Changes
m
Alter: title, pages. Add: issue, volume, isbn. Removed parameters. You can use this bot yourself. Report bugs here.
{{selfref|For the Wikipedia policy on the Arbitration Committee itself see [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee]].}}
{{about|the Arbitration Committee of the English Wikipedia|the general topic of arbitration committees|arbitration|and|Arbitral tribunal}}
{{Infobox organization
|name = Arbitration Committee
|image = EnArbJune2009.png
|image_border =
|size =
|alt =
|caption = Screenshot of the Arbitration Committee description page in 2009
|abbreviation = Arbcom
|formation = {{Start date|2003|12|04}}<ref name='Wales1'/>
|type =
|status =
|purpose =
|region_served = Global
|membership =
|main_organ =
|num_staff =
|num_volunteers =
|website = {{URL|https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee}}
}}
An '''Arbitration Committee''' is a [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Active sanctions|binding]] [[dispute resolution]] panel of [[Wikipedia editor|editors]], used on several projects of the [[Wikimedia Foundation]]. The first project to use an arbitration committee, and the most widely covered of these, is the [[English Wikipedia]], the first project where such a structure was used, and this is the committee mainly covered in this article. Each of Wikimedia's projects are editorially autonomous and independent. Therefore, over time some other Wikimedia projects have established arbitration committees, while others have not. Arbitration committees, where they exist, are established by a project's editors, and are usually elected by their community in annual elections. As well as serious disputes, they often address misconduct by administrators, access to various advanced tools, and a range of "[[reality|real world]]" issues related to harmful conduct, when these arise in the context of a Wikipedia project.
Arbitration committees generally have the authority to impose binding sanctions, and also to determine which users have access to special permissions.
The first such committee was created by [[Jimmy Wales]] on December 4, 2003, as an extension of the decision-making power he formerly held as owner of the site.<ref name='Wales1'>{{cite web|url=http://markmail.org/message/komcldyapats43xj#query:+page:1+mid:komcldyapats43xj+state:results |title= WikiEN-l Wikiquette committee appointments |accessdate=2009-06-09 |last=Wales |first=Jimmy |date=2003-12-04 |work=Wikipedia |publisher=[[Wikimedia Foundation]] }}</ref><ref name='SSRN'>{{cite journal|title=Wikitruth Through Wikiorder |journal=Emory Law Journal|year=2010|first=David A.|last=Hoffman|author2=Salil Mehra |volume=59|issue=2010|pages=|ssrn=1354424}}</ref> The committee acts as a [[court of last resort]] (described in the media variously as 'quasi-[[judiciary|judicial]]' or a Wikipedian 'High/[[Supreme court|Supreme Court]]', though the Committee states that it is not, nor pretends to be, a court of law in the formal sense) for disputes among editors. It has decided several hundred cases in its history.<ref name='NYT-2009'>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/08/technology/internet/08link.html?hpw |title=The Wars of Words on Wikipedia’s Outskirts |accessdate=2009-06-09 |last=Cohen |first=Noam |date=2009-06-07 |work=The New York Times | archiveurl= https://web.archive.org/web/20140328091528/http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/08/technology/internet/08link.html?hpw| archivedate=March 28, 2014<!--DASHBot-->| deadurl= no}}</ref> Members of the Committee are appointed by Wales either in person or email following advisory elections; Wales generally chooses to appoint arbitrators who were among those who received the most votes.<ref>{{cite book | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=h37N0BvkVSUC&pg=PA208 | title=Wikipedia: The Missing Manual | publisher=[[O'Reilly Media]] | author=Broughton, John | year=2008 | pages=208–209| isbn=9780596553777 }}</ref>
The Committee has been examined by academics researching [[dispute resolution]], and also reported in public media in connection with various case decisions and Wikipedia-related controversies.<ref name='SSRN'/><ref name='NZ-2009'>{{cite web|url=http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10577178 |title=Wikipedia sentinel quits after 'sock-puppeting' scandal |accessdate=2009-06-09 |last=Welham |first=Jamie |author2=Nina Lakhan |date=2009-06-08 |work=The New Zealand Herald |publisher=APN Holdings NZ Limited }}</ref><ref name='T-2009'>{{cite web|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/technology/wikipedia/5408761/Church-of-Scientology-members-banned-from-editing-Wikipedia.html |title=Church of Scientology members banned from editing Wikipedia |accessdate=2009-06-09 |last=Moore |first=Matthew |date=2009-05-30 |work=The Daily Telegraph |publisher=Telegraph Media Group Ltd. | archiveurl= https://web.archive.org/web/20090602104528/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/technology/wikipedia/5408761/Church-of-Scientology-members-banned-from-editing-Wikipedia.html| archivedate= 2 June 2009 <!--DASHBot-->| deadurl= no}}</ref>
== History ==
In October 2003, as part of an etiquette discussion on Wikipedia, [[Alex Roshuk|Alex T. Roshuk]], then legal adviser to the [[Wikimedia Foundation]], drafted a 1,300 word outline of mediation and arbitration. This outline evolved into the twin Mediation Committee and Arbitration Committee, formally announced by Jimmy Wales on December 4, 2003.<ref name='SSRN'/><ref name='AR'>{{cite web|url=http://www.roshuklaw.com/ |title=Law office of Alex T. Roshuk |accessdate=2009-06-14 |last=Roshuk |first=Alex T. |year=2008 | archiveurl= https://web.archive.org/web/20090629055224/http://www.roshuklaw.com/| archivedate= 29 June 2009 <!--DASHBot-->| deadurl= no}}</ref> Over time the concept of an "Arbitration Committee" was adopted by other communities within the Wikimedia Foundation's hosted projects.
When founded, the Committee consisted of 12 [[arbitrators]] divided into three groups of four members each.<ref name='Wales1'/><ref name='Fortune'>{{cite web|url=http://money.cnn.com/2006/05/31/magazines/fortune/mysql_greatteams_fortune/index.htm |title=Secrets of Greatness: Great Teams |accessdate=2009-06-15 |last=Hyatt |first=Josh |date=2006-06-01 |work=Fortune |publisher=Time Warner }}</ref> {{As of|2008}}, it had decided around 371 conduct cases, with remedies varying from warnings to bans.<ref name='CSM'>{{cite web|url=http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0105/p13s02-stct.html |title=Online Wikipedia is not Britannica - but it's close |accessdate=2009-06-15 |last=Lamb |first=Gregory M. |date=2006-01-05 |work=The Christian Science Monitor }}</ref><ref name='S-2004'>{{cite web|url=http://dir.salon.com/story/tech/feature/2004/04/27/wikipedia |title=Everyone is an editor |accessdate=2009-06-09 |last=Williams |first=Sam |date=2004-04-27 |work=Salon.com |publisher=Salon Media Group }}</ref>{{failed verification|date=January 2018}}
==Attention and controversies==
A statistical study published in the ''[[Emory Law Journal]]'' in 2010 indicated that the Committee has generally adhered to the principles of ignoring the content of user disputes and focusing on user conduct.<ref name='SSRN'/> The same study also found that despite every case being assessed on its own merits, a correlation emerged between the types of conduct found to have occurred and the remedies and decisions imposed by the Committee.
In 2007, an arbitrator using the username [[Essjay]] [[Essjay controversy#Timeline|resigned from the Committee]] after it was found that he had made false claims about his academic qualifications and professional experiences in a ''New York Times'' interview.<ref name='NYT-E'>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/12/technology/12wiki.html?ex=1331352000&en=668e67bce73bf6c6&ei=5089&partner=rssyahoo&emc=rss |title=After False Claim, Wikipedia to Check Degrees |accessdate=2009-06-14 |last=Cohen |first=Noam |date=2007-03-12 |work=The New York Times }}</ref><ref name='NYT-2006'>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/17/technology/17wiki.html?scp=3&sq=Arbitration%20Committee%20Wikipedia&st=cse |title=Growing Wikipedia Refines Its 'Anyone Can Edit' Policy |accessdate=2009-06-09 |last=Hafner |first=Katie |date=2006-06-17 |work=The New York Times }}</ref><ref name='NYT-2007'>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/05/technology/05wikipedia.html?scp=1&sq=Essjay&st=cse |title=A Contributor to Wikipedia Has His Fictional Side |accessdate=2009-06-09 |last=Cohen |first=Noam |date=2007-03-05 |work=The New York Times }}</ref> Also in 2007, the committee banned [[Massachusetts Institute of Technology]] professor [[Carl Hewitt]] from editing the online encyclopedia.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2007/dec/09/wikipedia.internet | title=Wikipedia ban for disruptive professor | work=The Guardian | date=9 December 2007 | accessdate=3 December 2014 | author=Kleeman, Jenny}}</ref> In May 2009, an arbitrator who edited under the username Sam Blacketer resigned from the Committee after it became known that he had concealed his past editing in obtaining the role.<ref name='NZ-2009'/>
