From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Arjun's criteria

Here is my special little criteria I use when I judge a candidate for adminship, this is not a checklist as it is just natural to check for these things, the criteria is also not written in stone and can be given to exceptions.

  • RC patrol:Always a plus with me, but hey... no big deal if thats not your thing. I mean there are 47,720,720 out there, they don't all have to be vandal fighters!
  • Time: I'm very big on the length of time editing the site. I became an admin in only about three months of solid editing. So the more the better, but if the user clearly shows tools won't be abused... then no worries. :)
  • Wikispace:Must be rather high, Wikispace is vital, and must be involved in XFD's even if it is just once and a while. Admins can use the "delete" button, so they should understand the process of XFD's.
  • Featured?: Arjun does not judge a candidate negativly if they have no Featured material, whether it be portals, articles, lists or pics. However it is always a grand plus. In a nutshell no 1FA criteria will be judged on you.
  • Civility: an absolute must, the candidate should be civil at all times. Admins go through a lot of #*%! which requires a civil outlook and must be calm and not let the vandals/trolls get under their skins.
  • User talk: must be a good total of edits, I prefer admins who interact with other users/admins. The candidate must not be afraid to ask questions.
  • Email: would be a big plus if it is enabled, I would however never oppose if it isn't.
  • Wars: must not edit war, edit warring is counter productive and doesn't help wikipedia at all. Basically any major quarreling with other editors could be a severe red flag in my eyes.
  • RFA Process must handle the RFA process professionally and with respect. I'm not a huge fan of people who advertise their RFA, just doesn't seem professional. Also good answers to questions is very important.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Arjun's criteria

Here is my special little criteria I use when I judge a candidate for adminship, this is not a checklist as it is just natural to check for these things, the criteria is also not written in stone and can be given to exceptions.

  • RC patrol:Always a plus with me, but hey... no big deal if thats not your thing. I mean there are 47,720,720 out there, they don't all have to be vandal fighters!
  • Time: I'm very big on the length of time editing the site. I became an admin in only about three months of solid editing. So the more the better, but if the user clearly shows tools won't be abused... then no worries. :)
  • Wikispace:Must be rather high, Wikispace is vital, and must be involved in XFD's even if it is just once and a while. Admins can use the "delete" button, so they should understand the process of XFD's.
  • Featured?: Arjun does not judge a candidate negativly if they have no Featured material, whether it be portals, articles, lists or pics. However it is always a grand plus. In a nutshell no 1FA criteria will be judged on you.
  • Civility: an absolute must, the candidate should be civil at all times. Admins go through a lot of #*%! which requires a civil outlook and must be calm and not let the vandals/trolls get under their skins.
  • User talk: must be a good total of edits, I prefer admins who interact with other users/admins. The candidate must not be afraid to ask questions.
  • Email: would be a big plus if it is enabled, I would however never oppose if it isn't.
  • Wars: must not edit war, edit warring is counter productive and doesn't help wikipedia at all. Basically any major quarreling with other editors could be a severe red flag in my eyes.
  • RFA Process must handle the RFA process professionally and with respect. I'm not a huge fan of people who advertise their RFA, just doesn't seem professional. Also good answers to questions is very important.

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook