From: Delirium delirium@rufus.d2g.com Reply-To: wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 13:07:43 -0800 To: wikipedia-l@wikipedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Arbitration/mediation on en
I think this is already what you have in mind, but just to clarify what I think is an important point, is this the correct understanding of the two committees' "power", such that it is? --
Mediation: Involved in both disputes between users, and in particularly difficult disputes over articles (including content and content presentation), for example by suggesting compromise wording or rearrangements. Mediators have no specific power to impose a solution, but should act in good faith, and hopefully their efforts will be seen as a good faith attempt to mediate disputes to reach a mutually agreeable conclusion.
Arbitration: *Only* tasked with reviewing potential bans of users. Does *not* have any power with regards to arbitrating the disputes over content or content presentation. Basically, this committee is what decides when someone simply cannot work within Wikipedia, after an appeal from someone who has made that claim and asked the user to be banned. The actual disputes themselves stay at the mediation level indefinitely, and are not subject to arbitration (any "voting" decision on them would be a wider vote on the talk page, presumably).
-Mark
The arbitrators cannot decide any dispute that is not submitted to us, but I think our jurisdiction should include disputes over content in appropriate instances, for example, where repeated struggles to produce a NPOV article have failed.
Fred