In 2009, the Committee was brought to media attention as a result of its decision to ban "all IP addresses owned or operated by the [[Church of Scientology]] and its associates, broadly interpreted", as part of the fourth Scientology-related case.<ref name='NYT-2009'/><ref name='TG'/> Such an action had "little precedent"<ref name='NYT-2009'/> in the eight-year history of Wikipedia and was reported on several major news services such as ''The New York Times'', ''[[ABC News]]'', and ''[[The Guardian]]''.<ref name='NYT-2009'/><ref name='TG'>{{cite web|url=https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2009/may/29/wikipedia-scientology |title=Wikipedia bans Church of Scientology from editing |accessdate=2009-06-14 |last=Fitzsimmons |first=Caitlin |date=2009-05-29 |work=The Guardian | archiveurl= https://web.archive.org/web/20090611225227/http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/may/29/wikipedia-scientology| archivedate= 11 June 2009 <!--DASHBot-->| deadurl= no}}</ref><ref name='ABC'>{{cite web|url=http://www.abcnews.go.com/Technology/AheadoftheCurve/story?id=7708616&page=1 |title=Wikipedia Blocks Church of Scientology From Editing Entries |accessdate=2009-06-14 |last=Heussner |first=Ki Mae |author2=Ned Potter |date=2009-05-29 |publisher=ABC News | archiveurl= https://web.archive.org/web/20090602204246/http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/AheadoftheCurve/Story?id=7708616&page=1| archivedate= 2 June 2009 <!--DASHBot-->| deadurl= no}}</ref> Satirical news-show host [[Stephen Colbert]] ran a segment on ''[[The Colbert Report]]'' parodying the ban.<ref name='SC'>{{cite web|url=http://www.cc.com/video-clips/oqx005/the-colbert-report-wikipedia-bans-scientologists |title=Wikipedia Bans Scientologists |accessdate=2009-06-14 |last=Colbert |first=Stephen |date=2009-06-04 |format=Flash Player |work=Comedy Central |publisher=MTV Networks}}</ref>
In 2015, [[Criticism of Wikipedia#Allegations of biased treatment|the Committee received attention]] for its ruling pertaining to [[Gamergate controversy|Gamergate]], in which one editor was banned from the site indefinitely and several others were banned from topics relating to Gamergate or gender.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2015/01/29/gamergate-wikipedia-and-the-limits-of-human-knowledge/ | title=Gamergate, Wikipedia and the limits of 'human knowledge' | work=Washington Post | date=29 January 2015 | accessdate=30 January 2015 | author=Dewey, Caitlin}}</ref>
In June 2015, the committee removed advanced permissions from Richard Symonds, an activist for the British party the [[Liberal Democrats (UK)|Liberal Democrats]].<ref name="BBC0">{{cite web |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-33055855 |title=Censure for Grant Shapps' Wikipedia accuser - BBC News |date=8 June 2015 |accessdate=23 August 2015}}</ref> Symonds had improperly blocked a Wikipedia account, and associated its edits with former [[Chairman of the Conservative Party]] [[Grant Shapps]],<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/andy-mcsmiths-diary-ed-balls-and-jack-straw-off-the-labour-peerage-list-10306167.html |title=Andy McSmith's Diary: Ed Balls and Jack Straw off the Labour peerage list |date=8 June 2015 |accessdate=23 August 2015}}</ref> and leaked this to ''The Guardian''.<ref name="BBC0" /> Shapps denied ownership of the account, calling the allegations "categorically false and defamatory".<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/22/nick-clegg-mocks-grant-shapps-wikipedia-affair|title=Nick Clegg mocks Grant Shapps over Wikipedia affair|author=Randeep Ramesh|work=the Guardian}}</ref> Symonds said in an interview that he stands by his actions.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/apr/23/interview-richard-symonds-wikipedia-administrator-blocked-account-linked-to-shapps|title=Wikipedia volunteer who blocked 'Grant Shapps' account: I stand by my decision|author=Randeep Ramesh|work=the Guardian}}</ref>
