Currently, there are no requests for arbitration.
Open cases
Currently, no arbitration cases are open.
Recently closed cases (Past cases)
Case name | Closed |
---|---|
Venezuelan politics | 25 May 2024 |
Request name | Motions | Case | Posted |
---|---|---|---|
Amendment request: World War II and the history of Jews in Poland | Motion | (orig. case) | 21 June 2024 |
Amendment request: Extended confirmed restriction | none | none | 25 July 2024 |
Motion name | Date posted |
---|---|
Majority required to open a case | 21 March 2022 |
Majority required close a case | 21 March 2022 |
Opening of proceedings amendment | 29 March 2022 |
![]() | This page can be used by arbitrators to propose motions not related to any existing case or request. Motions are archived at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Motions. Only arbitrators may propose or vote on motions on this page. You may visit WP:ARCorWP:ARCA for potential alternatives. Make a motion (Arbitrators only) You can make comments in the sections called "community discussion" or in some cases only in your own section. Arbitrators or clerks may summarily remove or refactor any comment. |
The Arbitration Committee procedure on "Opening of proceedings" (Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures § Opening of proceedings) is amended replacing Its acceptance has been supported by either of (i) four net votes or (ii) an absolute majority of active, non-recused arbitrators;
with Its acceptance has been supported by an absolute majority of active, non-recused arbitrators;
Abstentions | Support votes needed for majority |
---|---|
0–1 | 7 |
2–3 | 6 |
4–5 | 5 |
The Arbitration Committee procedure on "Motions to close" (Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures § Motions to close) is amended so to read as follows:
Once voting on a proposed decision appears to have ended, an arbitrator will move to close the case. To be adopted, a motion to close requires the support an absolute majority of active, non-recused arbitrators.
A final consideration period of at least 24 hours will usually elapse after a majority of votes to close the case has been reached. However, closure may be fast-tracked if an absolute majority of active, non-recused arbitrators vote to do so.
Markup of changes |
---|
|
Abstentions | Support votes needed for majority |
---|---|
0–1 | 7 |
2–3 | 6 |
4–5 | 5 |
Once voting... appears to have ended...) that there are no outstanding votes. The thought that since we need a majority to amend a case also seems rather valid, but since each passing motion already should have a majority support it seems more of a procedural nitpick than a practical one. I am leaning towards opposing this change at the moment but have not yet landed there formally. Primefac (talk) 10:07, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The Arbitration Committee procedure on "Opening of proceedings" (Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures § Opening of proceedings) is amended so the first line reads:
A case is eligible to be opened when it meets all of the following criteria
Abstentions | Support votes needed for majority |
---|---|
0–1 | 7 |
2–3 | 6 |
4–5 | 5 |
The current text indicates that the arbitration request "will proceed" if the criteria are met. This implies that after the 24-hour grace period is over, allowing for arbitrators to change their minds, the case has been definitively accepted. It doesn't, in my view, imply that the case pages must be created on a strict schedule. Is the proposed amendment intended to extend the grace period after criteria 1 and 3 have been met, so that an arbitrator could change their mind and the case is no longer eligible? Or is it just intended to address the fact that cases aren't instantly opened? If the latter, then I suggest leaving the existing wording, and adding an explanatory note somewhere about when the case pages are created. isaacl (talk) 23:58, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Although a case may be eligible to be opened, arbitrators may resolve the request through other action, such as a motion.isaacl (talk) 02:29, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]