Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard/Volunteering: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 00:07, 5 June 2014

Hello, and thank you for showing an interest at the dispute resolution noticeboard (DRN), an informal step in the dispute resolution processes of the English Wikipedia. The main purpose of DRN is to mediate content-oriented disputes between editors. Resolutions here are not formally binding, but may be referred back to in later discussions.

This is a guide for volunteers who want to help resolve DRN disputes. There are no formal requirements for helping and you should feel free to participate right away; any editor may comment on any discussion. You do not have add your name to the list of DRN volunteers to help out with a dispute, but adding your name to the list helps the DRN bot manage the DRN case status.

How to start

Add your name to the list of DRN volunteers - the DRN bot uses this list to perform some housekeeping chores.

Consider adding Template:DRN case status to your watchlist, so you can keep track of the disputes listed on DRN. This page keeps a listing of all cases currently at DRN, and is updated by a robot every half-hour. It sorts cases by age, and lists the amount of time since a volunteer edited a thread, and the current status of a dispute.

Pick a case from the list of DRN cases - The list is at the top of the WP:DRN page. Select a case that is displayed with the color white, meaning no volunteer has yet volunteered for that case. It's best to look at the older disputes first where possible, but feel free to start with a thread that interests you or doesn't look too complex. You can choose any case, provided that you are not involved with the case and that you have no strong conflicts of interest with the case or with the involved parties.

Review Wikipedia policies and guidelines - Volunteers should be familiar with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, most notably WP:Dispute resolution, WP:Verifiability, WP:Identifying reliable sources, WP:Neutral point of view (particularly WP:UNDUE), and WP:Biographies of living persons.

If you don't feel comfortable helping directly as a volunteer right now, you can help by just commenting in cases, participating at the DRN Talk page or helping with simple maintenance tasks such as procedural closings, fixing formatting issues with the filing, or correcting page links or names

Managing a typical case

Steps for mediating a typical DRN case are:

Find a new request that is not yet open
Ensure that the case is appropriate for DRN as described below
Ensure that all parties have been notified of the case
After all parties have posted opening comments, begin in the Discussion section by introducing yourself as a volunteer.
Guide the parties following the suggestions below
When the discussion has come to an end, mark the case closed

Opening

Requests in white rows are unassessed, meaning there is no volunteer yet.

– This request is unassessed.

To open a case, follow these steps:

Add a comment into the case's Discussion section introducing yourself, and announcing that you will be assisting the parties.
Confirm that each participant listed has been notified. If anyone has not been automatically notified by the bot, you may do so manually by adding this to their talk page: {{subst:Template:DRN-notice}}.
Check opening comments of each participant. Watch for excessively long openings. If something needs reducing, please ask on the editor's talk page first in a neutral and friendly manner.
Review the case information and any related talk page discussions.
Check the request to make sure everything is there. Filings must be filled out completely. If there is a way to fix an issue, such a an incorrect (redlinked) article redirect, please fix these errors.
Do not initiate discussion of the case's content-oriented issue until all parties have posted opening comments. It is okay to discuss procedural issues before then.
If the case is not appropriate for DRN, follow the instructions to quick-close a case.
You do not need to edit the {{DRN case status}} template to mark the case open. The DRN bot will automatically set the case to open based on your signature, provided that your name is in the list of volunteers. After you (or any volunteer) posts a comment, the case status bar will look like this:

– This request is receiving the attention of a volunteer.

Notifying parties about the case

To remind parties that the DRN case needs their input, post the {{DRN participation ping}} template in the party's talk page as follows:

== DRN case reminder ==
{{subst:DRN participation ping}}

Refer to the DRN participation ping template page for options and details. The DRN bot may already have posted a notice when the case was created by a party, but you can post additional reminders as needed. This may be especially useful if a case is large or contentious.

Mediating

See also WP:Consensus and Mediation Committee process

As a volunteer, your role is to assist the parties to come to a mutually satisfactory resolution of the underlying content dispute. Some suggestions:

Be cordial and welcoming. Many editors involved in DRN cases are new to Wikipedia, and an uncomfortable experience in DRN may cause them to stop editing altogether.

