Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard
| Wikipedia Arbitration |
|---|
 |
| Track related changes |
This noticeboard is for announcements and statements made by the Arbitration Committee. Only members of the Arbitration Committee or the Committee's clerks may post on this page, but all editors are encouraged to comment on the talk page.
Arbitration motions regarding amendment to Contentious topic procedure: awareness, warnings, renewal, and banners
The arbitration committee has resolved by motion that:
Wikipedia:Contentious topics § Awareness of contentious topics is hereby removed from the contentious topic procedures. Wikipedia:Contentious topics § Warnings is amended by inserting the following as a second paragraph:An administrator should warn an editor whose behavior is not egregiously disruptive if the administrator believes the editor does not understand what editing in a contentious topic means. Otherwise, the administrator should issue an appropriate restriction.
To conform with these changes:
- Wikipedia:Contentious topics § Warnings is amended by removing
An editor may be warned even if the editor was not previously aware that their editing occurred in a contentious topic.- The part of Wikipedia:Contentious topics § Enforcement of restrictions beginning
However, breaches of a page restriction...is amended to readHowever, breaches of a page restriction may result in a block or editor restriction only if the restricted page displayed an editnotice ({{Contentious topics/page restriction editnotice}} or a derived topic-specific template).- Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures § Noticeboard scope is amended by removing the word
aware- Point (v) of Palestine-Israel articles 4 remedy 9, point (v) of Indian military history remedy 9, and point (vii) of GamerGate remedy 1.2 ("Available sanctions", "ARBIPA available sanctions", and "Sanctions available", respectively) are amended to read
The contentious topics procedure permits uninvolved admins to use a wide variety of tools from the "standard set" to address disruption, including protections, blocks, topic bans, and revert restrictions.- Remedy 2 and remedy 3 of Editor conduct in e-cigs articles ("DS Extended: SPAs" and "DS: Administrators Encouraged", respectively) are terminated
- Remedy 1 of COVID-19 ("Contentious topic designation") is amended to read:
1) COVID-19 is designated as a contentious topic, replacing the community COVID-19 general sanctions.
All sanctions issued under the COVID-19 general sanctions are governed by the contentious topic procedure. Administrators who enforced the COVID-19 general sanctions are thanked for their work and asked to continue providing administrative assistance enforcing this contentious topic.
- Remedy 13 of Skepticism and coordinated editing ("BLP DS reminder") is retitled
BLP contentious topic reminderand amended to read:13) Editors are reminded about the contentious topic designation from the Editing of Biographies of Living Persons case. Administrators should give serious consideration to issuing contentious topic restrictions to editors named in this decision in the event of further misconduct.
- Remedy 1c of Indian military history ("Arbitration Committee assumes WP:GSCASTE and unifies South Asian WP:CTOPS") is amended by removing the second-to-last bullet point (beginning
Editors aware of the previous contentious topic...)- Remedy 1 of Article titles and capitalisation 2 ("Manual of Style and article titles contentious topic scope amended") is amended by removing
Editors aware of the previous contentious topic designation are not automatically presumed to be aware of the expanded scope, but may still be sanctioned within the subtopic of which they were previously considered aware. This does not invalidate any other reason why an editor might be aware of the expanded scope. Administrators are reminded that they may issue logged warnings even to unaware editors.Administrators are strongly reminded that warning before sanctioning is almost always best practice. This change only removes the formalities associated with awareness.
Wikipedia:Contentious topics § Warnings is amended by inserting the following as a final paragraph:If an editor does not improve their behavior after a warning, administrators should normally impose editor restrictions rather than give additional warnings.
Wikipedia:Contentious topics § Renewal of page restrictions is hereby removed from the contentious topic procedures. To conform with this change:
- Wikipedia:Contentious topics § Duration of restrictions is amended by removing
(or last renewed, if applicable)- Wikipedia:Contentious topics § Logging is amended by replacing Administrators who renew, change, or revoke a contentious topic restriction must append a note recording the amendment to the original log entry with
Administrators who change or revoke a contentious topic restriction must append a note recording the amendment to the original log entry- Wikipedia:Contentious topics § Appeals and amendments is amended to read as follows:
All contentious topic restrictions (and logged warnings) may be appealed according to the standard appeals and modification procedure for arbitration enforcement actions, with one exception: When a restriction is imposed by consensus at the arbitration enforcement noticeboard, only sitewide blocks become ordinary administrative actions after a year. Other restrictions imposed at the arbitration enforcement noticeboard must be formally appealed before they can be modified.
- Wikipedia:Contentious topics § Procedural summary is amended by removing
However, page restrictions may be renewed.- The first bullet point of Wikipedia:Contentious topics § Continuity (beginning
Previously-enacted single-admin page restrictions...) is amended to readPreviously-enacted single-admin page restrictions are now subject to modification and revocation in the same way as ordinary administrator actions after one year in accordance with #Duration of restrictions.
For the Arbitration Committee, ~delta {talk • cont • 🇰🇷 • 🎢} 18:46, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
Changes to the functionary team, June 2026 (4)
At his request, the checkuser permission of EdJohnston (talk · contribs) is removed. The Committee sincerely thanks EdJohnston for his service as a checkuser. For the Arbitration Committee, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 15:46, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
- Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § Changes to the functionary team, June 2026 (4)
An arbitration case, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Michael Jackson, has been now closed. The final decision is available at the link above.
The following remedies have been passed regarding this case:
- TruthGuardians (talk · contribs), TheWikiholic (talk · contribs), Guitarjunkie22 (talk · contribs), Jimcastor (talk · contribs), and MraClean (talk · contribs) are indefinitely banned from Wikipedia. This ban may be appealed six months after the enactment of this remedy, and every six months thereafter.
- TruthGuardians (talk · contribs), TheWikiholic (talk · contribs), Israell (talk · contribs), Episteme Aletheia (talk · contribs), Guitarjunkie22 (talk · contribs), Jimcastor (talk · contribs), Mr Boar1 (talk · contribs), MraClean (talk · contribs), Never17 (talk · contribs), and PinkSlippers (talk · contribs) are indefinitely topic banned from Michael Jackson, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed six months after the enactment of this remedy, and every six months thereafter.
- NE0mAn7o! (talk · contribs) is warned that future misconduct in the Michael Jackson topic area will result in restrictions under the Michael Jackson community contentious topic.
For the Arbitration Committee, ~delta {talk • cont • 🇰🇷 • 🎢} 21:16, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
- Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Michael Jackson closed
Change to the functionaries team, June 2026
At his request, the Arbitration Committee restores the CheckUser and Oversight permissions of TonyBallioni (talk · contribs).
On behalf of the Committee, Sdrqaz (talk) 01:17, 25 June 2026 (UTC)