It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of
Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been
thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.
Please note that the Question Phase of the RfA Review is now closed. The contents below are preserved as an archive.
Responses are now being examined and compiled into a report as part of the Reflect phase of the review.
Welcome to the Question phase of
RfA Review. We hope you'll take the time to respond to our questions in order to give us further understanding of what you think of the RfA process. Remember, there are no right or wrong answers here. Also, feel free to answer as many questions as you like. Don't feel you have to tackle everything if you don't want to.
In a departure from the normal support and oppose responses, this review will focus on your thoughts, opinions and concerns. Where possible, you are encouraged to provide examples, references, diffs and so on in order to support your viewpoint. Please note that at this point we are not asking you to recommend possible remedies or solutions for any problems you describe, as that will come later in the review.
To participate in the review, please create a subpage in your user area to hold your answers, by clicking
Special:Mypage/RfA review, Once you've done that, add the following text: {{subst:RFAReview}}, to your usersubpage, and it will generate the questions on your subpage, as well as code it for use once you've completed your responses. Alternatively, have the page automatically generated for you and remove the top line of code.
If you prefer, you can submit your responses anonymously by emailing them to gazimoff (at) o2.co.uk. Anonymous responses will be posted as subpages here and linked to from the responses section, but will have the contributor's details removed. If you have any questions, please use the project's
talk page.
Once you've provided your responses, please encourage other editors to take part in the review. More responses will improve the quality of research, as well as increasing the likelihood of producing meaningful results.
Once again, thank you for taking part!
Questions
When thinking about the adminship process, what are your thoughts and opinions about the following areas:
Candidate selection (inviting someone to stand as a candidate)
...
Administrator coaching (either formally or informally)
...
Nomination, co-nomination and self-nomination (introducing the candidate)
...
Advertising and canvassing
...
Debate (Presenting questions to the candidate)
...
Election (including providing reasons for support/oppose)
...
Withdrawal (the candidate withdrawing from the process)
...
Declaration (the bureaucrat closing the application. Also includes
WP:NOTNOW closes)
...
Training (use of New Admin School, other post-election training)
...
Recall (the Administrators Open to Recall process)
...
When thinking about adminship in general, what are your thoughts and opinions about the following areas:
How do you view the role of an administrator?
...
What attributes do you feel an administrator should possess?
...
Finally, when thinking about Requests for Adminship:
Have you ever voted in a request for Adminship? If so what was your experience?
...
Have you ever stood as a candidate under the Request for Adminship process? If so what was your experience?
...
Do you have any further thoughts or opinions on the Request for Adminship process?
...
Responses
Please paste the link from the bottom of your response page to the BOTTOM of this list.
The question phase has now closed. Although you are welcome to share your views, it is unlikely they will be included in the report that forms the next stage of the review. Many thanks to all who responded!
It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of
Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been
thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.
Please note that the Question Phase of the RfA Review is now closed. The contents below are preserved as an archive.
Responses are now being examined and compiled into a report as part of the Reflect phase of the review.
Welcome to the Question phase of
RfA Review. We hope you'll take the time to respond to our questions in order to give us further understanding of what you think of the RfA process. Remember, there are no right or wrong answers here. Also, feel free to answer as many questions as you like. Don't feel you have to tackle everything if you don't want to.
In a departure from the normal support and oppose responses, this review will focus on your thoughts, opinions and concerns. Where possible, you are encouraged to provide examples, references, diffs and so on in order to support your viewpoint. Please note that at this point we are not asking you to recommend possible remedies or solutions for any problems you describe, as that will come later in the review.
To participate in the review, please create a subpage in your user area to hold your answers, by clicking
Special:Mypage/RfA review, Once you've done that, add the following text: {{subst:RFAReview}}, to your usersubpage, and it will generate the questions on your subpage, as well as code it for use once you've completed your responses. Alternatively, have the page automatically generated for you and remove the top line of code.
If you prefer, you can submit your responses anonymously by emailing them to gazimoff (at) o2.co.uk. Anonymous responses will be posted as subpages here and linked to from the responses section, but will have the contributor's details removed. If you have any questions, please use the project's
talk page.
Once you've provided your responses, please encourage other editors to take part in the review. More responses will improve the quality of research, as well as increasing the likelihood of producing meaningful results.
Once again, thank you for taking part!
Questions
When thinking about the adminship process, what are your thoughts and opinions about the following areas:
Candidate selection (inviting someone to stand as a candidate)
...
Administrator coaching (either formally or informally)
...
Nomination, co-nomination and self-nomination (introducing the candidate)
...
Advertising and canvassing
...
Debate (Presenting questions to the candidate)
...
Election (including providing reasons for support/oppose)
...
Withdrawal (the candidate withdrawing from the process)
...
Declaration (the bureaucrat closing the application. Also includes
WP:NOTNOW closes)
...
Training (use of New Admin School, other post-election training)
...
Recall (the Administrators Open to Recall process)
...
When thinking about adminship in general, what are your thoughts and opinions about the following areas:
How do you view the role of an administrator?
...
What attributes do you feel an administrator should possess?
...
Finally, when thinking about Requests for Adminship:
Have you ever voted in a request for Adminship? If so what was your experience?
...
Have you ever stood as a candidate under the Request for Adminship process? If so what was your experience?
...
Do you have any further thoughts or opinions on the Request for Adminship process?
...
Responses
Please paste the link from the bottom of your response page to the BOTTOM of this list.
The question phase has now closed. Although you are welcome to share your views, it is unlikely they will be included in the report that forms the next stage of the review. Many thanks to all who responded!