Wikipedia:WikiProject ArbCom Reform Party

WikiProject ArbCom Reform Party aims to reform the ArbCom system by selecting candidates who will run collectively based on a common candidate statement (the Reform Party program). Each candidate will ask voters to also vote for all the other candidates from the Reform Party. This way, voters can actually choose a new ArbCom system instead of just being able to select a few new candidates who in practice cannot do more than participate in the current system. The current system is kept in place by a few Arbitrators who always get elected, supplemented by a few who leave for a few years and then get back. ArbCom has become Wikipedia's politburo and this has to be changed.

After an election victory for the Reform Party, the elected Arbitrators will hear and conduct cases according to the rules in the Party Program. The new ArbCom system will have to be ratified by motions. Only if these motions pass will the new ArbCom system come into effect, so a large enough number of candidates need to be nominated by this WikiProject and some support from current Arbitrators may be needed. In case the motions do not pass, this WikiProject will continue with nominating candidates for the next elections so that the motions will pass the next time.

Community support for proposals for the Reform Party program and candidates will be gauged via RFCs.

Putting Wikipedia first
Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, nothing more and nothing less. This requires editors to constructively collaborate with each other. To facilitate this we have a number of policies and guidelines which, however, don't take precedent over improving the encyclopedia. Administrators deal with problem editors who don't behave in a constructive way. We have various dispute resolution venues on Wikipedia and there is an ArbCom system that can impose binding rulings.

The existing system usually does a good job dealing with problem editors who aren't here to build an encyclopedia. But this isn't the only problem that Wikipedia faces. Being a very large collaboration, Wikipedia is also susceptible to negative aspects of social dynamics. Off site harassment, factional behavior in political disputes etc. can negatively affect the editing of Wikipedia.

Not all aspects of social dynamics pose a direct threat and Wikipedia cannot be completely immune to this; it has to work with it in the best way it can. However, what has happened in recent years is that this social pressure has caused Wikipedia to gradually drift away from being just an online encyclopedia, the social aspects of the community have been incorporated in Wikipedia, negatively affecting the way ArbCom rules on cases.

What needs to be done is to incorporate the social aspects of being an editor here in such a way that the results of dispute resolution and ArbCom cases will be the best outcome from the point of view of improving and maintaining Wikipedia's articles. This can be done by recognizing a number of inalienable rights of editors, such as proposed here.

A larger community participation in ArbCom
By increasing the number of editors involved in ArbCom one can lower the burden on the Arbitrators. One can e.g. let a jury hear cases. Alternatively, one can expand the number of Arbitrators by an order of magnitude. In elections one chooses a small number of Arbitrators as is done now. These Arbitrators can then appoint editors as "Assistant Arbitrator". Cases can then be heard with only a few Arbitrators and some Assistant Arbitrators. This would then allow for totally independent appeals and there is then also room for hearing a number of cases simultaneously.

Such a system will also allow content issues to be reviewed and taken into account in judgements. In the current system this is impossible to implement because the small number of Arbs means that these arbitrators will have a de facto privileged editor status when it comes to editing certain controversial articles. Clearly, this is not a problem for an arbitration system where any editor who has been editing for some time here has equal opportunity to contribute to the ArbCom system.

Proposals under discussion

 * WikiProject ArbCom Reform Party/Bill of Rights Proposed draft

Our competition

 * Things mostly work, let's keep doing roughly the same thing and make slow incremental changes party ArbCom Reform Counter-Party
 * ArbCom reform, not another party, just an essay on how ArbCom could be reformed
 * Beeblebrox poking fun at this page