User:Wisdom89/RfA philosophy and criteria

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] General overview

RfA or Requests for Adminship is the area of Wikipedia where the editorial community has the opportunity to have a comprehensive discussion regarding whether a particular editor can be trusted with the extra buttons endowed with after being granted Administrator status. In short, it is where we elect system operators. Unfortunately, this means that applicants are subjected to a thorough examination and an almost microscopic scrutiny from the Wikipedia community as a whole, and nothing is clandestine. Ergo, it can be insufferably frustrating, grueling and disheartening to the candidate. However, the thing to remember is that it is only a discussion about the editor in the moment, not the person overall, thus, nothing should be taken personally. Admittedly, criticism is sometimes hard to digest, and it's difficult to deal with the disparity by which the editors cast their !vote. Different editors invariably have different criteria that they feel a candidate should meet.

These are my standard requirements for supporting a request for adminship. They are not immutable and may change overtime.

[edit] Edits

Dwelling on the number of edits is not the most important factor, but it's certainly the most basic, which is why this is listed first. It is not an implication of significance. These are subjective rough numbers that constitute nothing more than a baseline of edits that a prospective candidate should probably possess if they are to have requisite experience.

  • ~1000+ mainspace edits
  • ~250+ Wikipedia namespace edits
  • 2000+ total edits, 3000+ preferred
  • Edit summaries should always be used, but unless this is exceptionally bad, it will not impact my decision.
  • I generally do not mind if an editor chooses to use automated tools/scripts for editing. However, excessive use of Huggle for anti-vandalism only will be looked down upon.

[edit] Activity

  • At least 4 months tenure since joining Wikipedia, 6 is preferred
  • At least 100 edits per month for several consecutive months to demonstrate continuous behavioral patterns
  • High activity in areas in which candidate mentions in their answer to question 1, especially WP:AIV, WP:CSD and WP:UAA. If you plan on working in these areas, be prepared to show some experience, and be prepared to have that experienced accessed.

[edit] Conduct

  • No personal attacks in last 4 months
  • No vandalism in last 6 months
  • Hasn't been blocked in last 6-12 months. This reason for this variability is because it depends on the nature of the block (e.g Edit warring will be treated more leniently than personal attacks and sockpuppetry).

[edit] Additional factors

  • I do care if the candidate has significantly contributed to at least 1 article in the mainspace. Creation of good or featured articles are not required, but they certainly help.
  • I do not care if you run a bot
  • I do not care if you have written essays
  • I do not make a distinction between self-nominations and nominations from other users, although, if I see that you have been nominated by respected members of the community it may work in your favor
  • I do not care if you add yourself to Administrators Open For Recall
  • I do not care if you know the difference between a block and a ban as stated verbatim by guidelines