Wikipedia:Arbitration policy proposed updating/FT2

This page represents a review of the first proposed version dated 17:58, 11 October 2008.

Arbitration policy and arbitration requests governs some of the projects most sensitive areas. They are not lightly amended, and should be carefully thought about. Possible edits for discussion are in bold and explained via footnotes (summary on discussion page).

FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 12:14, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration represents the final step in the English Wikipedia's dispute resolution procedures. This arbitration policy describes and provides guidelines for the workings of the Arbitration Committee (ArbCom). The Arbitration Policy was originally created and adopted in 2004, and has been updated in [month] 2008 by consensus of the community as endorsed by Jimbo Wales and the Arbitration Committee itself.^[1]

^ Arbitration Policy should say how it can be amended, and also say where Jimbo fits in, and why.
Rationale: the community only proposes matters that relate to the Committee and the Arbitration process. For example, in the Arbcom elections, the community votes and Jimbo decides who to appoint based upon that vote. For those who view everything as a communal decision, Arbcom related matters never were at any stage, other than Jimbo's as project leader. The most accurate description of policy change is probably that it would be some kind of tripartite decision between Jimbo, the community, and the then-committee. Probably in realistic terms it would end up like the Arbcom elections, ie communally discussed and Jimbo final say.

See also proposed policy talk page, #Issue 2: Jimbo-related policies and also #Issue 6: Formal correction.

[Jimbo-1] Arbitration Policy should say how it can be amended, and also say where Jimbo fits in, and why.
Rationale: the community only proposes matters that relate to the Committee and the Arbitration process. For example, in the Arbcom elections, the community votes and Jimbo decides who to appoint based upon that vote. For those who view everything as a communal decision, Arbcom related matters never were at any stage, other than Jimbo's as project leader. The most accurate description of policy change is probably that it would be some kind of tripartite decision between Jimbo, the community, and the then-committee. Probably in realistic terms it would end up like the Arbcom elections, ie communally discussed and Jimbo final say.

See also proposed policy talk page, #Issue 2: Jimbo-related policies and also #Issue 6: Formal correction.

[1]