Introduction to a special series: A look at the upcoming Arbitration Committee elections
A chat with the elected Arbitrators
6 February 2006
Jimbo Wales appoints 11 arbitrators, increases committee size
23 January 2006
Arbitration Committee elections continue; ArbCom member resigns
16 January 2006
ArbCom candidates (part two)
9 January 2006
ArbCom candidates
2 January 2006
Straw poll closes
19 December 2005
Jimbo starts new poll regarding election
5 December 2005
Last chance to run for ArbCom
28 November 2005
ArbCom voting process
14 November 2005
ArbCom duties and requirements
7 November 2005
A closer look: the calls for reform of the ArbCom
31 October 2005
A look back: the 2004 ArbCom elections
24 October 2005
Current ArbCom members
17 October 2005
Criticism of the ArbCom
10 October 2005
About the Arbitration process
3 October 2005
The history of the Arbitration Committee
26 September 2005
Introduction to a special series: A look at the upcoming Arbitration Committee elections
19 September 2005
|
|
|
A chat with the elected Arbitrators |
Less than three months from today, the Wikipedia community will come together and begin a major event that will shape the Wikipedia for months to come. Eight seats of the Arbitration Committee are up for election, with at least one incumbent member not returning. The Signpost will delve into the issues surrounding this election in a special series.
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost begins a special series documenting the Wikipedia Arbitration Committee and the upcoming 2005 ArbCom elections. The series will document everything from the history of the arbitration committee, the current members, the voting procedure for the upcoming elections, and will culminate in the end of December with the results of the elections.
The Signpost, established in January 2005, has been dedicated to bringing the news of Wikipedia to the dedicated Wikipedians who make this great encyclopedia possible. The elections will mark the first major event to occur while the Signpost is under press, and accordingly, we will offer unprecedented and comprehensive coverage of the election. In addition, we will take a closer look at the history of the Arbitration Committee, at how the need arose for a "judicial branch", and the current operations of the committee. We will offer a perspective from those criticizing the Arbitration Committee, and the flaws some have pointed out. However, we will also document the strides the ArbCom has made, and the progress and innovation it has brought to Wikipedia.
Besides looking at the actual ArbCom, the Signpost will also report on the elections process, the voting techniques used, the significant debate over elections rules and guidelines, and the candidates and current ArbCom members. We will also examine previous elections, especially the 2004 ArbCom elections, and analyze the significance. Once the voting has opened, we will offer reliable coverage of all the events of the week, and the Signpost will also summarize the debate and discussion that is sure to come.
The Wikipedia Signpost hopes that this comprehensive series will help make the Wikipedia community more informed, and we also hope that our coverage will be fair, unbiased, and extensive. On that note, the Signpost is proud to launch the special series on the 2005 Arbitration Committee elections.
Next week — The history of the Arbitration Committee
Discuss this story
Just like to say this is a great idea, and it looks like you're off to a good start. HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 09:24, 19 September 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think this is a great idea! - 203.134.166.99 23:49, 20 September 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Arbitration expansion and changes
I am glad to see this newspaper as a way of discussing the ArbCom. Perhaps these talk page articles can be a way to discuss changes that need to be made. There is a backlog of ArbCom cases. This backlog causes anger and resentment to fester because a few abuses cannot be dealt with in a timely manner. The reason for the backlog has to do with the structure of the current ArbCom, which functions essentially as a Supreme Court, where all of the judges hear every case.
I would suggest that two reforms be made. The first is to increase the number of arbitrators. The second is to have cases heard by panels of three, chosen in some way that arbitrators do not get to pick their own cases. This would permit more cases to be heard more quickly. There should be a right of appeal from a panel to the full ArbCom, but it should be understood that this will be granted rarely. Robert McClenon 13:32, 24 September 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]