A 2017 study found that the Committee's decision-making was mostly unaffected by extra-legal factors such as nationality, activity/experience, conflict avoidance, and time constraints. The same study found that the Committee's decision-making was affected much more by time constraints than that of conventional courts.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Konieczny |first=Piotr |date=2017-08-11 |title=Decision making in the self-evolved collegiate court: Wikipedia's Arbitration Committee and its implications for self-governance and judiciary in cyberspace |journal=International Sociology |volume=32 |issue=6 |language=en |pages=755–774 |doi=10.1177/0268580917722906 |issn=0268-5809}}</ref>
== Arbitration Committees on sister projects ==
{{further|meta:Arbitration Committee}}
In 2004 an Arbitration Committee was founded on the [[French Wikipedia]],<ref>{{cite book|language=French|title=Web Social: Mutation de la Communication|author=Florence Millerand|author2=Serge Proulx|author3=Julien Rueff|publisher=PUQ|year=2010|page=66|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=yIa-UMDxWjEC&pg=PA66|isbn=9782760524989}}</ref> and in 2007, on the [[German Wikipedia|German]]<ref name='dewiki-2007'>{{cite web|url=http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Wikipedia-sucht-Schiedsrichter--/meldung/89083 |title=Wikipedia sucht Schiedsrichter |accessdate=2009-06-09 |last=Kleinz |first=Torsten |date=2007-04-30 |publisher=Heise Online |language=German | archiveurl= https://web.archive.org/web/20090501114321/http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Wikipedia-sucht-Schiedsrichter--/meldung/89083| archivedate= 1 May 2009 <!--DASHBot-->| deadurl= no}}</ref> and [[Polish Wikipedia|Polish]] Wikipedias.<ref name='wikipedystyczny'>{{cite web|url=http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Wikipedia-sucht-Schiedsrichter--/meldung/89083 |title=Komitet arbitrażowy oraz mediatorzy w Wikipedii|accessdate=2012-02-01 |date=2007-08-31 |publisher=Blog wikipedystyczny|language=Polish}}</ref>
== References ==
{{reflist|colwidth=30em}}
{{Wikipedia}}
[[Category:Wikipedia]]
[[Category:Arbitration organizations]]
[[Category:Quasi-judicial bodies]]
{{about|the Arbitration Committee of the English Wikipedia|the general topic of arbitration committees|arbitration|and|Arbitral tribunal}}
{{Infobox organization
|name = Arbitration Committee
|image = EnArbJune2009.png
|image_border =
|size =
|alt =
|caption = Screenshot of the Arbitration Committee description page in 2009
|abbreviation = Arbcom
|formation = {{Start date|2003|12|04}}<ref name='Wales1'/>
|type =
|status =
|purpose =
|region_served = Global
|membership =
|main_organ =
|num_staff =
|num_volunteers =
|website = {{URL|https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee}}
}}
An '''Arbitration Committee''' is a [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Active sanctions|binding]] [[dispute resolution]] panel of [[Wikipedia editor|editors]], used on several projects of the [[Wikimedia Foundation]]. The first project to use an arbitration committee, and the most widely covered of these, is the [[English Wikipedia]], the first project where such a structure was used, and this is the committee mainly covered in this article. Each of Wikimedia's projects are editorially autonomous and independent. Therefore, over time some other Wikimedia projects have established arbitration committees, while others have not. Arbitration committees, where they exist, are established by a project's editors, and are usually elected by their community in annual elections. As well as serious disputes, they often address misconduct by administrators, access to various advanced tools, and a range of "[[reality|real world]]" issues related to harmful conduct, when these arise in the context of a Wikipedia project.
Arbitration committees generally have the authority to impose binding sanctions, and also to determine which users have access to special permissions.
