Knowino:Dispute resolution

It is inevitable that disputes will arise between contributors over matters of content and behaviour. In most cases, these disputes can be resolved quickly and amicably if the parties involved talk to each other and come to a consensus. Unfortunately, this will not always happen. The dispute resolution process is for parties who have already attempted, without success, to resolve a dispute through polite conversation. It should not be used as a first recourse.

The Community Council can arbitrate at its own discretion, but will normally recuse itself from comparatively minor disputes.

[edit] Content disputes

If all the disputants agree, they can decide upon an ad hoc panel of editors to mediate the dispute. This option is preferable.

If there is not unanimous agreement to establish such a panel, the following resolution procedure should be followed:

1. The disputants need to agree on the disputed area of content. The disputed area may range from a single section up to an entire article.
2. In order to prevent abuse of the dispute resolution process, a prerequisite to continuation is that an uninvolved administrator signs a note on the article's discussion page indicating that:
   • there is a legitimate and non-trivial content dispute
   • the disputed area has been correctly identified.
3. The disputed area is temporarily forked (split):
   • it is copied to two or more subpages of the article in question (for example, <Article>/Fork 1 and <Article>/Fork 2),^[1] with a permanent link given in the edit summaries for attribution purposes
   • a link to the forks is provided from the original disputed area in the main article
   • the original disputed area is reduced, or even stubbed, until it is at a point where it is no longer contested.
4. A detailed rationale should be provided for each forked version within three days of the split.
5. The forks are now separate, and can be developed and reviewed independently. Readers can follow links to the forks from the main article and decide which version they prefer.
6. The aim is for all parties to work towards a solution that can be reintegrated into the main article. When a solution is achieved, it can be copied back into the main article (again, with a permanent link given in the edit summary for attribution purposes), and the forks can be archived.

[edit] Behavioural disputes

If editors are clearly violating reasonable behavioural standards, any uninvolved administrator can intervene at his or her own discretion; temporary blocks may be appropriate.

However, subtle long-term patterns of implicit hostility and disruptive behaviour—including stalking and filibustering—can be just as disruptive as very obvious violations. To resolve long-term behavioural disputes, the Community Council may appoint an ad hoc panel of uninvolved editors to investigate the dispute and prepare a report for the Council to act upon.

[edit] Notes

1. ↑ Numbering should not be taken to imply any kind of precedence. If there is contention, random identifiers should be used (for example, <Article>/Fork fr5z5pcsjW and <Article>/Fork Q4YFf8T0yc).