Wikipedia Arbitration |
---|
Track related changes |
Who gets to place a Talk page ACDS notice?
I see where it says at WP:ACDS#Page restrictions that admins can impose protection, restrictions, and so on, but where does it say who gets to place a notice at an article Talk page identifying the topic as potentially subject to such restrictions, even if they have not been placed yet? There are any number of such ACDS notices on pages that don't (yet?) have any logged restrictions, and it's helpful to know when pages are subject to ACDS.
For example: Talk:Conversion therapy contains {{ArbComPseudoscience}}, which displays the Pseudo-science banner. This was placed in September 2013 (diff) and that seems right to me; the user who added it is not an admin (at least, not now). I see nothing on the ACDS page stating who can place such a TP banner, and under what conditions. I believe that Talk:Conversion therapy should also have {{Ds/talk notice|gg}}
placed, and so, probably, should Talk:John Money (and a lot of other pages I'm aware of). Where do I go to see what the requirements are for placing the Ds talk notice, and whether as a non-admin I can place it? Did I miss part of the page that describes this? If not, can we add some text about this? Is it just a matter of any editor making a BOLD edit to add a Ds talk notice of their choice, and then it's up to consensus? Somehow, that seems too loosey-goosey as far as subjecting something to ArbCom sanctions that didn't pass through ArbCom, but otoh, ArbCom isn't going to review 6.7M pages, either. So, what's the procedure here? Mathglot (talk) 06:27, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
- Template:Ds/talk notice says
"Anyone may place a discretionary sanctions talk page notice."
It links to this prior discussion, similar but not identical, with an OP that I respect a lot. There's a good case to be made for more clear guidance at WP:ACDS, but this does mean you can go ahead and tag those two pages, both of which are definitely in the GG/GAS topic area. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:39, 23 June 2022 (UTC) - The talk notice is purely informational in nature, so unlike other parts of DS, it does not carry a sanction or action that only an admin is allowed to take. I would support any editor adding it to the talk page of an article covered under the DS, as long as it's being done in good faith (i.e. no edit warring over whether to add it). I think using WP:BRD would be a good process to add the banner. Whether an article is covered is more difficult to ascertain in edge cases, but in cases where there is disagreement that cannot be resolved ARCA can be used to resolve this as described on the template documentation page. Hopefully that answers your question. Other clerks / the arbs may have other opinions, and this is just my thoughts (not a statement from the committee). Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 13:00, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
- As I mentioned in the last discussion you started (see link from Firefangledfeathers), as per Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions § aware.alert, anyone can place notices on pages that fall within a topic area for which the use of discretionary sanctions has been authorized. If someone contests a decision whether a page falls within scope of a topic area, the interested participants should have a discussion. If it can't be resolved within the community, a request for clarification from the arbitration committee can be made. isaacl (talk) 15:37, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
- The section you link to refers to "alerts" placed on editor talk pages, not notices placed on article talk pages. As far as I can tell, Mathglot is correct that the ACDS page does not comment on who can place article talk page notices. I think the only section that comes close to the topic is §Page restrictions, which just says that admins must place a notice when adding a page restriction (e.g. 1RR). Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:46, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
- Although the name of the section is "Alerts", the first sentence is
Any editor may advise any other editor that discretionary sanctions are in force for an area of conflict.
(The subsequent sentence describes what qualifies as a formal notification to a specific editor.) I discussed page restrictions in the previous discussion; however a page in a topic area for which discretionary sanctions has been authorized is not yet under an editing restriction, until an administrator actually imposes one at their discretion. isaacl (talk) 16:11, 23 June 2022 (UTC)- I'll add (but please correct me if I'm wrong) that deciding to enact a page-specific restriction under DS is something that can only be done by admins. So anyone (with the caveats above) may put a DS notice on a talk page, but only an admin can, for example, declare that 1RR applies to the page as a DS. --Tryptofish (talk) 16:42, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
- The second half was clear; it was the first part I was asking about, which now appears to be answered in a way agreeing with your assumption. Thanks, all! (And particularly to Firefangledfeathers, for pointing out that forgetful OP .) Mathglot (talk) 20:07, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
- I'll add (but please correct me if I'm wrong) that deciding to enact a page-specific restriction under DS is something that can only be done by admins. So anyone (with the caveats above) may put a DS notice on a talk page, but only an admin can, for example, declare that 1RR applies to the page as a DS. --Tryptofish (talk) 16:42, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
- Although the name of the section is "Alerts", the first sentence is
- The section you link to refers to "alerts" placed on editor talk pages, not notices placed on article talk pages. As far as I can tell, Mathglot is correct that the ACDS page does not comment on who can place article talk page notices. I think the only section that comes close to the topic is §Page restrictions, which just says that admins must place a notice when adding a page restriction (e.g. 1RR). Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:46, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
Awareness and alerts
- If an editor acknowledges on a talk page the awareness of discretionary sanctions why would that not suffice for being aware sanctions exist? If that makes sense it would seem that an addition to the "Awareness and alerts" section might seem logical,
- "#7)- An editor is deemed aware of discretionary sanctions if the editor mentions this on any talk page comments." -- Otr500 (talk) 04:51, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Barkeep49: I 100% agree with the comments you mentioned especially as being a "system that needs change". I typically just do not edit in such areas and rarely even comment. I am less worried about specifically mentioned restrictions but generally stay clear of subjects that are under the added "broadly construed", or other such vague wording, that has at least two issues that I would just rather leave alone. Hopefully, at some point the template issue can be looked at. -- Otr500 (talk) 00:26, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
Edit notices
Can template editors or page movers use {{ds/editnotice}} to place an editnotice on pages within a conflict area? If yes, would it fulfil the There was an editnotice ({{ds/editnotice}}) on the restricted page which specified the page restriction?) criterion? Thanks. NotReallySoroka (talk) 10:38, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Discretionary sanctions#sanctions.page says
Any uninvolved administrator may impose on any page or set of pages relating to the area of conflict [restrictions] or any other reasonable measure [...].
