Talk:Dispute resolution analysis group

Current dispute resolution processes

I'm not including "Page and user talkpages" in any of these, as they're global in scope except for a few possible circumstances. If you see any discrepancies, please feel free to add/change anything I'm going for "typical" over "complete", hence the absence of many ENWP dispute resolution options. We're not copying the templates. :) ~Kylu (u|t) 16:10, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Meta

• Requests for comments
• Mediation planning group‎ (starting)

Generally, disputes on Meta tend to be handled on RFC, with either a local admin or steward making the final decision and closure if it requires one. The mediation planning group is to create a mediation system for those projects who don't have their own dispute resolution system, for problems requiring mediation on Meta, and possible problems arising between two projects. If problems arise on Meta requiring arbitration, it is imagined that the Board itself would decide the result, or at least the stewards en banc.

English Wikipedia

Primarily, the English Wikipedia DR system seems to be focused on these:

• Third opinion
• Requests for comments
• Informal mediation (Mediation Cabal)
• Formal mediation (Mediation Committee)
• Arbitration

Generally speaking, each level of dispute resolution requires that you have attempted some previous step before acceptance of the issue.

There are also a number of topic specific dispute fora, for example deletion review for disputes about page deletion and closures of deletion debates or the reliable sources noticeboard for getting outside opinions on whether a given source is reliable for a given claim. Many are listed at en:Template:Editabuselinks.

French Wikipedia

• fr:Wikipédia:Wikipompiers (Mediation), "Firemen" who put out fiery disputes. :)
• fr:Wikipédia:Appel à commentaires like RFC
• fr:Wikipédia:Comité d'arbitrage/Arbitrage Arbitration

Italian Wikipedia

• it:Progetto:Mediazione Mediation, so far veering towards "somewhat informal" mediation.
• it:Wikipedia:Richieste di pareri RFC, not yet community-approved as policy.
• it:Wikipedia:Sondaggi Polls, seeking a wide audience to help determine the solution
• it:Wikipedia:Utenti problematici (non-admin users) & it:Wikipedia:Amministratori problematici (admins) - Reporting of users as troublesome.

I'm not familiar enough with Italian Wikipedia to determine the difference between the polls and RFC, except one is vote-like and the other simply seeking additional comments.

English Wiktionary

Mostly absent, but under development. Generally, the site works on consensus for nearly all issues, including conflicts.

Questions

I have the beginning of an essay draft about development and maintenance of a suite of articles covering a contentious controversial topic. It covers my experiences and observations from English Wikipedia. I have more ideas for further essays on this and related subjects (not all of which might fit into dispute resolution analysis, but might be more general). Where should they go? What should I do?--Filll 19:17, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

You could start at Dispute_resolution_analysis_group/essay by Filll (replace "essay by Filll" with actual name), for instance. Will that do? --Kim Bruning 21:09, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I've made a subpage for essays: Dispute resolution analysis group/Essays. It's nothing special, just a general bit of categorization and guidance. Vassyana 09:08, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Hellooooooo...

Is this still going on? I wrote a few dispute resolution essays and I found this page while looking around for customs about submitting them to the community. Is this group still active? Darkfrog24 (talk) 14:31, 23 April 2020 (UTC)