The first such committee was created by [[Jimmy Wales]] on December 4, 2003, as an extension of the decision-making power he formerly held as owner of the site.<ref name='Wales1'>{{cite web|url=http://markmail.org/message/komcldyapats43xj#query:+page:1+mid:komcldyapats43xj+state:results |title= WikiEN-l Wikiquette committee appointments |accessdate=2009-06-09 |last=Wales |first=Jimmy |date=2003-12-04 |work=Wikipedia |publisher=[[Wikimedia Foundation]] }}</ref><ref name='SSRN'>{{cite journal|title=Wikitruth Through Wikiorder |journal=Emory Law Journal|year=2010|first=David A.|last=Hoffman|author2=Salil Mehra |volume=59|issue=2010|pages=|ssrn=1354424}}</ref> The committee acts as a [[court of last resort]] (described in the media variously as 'quasi-[[judiciary|judicial]]' or a Wikipedian 'High/[[Supreme court|Supreme Court]]', though the Committee states that it is not, nor pretends to be, a court of law in the formal sense) for disputes among editors. It has decided several hundred cases in its history.<ref name='NYT-2009'>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/08/technology/internet/08link.html?hpw |title=The Wars of Words on Wikipedia’s Outskirts |accessdate=2009-06-09 |last=Cohen |first=Noam |date=2009-06-07 |work=The New York Times | archiveurl= https://web.archive.org/web/20140328091528/http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/08/technology/internet/08link.html?hpw| archivedate=March 28, 2014<!--DASHBot-->| deadurl= no}}</ref> Members of the Committee are appointed by Wales either in person or email following advisory elections; Wales generally chooses to appoint arbitrators who were among those who received the most votes.<ref>{{cite book | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=h37N0BvkVSUC&pg=PA208 | title=Wikipedia: The Missing Manual | publisher=[[O'Reilly Media]] | author=Broughton, John | year=2008 | pages=208–209| isbn=9780596553777 }}</ref>
The Committee has been examined by academics researching [[dispute resolution]], and also reported in public media in connection with various case decisions and Wikipedia-related controversies.<ref name='SSRN'/><ref name='NZ-2009'>{{cite web|url=http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10577178 |title=Wikipedia sentinel quits after 'sock-puppeting' scandal |accessdate=2009-06-09 |last=Welham |first=Jamie |author2=Nina Lakhan |date=2009-06-08 |work=The New Zealand Herald |publisher=APN Holdings NZ Limited }}</ref><ref name='T-2009'>{{cite web|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/technology/wikipedia/5408761/Church-of-Scientology-members-banned-from-editing-Wikipedia.html |title=Church of Scientology members banned from editing Wikipedia |accessdate=2009-06-09 |last=Moore |first=Matthew |date=2009-05-30 |work=The Daily Telegraph |publisher=Telegraph Media Group Ltd. | archiveurl= https://web.archive.org/web/20090602104528/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/technology/wikipedia/5408761/Church-of-Scientology-members-banned-from-editing-Wikipedia.html| archivedate= 2 June 2009 <!--DASHBot-->| deadurl= no}}</ref>
== History ==
In October 2003, as part of an etiquette discussion on Wikipedia, [[Alex Roshuk|Alex T. Roshuk]], then legal adviser to the [[Wikimedia Foundation]], drafted a 1,300 word outline of mediation and arbitration. This outline evolved into the twin Mediation Committee and Arbitration Committee, formally announced by Jimmy Wales on December 4, 2003.<ref name='SSRN'/><ref name='AR'>{{cite web|url=http://www.roshuklaw.com/ |title=Law office of Alex T. Roshuk |accessdate=2009-06-14 |last=Roshuk |first=Alex T. |year=2008 | archiveurl= https://web.archive.org/web/20090629055224/http://www.roshuklaw.com/| archivedate= 29 June 2009 <!--DASHBot-->| deadurl= no}}</ref> Over time the concept of an "Arbitration Committee" was adopted by other communities within the Wikimedia Foundation's hosted projects.
When founded, the Committee consisted of 12 [[arbitrators]] divided into three groups of four members each.<ref name='Wales1'/><ref name='Fortune'>{{cite web|url=http://money.cnn.com/2006/05/31/magazines/fortune/mysql_greatteams_fortune/index.htm |title=Secrets of Greatness: Great Teams |accessdate=2009-06-15 |last=Hyatt |first=Josh |date=2006-06-01 |work=Fortune |publisher=Time Warner }}</ref> {{As of|2008}}, it had decided around 371 conduct cases, with remedies varying from warnings to bans.<ref name='CSM'>{{cite web|url=http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0105/p13s02-stct.html |title=Online Wikipedia is not Britannica - but it's close |accessdate=2009-06-15 |last=Lamb |first=Gregory M. |date=2006-01-05 |work=The Christian Science Monitor }}</ref><ref name='S-2004'>{{cite web|url=http://dir.salon.com/story/tech/feature/2004/04/27/wikipedia |title=Everyone is an editor |accessdate=2009-06-09 |last=Williams |first=Sam |date=2004-04-27 |work=Salon.com |publisher=Salon Media Group }}</ref>{{failed verification|date=January 2018}}
==Attention and controversies==
A statistical study published in the ''[[Emory Law Journal]]'' in 2010 indicated that the Committee has generally adhered to the principles of ignoring the content of user disputes and focusing on user conduct.<ref name='SSRN'/> The same study also found that despite every case being assessed on its own merits, a correlation emerged between the types of conduct found to have occurred and the remedies and decisions imposed by the Committee.
