Policy:Code of Conduct/Enforcement Guidelines

RetroWikipedia Enforcement Guidelines

1. Enforcement Overview

These guidelines describe how the RetroWikipedia community supports the enforcement of its Code of Conduct. This includes promoting understanding, proactive prevention of violations, principles for responsive enforcement, and support for local enforcement processes.

As with all RetroWikipedia policies, enforcement is a shared responsibility, ideally handled at the most appropriate local level.

These guidelines create a framework for collaboration across present and future enforcement structures and promote fair and consistent application.

1.1 Translations

The primary version of these guidelines is in English. Translations may be made available. In case of a discrepancy, the English version prevails.

1.2 Review Process

An annual review of these guidelines will be conducted by the RetroWikipedia Coordinating Committee.

2. Preventive Work

2.1 Notification and Confirmation

The Code of Conduct applies to all RetroWikipedia users and contributors, and to related community events and affiliated spaces.

The following individuals must confirm adherence:

• All staff and moderators
• Board members of affiliated projects
• Event organizers using RetroWikipedia branding
• Presenters or representatives at RetroWikipedia-related events

2.1.1 Promoting Awareness

A link to the Code of Conduct will be prominently displayed:

• On user registration pages
• In footers or banners (where technically feasible)
• On affiliated event pages
• At all in-person, remote, and hybrid events

2.2 Training Recommendations

Training modules will be developed to foster understanding and implementation. Modules will be accessible in various formats and languages.

Modules include:

• Module A – Orientation: Overview of the Code of Conduct and reporting mechanisms.
• Module B – Identification and Reporting: How to recognize and report violations.
• Module C – Complex Cases and Appeals:
  • C1: Handling multi-wiki violations and long-term harassment
  • C2: Managing appeals and final case closure

3. Responsive Work

3.1 Principles for Reporting and Processing Violations

• Reports may come from affected individuals or third parties.
• Reports may be public or private.
• Accused users may view details unless this poses a risk.
• False or bad-faith reports may lead to revoked privileges.
• Outcomes should be proportional and contextually informed.
• Cases should be resolved consistently and in a timely manner.

3.1.1 Support for Case Processing

Local enforcement structures may include:

• Arbitration Committees (ArbComs)
• Panels of moderators
• Advanced rights holders
• Community-led enforcement via consensus

3.1.2 Enforcement by Violation Type

Different types of violations are handled by different groups:

• Physical threats: Handled by Trust & Safety
• Legal threats: Sent to legal professionals
• Doxing: Handled by oversight users or Trust & Safety
• Affiliate issues: Handled by relevant committees
• Technical spaces: Technical Code of Conduct teams
• Systemic failures: Handled by the Coordinating Committee
• On-wiki and off-wiki violations: Enforced by local/global authorities
• Event violations: Addressed by on-site enforcement teams or escalated to the committee

3.2 Reporting Tool

A centralized reporting tool will be developed. It will:

• Accept detailed, actionable reports
• Prioritize privacy, accessibility, and transparency
• Be optional—enforcers may use other tools if consistent

3.3 Principles for Enforcement Structures

3.3.1 Fairness

• Enforcers must avoid conflicts of interest.
• All parties may present perspectives, with limits for privacy/safety.

3.3.2 Transparency

• Document enforcement effectiveness and share learnings.
• Publish local policy pages aligned with this guideline.
• Accept evidence from off-wiki platforms where applicable.

3.3.3 Appeals

• Appeals may be made to a higher enforcement body or U4C if local options are exhausted.
• No appeal is allowed against some legal decisions, though some may be reviewed by the Case Review Committee.
• Appeals should be handled respectfully, with privacy and context in mind.

4. RetroWikipedia Coordinating Committee (RCC)

4.1 Purpose and Scope

The RCC ensures effective enforcement when systemic failure occurs and may:

• Investigate cases and appeals as defined
• Provide guidance and training
• Offer interpretations of policy
• Monitor enforcement practices and suggest improvements

4.2 Membership and Elections

• Up to 16 voting members are elected annually.
• Interim elections may be held if needed.
• The Foundation may appoint 2 non-voting observers.

4.3 Policy Authority

• RCC does not make policy but enforces it.
• Prior decisions guide, but do not bind, future enforcement.

5. Glossary

Advanced rights holder

A user with permissions beyond standard editing, e.g., moderators, administrators, stewards.

Arbitration Committee (ArbCom)

A group resolving high-level disputes; may serve one or more projects.

Community

The collective of contributors to a specific RetroWikipedia project.

Cross-wiki

Issues involving more than one wiki.

Doxing

The release of private, identifiable information without consent.

Local

Pertaining to a single RetroWikipedia project.

Off-wiki

Discussions or actions occurring outside the RetroWikipedia platform, including on third-party tools.

RCC

RetroWikipedia Coordinating Committee—a body for high-level enforcement.

Systemic failure

Repeated inability or unwillingness to enforce the Code of Conduct.

Trust & Safety

The team handling safety-sensitive cases and threats.