 | This page is currently inactive and is retained forhistorical reference. Either the page is no longer relevant or consensus on its purpose has become unclear. To revive discussion, seek broader input via a forum such as thevillage pump. |
|
|
As part of the recentarbitration case on Palestine-Israel articles, a working group is being appointed to look freshly and with a completely open and wide remit at the kinds of nationalistic, ethnic or cultural based editorial conflicts which came to the fore in 2007, which often reflect deep feelings, advocacy, and unreconciled viewpoints in the real world. The aim of the group is to:
FT200:01, 23 January 2008 (UTC), for the Arbitration Committee.[reply]
In 2007, a number of large scale edit wars came to the fore, with many common features:
Examples that reached arbitration include:
Examples for conflicts that are being successfully mediated:
The formal decision which facilitated this group's creation contained four parts:
Passed 10 to 0 01:38, 19 January 2008 (UTC). |
| Nominations/applications (Jan 23, 2008) |
|---|
Applications for places on the Working Group are now open. If interested, please read theworking group guidelines first, and then emailany arbcom member or the Arbitration Committee's private mailing list,arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org. Application is open toany editor in good standing, meeting the tentativecriteria (broadly interpreted and subject to improvement). The Committee will seek to appoint the users it feels would have the best chance of producing a successful report with insightful findings, as its primary criterion. Users wishing to suggest others may do so, but usually are best advised as a courtesy to check beforehand if they would wish to be nominated. Applications should be received prior toJanuary 29 2008, 7 days from now (to allow time for Committee discussion after that date), and the Committee will announce the working group membership byFebruary 2 2008. Arbitrators also invite any general comments and suggestions that are related to the issue, or the proposed approach to it. Please see theworking group guidelines for more. Please ensure you state clearly your username, or a link to your talk page. |
| Appointment and participants (Feb 6, 2008) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Membership in the working group was considered between January 23 and February 2, 2008. On February 6, the following users were appointed to the working group. In addition a number of others were given observer standing, explained below. The arbitration committee, in choosing the working group members, deemed that"The Committee will seek to appoint the users it feels would have the best chance of producing a successful report with insightful findings, as its primary criterion". This was carefully considered. Accordingly there are likely to be some surprises, also explained below. 1. Working group members:
We feel strongly that this group should be created genuinely fresh and cover a wider than usual range of experiences and viewpoints, subject to the guideline requirement to be able to work with others and to value communal norms. Of the above, some have rejected adminship, some have criticized past decisions (of various kinds, communal, arbcom etc), a few have been mediators and others "just good editors" or administrators putting work into the relevant areas. A few have had controversy attached. In each case, our sole criteria in the decision has been whether the group will be more likely to produce better results for their involvement, and their ability to meet the criteria set out in the guidelines and work beneficially. 2. Observers A number of users who applied, will be given access to the working group's discussions as described below. Users who are not in the formal working group but are given access this way include:
The intent is that the group may benefit from the views of users who are uninvolved in the main discussion but may come up with additional perspectives and analyses for consideration now and then. Observer status also better suits certain people's skills and approaches, users who are interested but expect to become busy or away, users who are uncertain about their level of involvement, and users with other specialist insight and experience relevant to an aspect of the issue. Movement between the groups will probably be allowed in some cases. 3. Next... To all who applied and are not listed above - thank you for your interest and time. It was valued, and brought several names to attention that would otherwise not have been. Much of what was said did make a difference. Matters are in hand for the working group, and an email will be sent to all the above by the end of the week with further details. Anyone wishing to discuss any aspect of the working group or its activities, please feel free toemail me. FT2 (Talk | email)19:18, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply] |