In 2007, an arbitrator using the username [[Essjay]] [[Essjay controversy#Timeline|resigned from the Committee]] after it was found that he had made false claims about his academic qualifications and professional experiences in a ''New York Times'' interview.<ref name='NYT-E'>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/12/technology/12wiki.html?ex=1331352000&en=668e67bce73bf6c6&ei=5089&partner=rssyahoo&emc=rss |title=After False Claim, Wikipedia to Check Degrees |accessdate=2009-06-14 |last=Cohen |first=Noam |date=2007-03-12 |work=The New York Times }}</ref><ref name='NYT-2006'>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/17/technology/17wiki.html?scp=3&sq=Arbitration%20Committee%20Wikipedia&st=cse |title=Growing Wikipedia Refines Its 'Anyone Can Edit' Policy |accessdate=2009-06-09 |last=Hafner |first=Katie |date=2006-06-17 |work=The New York Times }}</ref><ref name='NYT-2007'>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/05/technology/05wikipedia.html?scp=1&sq=Essjay&st=cse |title=A Contributor to Wikipedia Has His Fictional Side |accessdate=2009-06-09 |last=Cohen |first=Noam |date=2007-03-05 |work=The New York Times }}</ref> Also in 2007, the committee banned [[Massachusetts Institute of Technology]] professor [[Carl Hewitt]] from editing the online encyclopedia.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2007/dec/09/wikipedia.internet | title=Wikipedia ban for disruptive professor | work=The Guardian | date=9 December 2007 | accessdate=3 December 2014 | author=Kleeman, Jenny}}</ref> In May 2009, an arbitrator who edited under the username Sam Blacketer resigned from the Committee after it became known that he had concealed his past editing in obtaining the role.<ref name='NZ-2009'/>
In 2009, the Committee was brought to media attention as a result of its decision to ban "all IP addresses owned or operated by the [[Church of Scientology]] and its associates, broadly interpreted", as part of the fourth Scientology-related case.<ref name='NYT-2009'/><ref name='TG'/> Such an action had "little precedent"<ref name='NYT-2009'/> in the eight-year history of Wikipedia and was reported on several major news services such as ''The New York Times'', ''[[ABC News]]'', and ''[[The Guardian]]''.<ref name='NYT-2009'/><ref name='TG'>{{cite web|url=https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2009/may/29/wikipedia-scientology |title=Wikipedia bans Church of Scientology from editing |accessdate=2009-06-14 |last=Fitzsimmons |first=Caitlin |date=2009-05-29 |work=The Guardian | archiveurl= https://web.archive.org/web/20090611225227/http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/may/29/wikipedia-scientology| archivedate= 11 June 2009 <!--DASHBot-->| deadurl= no}}</ref><ref name='ABC'>{{cite web|url=http://www.abcnews.go.com/Technology/AheadoftheCurve/story?id=7708616&page=1 |title=Wikipedia Blocks Church of Scientology From Editing Entries |accessdate=2009-06-14 |last=Heussner |first=Ki Mae |author2=Ned Potter |date=2009-05-29 |publisher=ABC News | archiveurl= https://web.archive.org/web/20090602204246/http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/AheadoftheCurve/Story?id=7708616&page=1| archivedate= 2 June 2009 <!--DASHBot-->| deadurl= no}}</ref> Satirical news-show host [[Stephen Colbert]] ran a segment on ''[[The Colbert Report]]'' parodying the ban.<ref name='SC'>{{cite web|url=http://www.cc.com/video-clips/oqx005/the-colbert-report-wikipedia-bans-scientologists |title=Wikipedia Bans Scientologists |accessdate=2009-06-14 |last=Colbert |first=Stephen |date=2009-06-04 |format=Flash Player |work=Comedy Central |publisher=MTV Networks}}</ref>
In 2015, [[Criticism of Wikipedia#Allegations of biased treatment|the Committee received attention]] for its ruling pertaining to [[Gamergate controversy|Gamergate]], in which one editor was banned from the site indefinitely and several others were banned from topics relating to Gamergate or gender.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2015/01/29/gamergate-wikipedia-and-the-limits-of-human-knowledge/ | title=Gamergate, Wikipedia and the limits of 'human knowledge' | work=Washington Post | date=29 January 2015 | accessdate=30 January 2015 | author=Dewey, Caitlin}}</ref>