Be neutral and professional. If you are too opinionated or flippant, the parties will not view you as a useful mediator. If you have a strong opinion about the underlying topic in a case, suppress it, or let another volunteer handle the case.

Avoid making value judgments on the article's material; but you should provide opinions about whether the material complies with Wikipedia polices.

View the case as a temporary effort; avoid becoming a co-party by directly editing the article under discussion.

Remember that settling disputes is secondary to the goal of improving the encyclopedia. Discourage resolutions which violate Wikipedia's content policies such as WP:Verifiablity or WP:Biographies of living persons.

If you have had past dealings (either positive or negative) with the article, subject matter, or with the editors involved in the dispute which would which would bias your response, do not act as a volunteer on that dispute or engage in administrative actions, such as closing, which may affect the outcome of the dispute. If any editor objects to your involvement in a case, you must either withdraw from the case or initiate a discussion on the DRN talk page so the community can decide if a new volunteer should step in.

When starting a case, focus on asking questions rather than making pronouncements.

Make sure that everyone agrees to the details of the dispute. Sometimes, a simple misunderstanding is the source of the problem.

Consensus does not mean that all the parties must love the proposed resolution, it merely means that all the parties can live with the resolution.

If the parties are making progress without your assistance, avoid the temptation to comment on every action the parties take.

In complex cases, imposing a structure (such as a step-by-step process) may be useful to avoid chaos and going around in circles.

Ground rules for parties

In contentious disputes, establishing ground rules that all parties must agree to may help structure the discussion. Example ground rules for parties to follow include:

Keep all comments focused on the mediation.
Proper editing decorum must be maintained. Incivility and personal attacks must not occur. Volunteers can collapse or remove comments of such nature. (Any such action should be preceded by a warning within the DRN case or on the party's talk page. If a volunteer's collapse or removal of content is reverted by a participant, the volunteer should not revert the reversion. Clarify again on the user's talk page and attempt a different solution).
Try to keep an open mind in the case, and realize that sometimes, you need to give a little to get a little. Mediation is not possible without compromise as well as keeping an open mind.
When there are multiple issues that need to be addressed in a dispute, only one particular issue or dispute is to be discussed at a time. Discussion that veers off course of the current topic may be archived at the volunteer's discretion.
DRN is not a formal part of the dispute resolution process, and cannot provide binding sanctions. Nevertheless, everyone involved should agree to abide by the outcome of the case.

Closing

Volunteers should close cases when the case is resolved or it becomes clear that no consensus can be reached. To close a case, first set the case status to either "resolved" or "failed" within the {{DR case status}} template. Second, collapse the entire case by enclosing it in an archive box with a comment explaining the closure. Example:

== History of Russia case ==
{{DR case status|closed}}<!-- Bot Case ID (please don't modify): 000 -->
{{drn filing editor|Wiki-editor|00:00, 0 August 2013 (UTC)}}


{{DRN archive top|reason=Reason for closing. ~~~~}}
Filing request and discussion.
{{DRN archive bottom}}

There are two case states that are typically used to close a case: "resolved" and "failed".

Resolved

When all involved parties have agreed on a resolution in an unambiguous manner, the case filing may be closed. Encourage parties to continue to communicate in the article's talk page. To close a case as "resolved", set the DRN case status to "resolved":

{{DR case status|resolved}}

The case status bar will look like this after closed:

- This request will be archived because it is resolved.

Not resolved

If it becomes apparent that the parties will not reach a resolution, mark the case closed with the "failed" status. You can recommend a particular resolution, but all volunteer recommendations are non binding. Advise the parties to continue discussing the issue in the article talk page, and remind them of the Request for Comment process that is available to them. To close a case as "failed" set the DRN case status template to contain the word "failed" as follows:

{{DR case status|failed}}

The case status bar will look like this after closed:

– This request has been closed and no resolution has been reached.

