Wikipedia talk:Contentious topics/Comparison with discretionary sanctions

Thoughts/Changes
Thanks @Dreamy Jazz for getting this started. Some thoughts on reading this: Courtesy ping to the drafters @L235 @Wugapodes @CaptainEek. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 17:44, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I believe that people have to use our alerts so is not correct.
 * I think it might make sense (perhaps in a collapsed box if we're worried about length) to include the default standard restrictions. As noted certain areas can have more but since some are universal why not list?
 * I did some CE around expiry.
 * Sitewide blocks having CT protection for 1 year is status quo and so probably doesn't need to be in a list of changes?
 * I have added some content to the Appeals section.
 * I don't know if it makes sense to have the 3 standards listed out verbatim but it felt weird not including them so I did. I have no attachment to this format though.


 * From it says When an editor first begins making edits within any contentious topic, anyone may alert the editor of the contentious topic designation using the Contentious topics/alert/first template. Only the officially designated templates should be used for an editor's first contentious topic alert ... When alerting an editor who has previously received any contentious topic alert, the alert template may be used, but any message that conveys the contentious topic designation is acceptable.
 * Sure. Adding the standard set is a good thing, though putting in a collapse box is probably a good idea.
 * Thanks
 * Ah, I missed that being the case.
 * Dreamy Jazz talk to me &#124; my contributions 17:50, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Explicit notices
I would like to see that "CT" notices are always explicitly required at the page level where it is in effect, to ensure there can be no room for interpretation that a given page might be CT because it is somehow related to a CT topic area, and thus a single admin can ban/block an editor on the spot (this has happened to me). I disagree with abolishing the 12-month requirement for awareness alerts, and I believe that admins should be strongly urged to first warn editors before imposing sanctions in their sole discretion, regardless of the editor's awareness. Thank you. soibangla (talk) 23:26, 17 January 2023 (UTC)


 * @Soibangla your comments will get wider consideration if you post them at the currently happening discussion at Wikipedia Talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard. Barkeep49 (talk) 23:31, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

"recently"
it would be helpful to know precisely when arbcom adopted the contentious topics procedure instead of a vague statement that it was "recently". Daddyelectrolux (talk) 07:47, 15 July 2024 (UTC)