User:Thryduulf/Hierarchy of content decisions

{{deletion essay}} There exists on Wikipedia a number of processes for decision-making about the inclusion or otherwise of content. These can be organised into the hierarchy below, with decisions taken at each level overruling decisions taken at lower levels.

Hierarchy

{!class=wikitable LevelProcessAppeal processNotes 1WP:JIMBOWikipedia:Arbitration Committee (ArbCom) (excluding appeals of ArbCom decisions)Jimbo remains the ultimate arbitrator of content, but exercises this right almost never. All Jimbo's actions are theoretically appealable to the Arbitration Committee but as the ArbCom does not deal with content, and no content decision has been appealed to the committee it is at present undefined what would happpen. 2Wikipedia:Office actionsEmail to the Wikimedia Foundation office or Jimbo
DMCA counter-notice (if appropriate) OFFICE actions are usually regarding legal matters so appeals require a sound factual basis. 3WP:OTRSEmail to OTRS or Wikimedia Foundation officeOTRS review evidence of permission to use works and so determine whether given text or media constitute a copyright violation Confirmed copyright issues; other legal problemsWP:OTRS or WP:DRVAppeals need to show either new evidence, or that the existing evidence was interpreted incorrectly. Consensus that a copyrighted image does or does not meet the Non-free content criteria overrules suspicions and assertions to the contrary. 5Suspected copyright issuesXfD or WP:DRV; WP:OTRSEvidence that text or media is or is not a copyright violation is normally required to overturn a decision. Consensus that a copyrighted image does or does not meet the Non-free content criteria overrules suspicions and assertions to the contrary. 6

DRV XfD RfC Speedy deletion PROD Talk page WP:BOLD

See also

• WP:CONEXCEPT