Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard
Wikipedia Arbitration |
---|
|
Track related changes |
This noticeboard is for announcements and statements made by the Arbitration Committee. Only members of the Arbitration Committee or the Committee's Clerks may post on this page, but all editors are encouraged to comment on the talk page.
Motion: India-Pakistan
The Arbitration Committee has resolved by motion that:
SheriffIsInTown's topic ban from pages related to conflict between India and Pakistan is lifted, subject to a probationary period lasting six months from the date this motion is enacted. During this period, any uninvolved administrator may re-impose the topic ban as an arbitration enforcement action, subject to appeal only to the Arbitration Committee. If the probationary period elapses without incident, the topic ban is to be considered permanently lifted.
For the Arbitration Committee, -- Amanda (aka DQ) 23:04, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
Proposed amendment to the arbitration policy
The Arbitration Committee has resolved by motion that:
Pursuant to the arbitration policy's section on "Ratification and amendment", the Arbitration Committee resolves that the following change to the arbitration policy will be submitted for formal ratification by community referendum:
The final paragraph of the "Conduct of arbitrators" section of the arbitration policy is amended as follows:
- Any arbitrator who repeatedly or grossly fails to meet the expectations outlined above may be suspended or removed by Committee resolution supported by two-thirds of all arbitrators excluding:
- The arbitrator facing suspension or removal, and;
- Any inactive arbitrator who does not respond within 30 days to attempts to solicit their feedback on the resolution through all known mediums of communication.
This amendment to the arbitration policy will enter into force once it receives majority support, with at least one hundred editors voting in favour of adopting it. Until this amendment is ratified, the existing arbitration policy remains in effect.
For the Arbitration Committee, Bradv🍁 23:08, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Proposed amendment to the arbitration policy
Ratification
The ratification process has begun at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Policy/Proposed amendment (April 2019). ~ Rob13Talk 02:14, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Restoration of sysop privileges to Necrothesp
The Arbitration Committee has resolved by motion that:
On March 14, 2019, the administrator permissions of Necrothesp (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) were temporarily removed as a suspected compromised account under the Level 1 desysopping procedures.
Following discussion concerning account security, and pursuant to the procedures for return of revoked permissions, the Arbitration Committee resolves the following:
The administrator permissions of Necrothesp (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) are restored, provided he enables two-factor authentication on his account.
For the Arbitration Committee, – bradv🍁 03:03, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Restoration of sysop privileges to Necrothesp
Return of permissions for compromised administrator accounts
The Arbitration Committee has resolved by motion that:
Since November 2018, six accounts have been desysopped under the Level I desysopping procedures as compromised administrator accounts. The Arbitration Committee reminds administrators that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." The current policy on security of administrator accounts provides that "a compromised admin account will be blocked and its privileges removed on grounds of site security" and "in certain circumstances, the revocation of privileges may be permanent."
The Arbitration Committee resolves that the return of administrator privileges to a compromised account is not automatic. The committee's procedure at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures § Removal of permissions, subsection Return of permissions, is replaced by the following:
Removal is protective, intended to prevent harm to the encyclopedia while investigations take place, and the advanced permissions will normally be reinstated
onceif a satisfactory explanation is provided or the issues are satisfactorily resolved. If the editor in question requests it, or if the Committee determines that a routine reinstatement of permissions is not appropriate, normal arbitration proceedings shall be opened to examine the removal of permissions and any surrounding circumstances.In cases where an administrator account was compromised, the committee will review all available information to determine whether the administrator followed "appropriate personal security practices" before restoring permissions. Factors used to make this determination include: whether the administrator used a strong password on both their Wikipedia account and associated email account; whether the administrator had reused passwords across Wikipedia or the associated email account and other systems; whether the administrator had enabled two-factor authentication; and how the account was compromised.
If the Committee determines the administrator failed to secure their account adequately, the administrator will not be resysopped automatically. Unless otherwise provided by the committee, the administrator may regain their administrative permissions through a successful request for adminship.
For the Arbitration Committee, – bradv🍁 15:05, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Return of permissions for compromised administrator accounts
Flooded with them hundreds unblocked following successful appeal
Following a successful appeal via email to the arbitration committee, Flooded with them hundreds has been unblocked, with an indefinite one-account restriction and the agreement to publicly disclose all past accounts. The account restriction has been logged at Wikipedia:Editing restrictions#Placed by the Arbitration Committee. The past accounts are:
- MagicSkyPimp (talk · contribs)
- EDMLover (talk · contribs)
- ReZawler (talk · contribs)
- CoffeeMusicGym (talk · contribs)
- PleaseLeaveMeAlone (talk · contribs)
- Zawl (talk · contribs)
- FloodedBot (talk · contribs)
- Z0 (talk · contribs)
- KingAndGod (talk · contribs)
- FWTH (talk · contribs)
- Offend (talk · contribs)
For the Arbitration Committee,
GorillaWarfare (talk) 20:19, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
- Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Flooded with them hundreds unblocked following successful appeal
Arbitration Policy - Community Ratification
The community has ratified the following amendment to the Arbitration Policy.
Any arbitrator who repeatedly or grossly fails to meet the expectations outlined above may be suspended or removed by Committee resolution supported by two-thirds of arbitrators.
to
Any arbitrator who repeatedly or grossly fails to meet the expectations outlined above may be suspended or removed by Committee resolution supported by two-thirds of all arbitrators excluding:
- The arbitrator facing suspension or removal, and;
- Any inactive arbitrator who does not respond within 30 days to attempts to solicit their feedback on the resolution through all known methods of communication.
This provision is now reflected in the policy and is in full force. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 06:50, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
- Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Arbitration Policy - Community Ratification
Motion: Amendment to the standard provision for appeals and modifications (April 2019)
The Arbitration Committee has resolved by motion that:
The following text is added to the "Important notes" section of the standard provision on appeals and modifications, replacing the current text of the fourth note:
All actions designated as arbitration enforcement actions, including those alleged to be out of process or against existing policy, must first be appealed following arbitration enforcement procedures to establish if such enforcement is inappropriate before the action may be reversed or formally discussed at another venue.
For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 00:23, 19 April 2019 (UTC)