The enforcing administrator must log page restrictions they place. Enforcing administrators must add an editnotice to restricted pages, using the standard template ({{ds/editnotice}}), and should add a notice to the talk page of restricted pages. - So, only administrators can place a page under editing restrictions and they should be placing the template when doing so. However, if they didn't for whatever reason then I (as a non-arb) see no reason why someone else shouldn't be able to add it. Thryduulf (talk) 14:19, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- There are provisions elsewhere that essentially say if an admin doesn't fill out the paperwork correctly someone else can help them. I would see this as part of that. Barkeep49 (talk) 14:28, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- Is this different from what was discussed above in #Who gets to place a Talk page ACDS notice?? If there is a difference, could someone please explain it to me? Thanks. --Tryptofish (talk) 17:55, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- @Tryptofish the previous thread was about placing a notice on the talk page, this one is about placing an edit notice on the article. Thryduulf (talk) 18:04, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks, Thryduulf. I was genuinely confused about that. But now that leads me to a procedural question. If it's just "helping" for a non-admin to put an edit notice (for 1RR) on a page, isn't it still the case that enacting a 1RR-type page sanction can be initiated only by an uninvolved administrator? If ArbCom had already enacted a remedy applying 1RR for the topic area, then I can see how a non-admin would not need permission from an admin to post the edit notice, but that's not the same thing as enacting a page-specific sanction under the authority of DS. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:10, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- The previous discussion was on who can place a notice on the talk page saying that the page falls within an area for which administrators have been authorized to enact sanctions at their sole discretion. This discussion is on who can add an edit notice to a page, which typically is done in conjunction with there being an actual restriction imposed on the page. (At one point, some Covid-related articles were the only ones with edit notices simply noting the authorization for discretionary sanctions, without any actual sanctions imposed. I don't know if that's changed.) isaacl (talk) 20:17, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- Covid restrictions are general sanctions (community-authorised) rather than discretionary sanctions (arb com-authorised) but they are very similar. I think the following table is correct regarding these matters:
- @Tryptofish the previous thread was about placing a notice on the talk page, this one is about placing an edit notice on the article. Thryduulf (talk) 18:04, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- Is this different from what was discussed above in #Who gets to place a Talk page ACDS notice?? If there is a difference, could someone please explain it to me? Thanks. --Tryptofish (talk) 17:55, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- There are provisions elsewhere that essentially say if an admin doesn't fill out the paperwork correctly someone else can help them. I would see this as part of that. Barkeep49 (talk) 14:28, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
Regime Authorised for topic area by Who can place restrictions on pages? Who can place restrictions on editors? Who can inform editors about authorisations and/or restrictions? Where are sanctions enforced? Discretionary sanctions Arbitration Committee Uninvolved administrators Arbitration Committee Uninvolved administrators Arbitration Committee Everybody Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement (WP:AE) General sanctions The community, following consensus at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard Community consensus Community consensus Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard (WP:AN) Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (WP:AN/I)
- Thryduulf (talk) 21:48, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- @Thryduulf the committee assumed responsibility for COVID last year and so it is now DS. That table looks correct to me - it's good stuff. Barkeep49 (talk) 21:51, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- The language around this gets used by different people in different ways. As described at Wikipedia:General sanctions,
General sanctions are a type of Wikipedia sanctions that apply to all editors working in a particular topic area. These contrast with editing restrictions, also called "personal sanctions", which apply only to individual editors. General sanctions are measures used by the community or the Arbitration Committee ("ArbCom") to improve the editing atmosphere of an article or topic area.
Under the "Discretionary sanctions" section,Use of such tools can be authorized by the Arbitration Committee, usually as part of an arbitration case. In addition, community discussions can authorize sanctions that generally echo those established by the Arbitration Committee.
So technically, general sanctions are ones that apply to all editors, and the use of discretionary sanctions can be authorized by either the arbitration committee or the community. - Regarding Covid-19, I only was noting it as an outlier with respect to having edit notices for articles without specific restrictions, regardless of who authorized the use of discretionary sanctions. isaacl (talk) 22:02, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks all, I understand all of that, and I agree with all of that. What was previously unclear to my reading of this discussion was that it sounded as though someone who is not an admin could decide that an edit notice could be placed on a page, and that it would be regarded as being helpful. Prior to Thryduulf's table, no one had made a clear distinction between the table column about "who can inform" and the "can place" columns. (Re-reading the discussion, I realize that Thryduulf actually did say this in his first reply to the opening question, but I missed that before. My bad.) I think that distinction was intended and assumed, but it didn't seem to me like it had been made clear. (Picture an additional table column, verbosely headed "Once ArbCom has established DS in a topic area but has not specified what rules are in place on a given page, who can place restrictions on a given page under the authority of DS?" Only an uninvolved admin belongs in the column under that heading, but anyone can inform other editors once such a choice has been made.) I was confused about it, and I could easily imagine other users being confused. For me, the takeaway is that the opening question here was about informing editors via an edit notice and was never intended to be about the rest. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:33, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- Thryduulf (talk) 21:48, 5 July 2022 (UTC)