Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/Header

This is a message board for requesting and discussing enforcement of Arbitration Committee (ArbCom) decisions. Administrators are needed to help enforce ArbCom decisions. Any user is welcome to request help here if a user is in violation of an ArbCom decision. Please make your comments concise.

Are you sure this is the page you are looking for?

This page only involves violations of final ArbCom decisions. It is not for re-opening the dispute, or arguing about any ongoing dispute, but purely to compare a user's actions to any ruling that may apply to them, and enforcing a suitable remedy if there is a breach.

Other remedies you may be looking for:

• Three-revert rule violations are best reported on the 3RR noticeboard (WP:AN/3RR). Even if an editor has an arbitration ruling about reverts, you will likely get a quicker response there.
• Reporting of incidents that do not involve a completed Arbitration case (e.g. blocked users evading blocks, breach of a proposed ruling, etc) is done on the Administrator's incidents noticeboard (WP:AN/I).
• Specific assistance from an administrator can be obtained via Wikipedia:Requests for administrator attention. To request assistance from a specific administrator, see [[User talk:Whomever]].
• Block appeals (unblocking) can are addressed by following the suggestions at appealing a block.
• To request arbitration of a matter, please go to Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration.

If a user has breached an arbcom ruling, but others provoked them, or have breached rulings as well:

• This is enforcement, not dispute resolution. The case has already been ruled on. The question here is whether they engaged in conduct that breached that ruling.
• If others breached a ruling too, then they should be likewise listed here for enforcement.
• If others acted problematically, but did not breach a ruling, then seek normal dispute resolution, administrative action or an extension of the original ruling (see below).

If a case remedy has proven inadequate, unhelpful, or a user's conduct received complaints at arbcom but was not sufficiently addressed, then it is possible to open a request for an extension of the case ruling. Examples:

• A user was topic-banned from George Bush but has now begun similar conduct on another political figure's article. Extension to cover "political biographies" not just one politician.
• Evidence of some misconduct was presented for a user, but they had ceased some time ago and no ruling was given (or it was not sufficient for a ruling to be needed at that time). The behavior is being a problem. Extension sought to obtain some form of probation or restriction ruling.
• Enforcement requirements were limited to 24 hour blocks, but due to ongoing problems administrators feel blocks of a longer period need to be possible.

For further information on arbitration, see Wikipedia:Arbitration guide.

Enforcement

Enforcement requests against users should be based on the principles and decisions in their arbitration case.

Please be aware that these pages aren't the place to bring disputes over content. ArbCom decisions are generally about behavior, not content. Very few editors have content dispute prohibitions. Requests for Comments is still the best place to hash out content disputes.

Most editors under ArbCom sanction are neither trolls nor vandals and should be treated with the same respect as any other editor. We should still Assume Good Faith. ArbCom decisions are designed to be coercive, not punitive. Gaming the system at editors under ArbCom sanction is about as civilized as poking sticks at caged animals. Please do not post slurs of any kind on this page, and note that any messages that egregiously violate Wikipedia's civility or personal attacks policies will be paraphrased and, if reinserted, will be deleted.

If an arbitration case has not been finalized, it is not enforceable. In that case, bad behavior should be reported on WP:AN/I and you should consider adding the behavior to the /Evidence page of the arbitration case.

Administrators:

• ArbCom decisions are the last stop of dispute resolution. ArbCom has already decided that certain types of behavior are not constructive to our purpose of building an encyclopedia and has ruled they should not recur. The question here is whether that prohibition was breached. If you participate on this page you should be prepared to mete out potentially long term bans and you should expect reactive behavior from those banned.
• The enforcement mechanisms listed in each individual case should be construed liberally in order to protect Wikipedia and keep it running efficiently. Not all enforcement requests will show behavior restricted by ArbCom. It may, however, violate other Wikipedia policies and guidelines which you may use administrative discretion to deal with.
• Remember that more than one side in a dispute may have arbcom conduct rulings applicable to them.
• Once an issue is resolved, close it and move it to the Resolved issues section, from whence a bot should archive it in 3 days.

Using this page

Add new requests at the top of the page. Please provide the following information:

Be prepared with:

• A link to the final decision in their arbitration case; a list with summary disposition is at WP:AER
• Diffs showing the violating behavior
• A brief summary of how this behavior is linked to the principles, findings of fact, remedies, and/or enforcement mechanism of the arbitration case.
• Sign and date your report with Wikipedia's special signature format (~~~~). The archival bot uses the time stamp to determine when to archive reports.
• (recommended) A diff showing that the user has previously been cautioned at their talkpage about the sanctions

Please notify the user of your report at his or her user talk page.