruling a vandalism case correctly, St. Iscariot, Wiki Martyr, and The Mall Tour 2009 seek to prevent the user known as Sgt Raiden from making any further edits on this wiki concerning the Mall Tour 2009. I will accept User:Johnny Bass, User:Dr Cory Bjornson and User:Fifth Element as arbitrators. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 05:10, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Call me stupid, but aren't Johnny and Fifth Element both working with the Mall Tour, and since the Mall Tour is named in this case... Linkthewindow  Talk  05:28, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

OK, you're stupid. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 05:31, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I am not part of this case. Wiki Martyr 06:46, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Extraneous discussion moved to talk page -- Cheese 02:06, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

LOL, quite a case to bring against a wiki newbie... seeking to forbid them from commenting on one of the major current events in the game, and giving them a list of arbitrators to pick from, all of whom are Mall Tourists. Noice -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 10:12 15 January 2009 (BST)

You could have handed out a warning and reverted the contentious edit, and all of this would have been avoided, the warning itself would have been struck before the end of the Mall Tour 2009 given his rate of contributions. However, you didn't, and stated clearly that it was a matter for arbitration. You're always going on about how I don't follow correct procedure, well I did what you told me to do.... -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 16:28, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

So much for the user who claims its the sysops fault that users are being driven away from the wiki. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{talk mod} 10:26, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I reject you as a potential arbitrator. According to your own badly crafted guidelines, please refrain from posting on the main page of this case again. Take it to the talk page, I'm sure someone will read what you have to say. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 16:28, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I offer to arbitrate. --Pestolence^(talk) 21:49, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

How about before this turns into a totally irrelevant and bitter flame war, someone gets Sgt. Raiden to actually respond and accept or reject this case?--SirArgo ^Talk 21:52, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

He's been notified on his talk page already. (And I don't believe you can reject a case.) --Pestolence^(talk) 21:57, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't think thats actually ever been tried, however, i think that rejecting (or rather refusing to take part) would be a valid response given that arbitration is by definition a process involving 2 parties agreeing to accept the input of a nuetral 3rd! In any event he can just refuse all arbitration until the case collapses... It's a shit way to do it; and should not really be allowed; but it is a tried and tested way to fuck with the system!--Honestmistake 00:05, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

And while I understand all of that, what I was getting at is why don't we give him a decent chance to respond before this page turns into an all out war.--SirArgo ^Talk 01:07, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

What are the edits which have brought this case forth? All I can see is someone posting POV stuff. While I'm sure that Sgt Raiden needs a lesson on keeping his posts in an netural POV on suburb pages and what not, I don't see any reason in his edits for an arbitration case, let alone you trying to resolve the issue by you talking to him. As of such, unless you give me a really good reason not to archive this case, this case will be removed within the next few days. - Jedaz - 00:37/16/01/2009

Extraneous discussion moved to talk page -- Cheese 02:06, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Ok, ok! God, after pointless notifies i accept the ****ing case! God, I don't even want to post about Mall Tour 2009. THERE. ARE YOU SATISFIED??! MRH!!!!!!! --Sgt Raiden

Sgt Raiden... You can come to an agreement and the Arby can be dropped... Just because it's started doesn't mean it has to keep going... But I'd assume Iscariot would have to trust you at your word... Try. --WanYao 23:41, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

What Wan said. Since all Iscariot really wants is you to stop posting about the mall tour, you can just agree to do that and this will hopefully go away. Linkthewindow  Talk  23:56, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps we don't want to just advise him to bow down to Iscariots blatant misuse of the Arbitration system.....--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 20:26, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Just archive it, nobody cares about this case. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 20:41, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Arbitration Cases in Progress

Active cases

Umbrella Biohazard Containment Service vs Umbrella Corporation

Involved Users	Umbrella Biohazard Containment Service, Umbrella Corporation
Arbitrator	Cheese
Created	23:33, 9 January 2009 (UTC) by Haliman - Talk
Status	Undefined
Summary	An attempt to mediate the hostilies between UBCS and Umbrella as well as prepare a POV neutral war report page

Recently Concluded cases

There are currently no recently concluded cases, see the archives for older cases

Archives

• List of Arbitration Cases