If parties stop participating in a case, so it is neither resolved nor a failure, close it with the "closed" status, as explained below.

Closing a case that is not appropriate for DRN

Some cases created by editors are not appropriate for DRN. If a volunteer notices an inappropriate case, the volunteer should close the case. Close actions for inappropriate cases are called "procedural closes" or "quick closes". Reasons for a procedural close include:

Parties have not discussed the issue in detail in a talk page (the discussion can be in an article talk page or a user's talk page).
No parties participate (because they are blocked, uninvolved or decline to participate).
The dispute is primarily about user conduct or behavior.
There is no current, actual dispute (for example, if the person filing the case was mistaken about the existence of a dispute).
All parties have stopped participating, and a week or two has gone by with no new input.
The case is currently being discussed in a Request For Comment or in a Wikipedia noticeboard such as WP:ANI, WP:AN, or WP:RSN.
The community already arrived at consensus in another venue such as WP:RFC, and an editor who disagreed with the outcome immediately initiated a DRN case (see WP:Forum shopping).

To close a case, edit the DRN case section and place the word "closed" in the case status, and archive the case with the {{DRN archive top}} template, as shown in this example:

== Moon landing conspiracy case==
{{DRN archive top|reason=The  parties have not yet discussed the issue in the article talk page.   ~~~~}}
{{DR case status|closed}}
... entire DRN case here ....
{{DRN archive bottom}}

After closing for procedural reason, the case status box will look like this:

– This request has been closed and will be archived.

Helping a case that is already opened

Sometimes a case will get opened by a volunteer, and then become inactive. In those situations, additional help from other volunteers may be desirable. The table of cases at the top of the WP:DRN page will be color-coded to indicate inactive cases that may require help. A dispute is automatically flagged as needing attention after a small period of time active:

– This request requires a volunteer's attention.

This means that it has gone long enough without being resolved and needs the attention of a volunteer. Sometimes the parties may be stuck and need another opinion and sometimes the case was marked as resolved but was given 24 hrs for comment. Any volunteer may close a dispute that is non controversial such as those that all parties have agreed to a resolution but the filing has yet to be closed, volunteers may close a resolved case that has not had further posting for 24 hrs. Follow the instructions for a resolved case closing. If it is shaded pink and there is an active unresolved dispute, you may want to read through the case and ask questions and make suggestions if you think it will help another volunteer.

Another case status is the following:

– This request has been inactive for some time.

This case status indicates that the case may have been resolved or the parties have lost interest. Any volunteer may close a stale dispute, as long as a warning has been given that the case will be closing in 24 hrs if no further comments are made.

Two or more volunteers in one case

No volunteer owns a particular case. If another volunteer participates in a case you opened, welcome them. Conversely, if you have something to contribute to a case that already has a volunteer, you should feel free to post your comments. You may choose to identify yourself as a volunteer, and state that you are merely contributing as a editor; or you may wish to state that you will be assisting with the mediation. If you join in a case that is already in progress with another volunteer, be respectful for what is being done by that volunteer. If you have taken the lead in a case but cannot continue for some reason, post a notice in the case's Discussion section and put a request on the DRN talk page, asking for another volunteer to take over.

Awards

Awards are available for faithful and meritorious service, and one award is also available to give to participants in a dispute who deserve special praise. See the award page for details. Volunteers are encouraged to distribute awards to those who deserve them.

