English Wikipedia is a significant example of a knowledge commons that is largely maintained by volunteer editors across the world. As in any large collaboration, disputes inevitably arise among Wikipedia’s editors, and the Wikipedia community has a number of processes in place to adjudicate disagreements about what information should be present on Wikipedia, and to address anti-social or harmful conduct that arises within its user base.
The most challenging disputes on Wikipedia are adjudicated by a group of elected volunteers known as the Arbitration Committee (ArbCom). ArbCom investigates evidence around major disputes, and convenes hearings for the users involved on public pages on Wikipedia. Members of the Wikipedia editing community at large may comment on and provide context for disputes as they are being heard by ArbCom.
To understand the role and function of this dispute resolution process over the course of Wikipedia's existence, we assembled a dataset of 203 arbitration cases from 2008 to 2024 to understand who contributes to case discussions, and how a Wikipedian’s stature within the editing community impacts their case’s outcome. Our analysis shows that editors contributing to ArbCom case discussions are rarely commenting for the first time, and have been contributing to Wikipedia much longer than the average editor. Additionally, we find users with higher community stature are more likely to be given warnings than their less experienced counterparts, who tend to receive more bans.