In June 2015, the committee removed advanced permissions from Richard Symonds, an activist for the British party the [[Liberal Democrats (UK)|Liberal Democrats]].<ref name="BBC0">{{cite web |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-33055855 |title=Censure for Grant Shapps' Wikipedia accuser - BBC News |date=8 June 2015 |accessdate=23 August 2015}}</ref> Symonds had improperly blocked a Wikipedia account, and associated its edits with former [[Chairman of the Conservative Party]] [[Grant Shapps]],<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/andy-mcsmiths-diary-ed-balls-and-jack-straw-off-the-labour-peerage-list-10306167.html |title=Andy McSmith's Diary: Ed Balls and Jack Straw off the Labour peerage list |date=8 June 2015 |accessdate=23 August 2015}}</ref> and leaked this to ''The Guardian''.<ref name="BBC0" /> Shapps denied ownership of the account, calling the allegations "categorically false and defamatory".<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/22/nick-clegg-mocks-grant-shapps-wikipedia-affair|title=Nick Clegg mocks Grant Shapps over Wikipedia affair|author=Randeep Ramesh|work=the Guardian}}</ref> Symonds said in an interview that he stands by his actions.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/apr/23/interview-richard-symonds-wikipedia-administrator-blocked-account-linked-to-shapps|title=Wikipedia volunteer who blocked 'Grant Shapps' account: I stand by my decision|author=Randeep Ramesh|work=the Guardian}}</ref>
A 2017 study found that the Committee's decision-making was mostly unaffected by extra-legal factors such as nationality, activity/experience, conflict avoidance, and time constraints. The same study found that the Committee's decision-making was affected much more by time constraints than that of conventional courts.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Konieczny |first=Piotr |date=2017-08-11 |title=Decision making in the self-evolved collegiate court: Wikipedia's Arbitration Committee and its implications for self-governance and judiciary in cyberspace |journal=International Sociology |volume=32 |issue=6 |language=en |pages=755–774 |doi=10.1177/0268580917722906 |issn=0268-5809}}</ref>
== Arbitration Committees on sister projects ==
{{further|meta:Arbitration Committee}}
In 2004 an Arbitration Committee was founded on the [[French Wikipedia]],<ref>{{cite book|language=French|title=Web Social: Mutation de la Communication|author=Florence Millerand|author2=Serge Proulx|author3=Julien Rueff|publisher=PUQ|year=2010|page=66|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=yIa-UMDxWjEC&pg=PA66|isbn=9782760524989}}</ref> and in 2007, on the [[German Wikipedia|German]]<ref name='dewiki-2007'>{{cite web|url=http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Wikipedia-sucht-Schiedsrichter--/meldung/89083 |title=Wikipedia sucht Schiedsrichter |accessdate=2009-06-09 |last=Kleinz |first=Torsten |date=2007-04-30 |publisher=Heise Online |language=German | archiveurl= https://web.archive.org/web/20090501114321/http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Wikipedia-sucht-Schiedsrichter--/meldung/89083| archivedate= 1 May 2009 <!--DASHBot-->| deadurl= no}}</ref> and [[Polish Wikipedia|Polish]] Wikipedias.<ref name='wikipedystyczny'>{{cite web|url=http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Wikipedia-sucht-Schiedsrichter--/meldung/89083 |title=Komitet arbitrażowy oraz mediatorzy w Wikipedii|accessdate=2012-02-01 |date=2007-08-31 |publisher=Blog wikipedystyczny|language=Polish}}</ref>
== References ==
{{reflist|colwidth=30em}}
{{Wikipedia}}
[[Category:Wikipedia]]
[[Category:Arbitration organizations]]
[[Category:Quasi-judicial bodies]]