Case status options

Full DRN status details

The state of each case is indicated by a rectangular status box at the top of the case. The bot will maintain the status on all but three, which require a volunteer to manually do so (see "Closing a dispute filing" below). The status boxes include the following:

– This request is unassessed.	This marks a new case that needs a volunteer. You do not normally need to manually set this case status (the form wizard will do that automatically when the filing is posted. However, a volunteer can add or re-add this status manually if needed). Before opening a case, read over the parties' opening comments and the article talk page. Assess the situation. Make recommendations on how to resolve the dispute based on the suggestions below.
– This request is receiving the attention of a volunteer.	This marks a discussion that has been opened by a volunteer. DRN works best when multiple editors provide input, so feel free to add a comment even though another volunteer has already commented.
- This request will be archived because it is resolved.	This marks a discussion that was resolved successfully and has been closed. If you feel a case has been resolved, ask the parties if they agree with the resolution. You can also ask for guidance on the DRN talk page. To mark a case "resolved", change the status at the top of the case to `{{DR case status\|resolved}}` and post an explanation at the bottom of the discussion. Any volunteer can mark a case resolved (it does not have to be the same editor that opened the case).
– This request has been closed and no resolution has been reached.	This marks a discussion that was not resolved successfully and has been closed because of inactivity. This may be that the participants couldn't come to a consensus on the issues that were being discussed. The participating editors may have requested that the case should be closed. Dispute resolution was attempted, but the process was not successful. To mark a case as "failed", change the status at the top of the case to `{{DR case status\|failed}}` and post an explanation at the bottom of the discussion.
– This request has been closed and will be archived.	This marks a discussion that has been closed, because the discussion is unsuitable for DRN. This may be that the issues are too complex, that prior discussion has yet to occur, or that another forum like WP:MEDCOM is more appropriate. If you think that any of these are the case, ask a few questions on the thread to see if others agree. Feel free to ask on the DRN talk page too. To close the discussion, change the status at the top of the thread to `{{DR case status\|closed}}` and leave a comment at the bottom of the discussion.
– This request has been inactive for some time.	This marks a discussion that has been opened, but hasn't been commented on by anyone in a day. The noticeboard can clog up with cases if inactive threads are left open. If you see a dispute that's marked as stale, read over the discussion: the dispute may be resolved but hasn't been closed. Otherwise, leave a comment on the thread asking if it still needs assistance.
– This request requires a volunteer's attention.	This marks a discussion that has been opened, but needs assistance from a volunteer.Sometimes a thread gets forgotten, and the participants will continue discussion without the assistance of a volunteer. If the bot notices such a situation, it will flag the thread for attention. It's advisable to ask the participants to hold off discussing the issue any further until you've had time to review the thread and given suggestions based on the situation.

List of the DRN volunteers

Shortcut

WP:DRVOLUNTEERS

If you volunteer at the noticeboard, even if only for a short period of time, add yourself to the list of volunteers below. This list helps the DRN bot do its job. The list may also be used by editors to find someone willing to help with a DRN case or other dispute resolution issues.

In addition to the adding your name to the list, consider adding the {{User DRN}} userbox to your user page, or including yourself in Category:Wikipedians who assist at the dispute resolution noticeboard.

If you list yourself here, and later become a party to a DRN case, the DRN bot may become confused and think that the first comment posted by you means a volunteer has taken the case. To avoid this, you can either:

a) Refrain from posting any comments in the case (not even an opening statement) until another volunteer opens the case; or

b) Sign your comments with an unofficial signature that contains your name, but won't be recognized by the bot; or

c) Remove yourself from the DRN volunteer list while the case is starting up.

Your support is very much appreciated.

@@ Line 120: / Line 120: @@
 ==Closing a case that is not appropriate for DRN==
 Some cases created by editors are not appropriate for DRN. If a volunteer notices an inappropriate case, the volunteer should close the case.  Close actions for inappropriate cases are called "procedural closes" or "quick closes".  Reasons for a procedural close include:
-#Parties have not discussed the issue in detail in a [[WP:Talk page|talk page]] (the discussion can be in an article talk page or a user's talk page).  The mere fact that one or more threads exist is insufficient.  The thread(s) must clearly articulate desired content changes in order to avoid this pitfall.
+#Parties have not discussed the issue in detail in a [[WP:Talk page|talk page]] (the discussion can be in an article talk page or a user's talk page).
 #No parties participate (because they are blocked, uninvolved or decline to participate).
 #The dispute is primarily about user conduct or behavior.