This page in a nutshell: RFA Candidates is part of the Continued RfA reform project‎. It contains research, data, and proposals to establish possible minimum criteria for adminship candidates. Please view this page in conjunction with Voter profiles. Please discuss the contents of this page on this page's talk page.

One should should demonstrate at least one year of experience as a writer and collaborator in various fields of the project. Candidates with less experience have no chance of being elected to adminship. Candidates that do not have a significant four-digit number of edits are mostly rejected. The proportions of the edits in different namespaces is often critically examined. German Wikipedia: Administrators

This page: is in five parts:

• Part 1 is a table showing each editor's stats at the time of their RfA
• Part 2 is a detailed breakdown and analysis of the criteria on which users base their !votes. The information is drawn from users' essays.
• Part 3 is a statistical summary extrapolated by Worm That Turned from the data he researched.
• Part 4 is a table of stats of candidates who were not successful in 2011.
• Part 5 is a comparison table of how RfA is conducted on the English, French, German, and Italian Wikipedias.

Research and data by courtesy of Worm That Turned

These tables show for each candidate at the time of RfA:

• Tenure in months (length of membership at Wikipedia)
• Consecutive active months
• Edit count
• Automated edits as a percentage
• Approximate number of manual edits.

Research and data by courtesy of Worm That Turned

Analysis of RfA criteria drawn from user essays.
Note: Some are out of date, some are by banned users.

User essays

Metrics drawn from all essays

Stats

Edit count:

Total Numbers - 59

Mean - 2840.67797

Median - 2500

Mode - 2000,3000

Tenure (months):

Total Numbers - 57

Mean - 6.59649

Median - 6

Mode - 6

Metrics from the vetted numerical criteria essays

Summaries

Edit counts

Overall

23 out of 28 editors had a minimum number of edits they would like to see.

Space specific

There were 24 suggestions on space minimums, majority about the mainspace. (Around 12 of 28 mentioed some form of space minimum)

Edit Summaries

13 out of 28 editors mentioned edit summary usage. 5 did not give an accurate number and the rest are shown below.

Manual

4 editors suggested a minimum number of manual edits. 2 did not specify what the minimum should be

• 2500 manual edits
• 10000 manual edits

Activity

4 editors suggested minimum activity levels.

• 1 edit per month
• 100 epm for 2 years
• 150 epm for 6 months
• 150 epm for 12 months

Time served

Overall

25 of 28 editors gave an opinion on tenure/minimum period of active editing

Time without a block

19 of 28 editors gave an opinion on time since last block

Other

• Maintenance
  • Regular AIV, UAA, RFPP & AFD x12
  • Good CSD tagging x7
  • Good Wikipedia space work
  • Participated in ANEW, ANI or AN x2
  • Having rollback x8
  • Vandal fighter x7

• Civility
  • Civility x12
  • Good communication x2

• Article work
  • Article work x7
  • Good BLP work x2
  • Super-majority of edits in mainspace and article talk x2

• Knowledge
  • Well versed in policy x10
  • Know the difference between block and ban
  • Well versed in templates

• Community and teamwork
  • Good Userpage x2
  • Active in at least 1 wikiproject x5
  • Barnstars
  • Appropriate username & sig
  • Email enabled
  • Appropriate archiving on usertalk

• Other
  • Mature x4
  • Not too much Drama x2
  • Not admin coached x2
  • Not bitey x2
  • WP:AOR x2
  • Gnoming work x2
  • Regular edit history
  • Patroller
  • Avoids COI
  • specifically needs the tools
  • Auto patroller
  • Good BLP work
  • Help newbies
  • Participates in RfA
  • Clerking work
  • Admin coached

Facts drawn from the above data:

• The edit count of new admins has increased year on year. From a midpoint of ~11,000 to ~19,000.

• Only one person since 2009 has gained adminship with less than 3,000 edits (He had over 1 million edits across wikis)

• Editors who passed with less than 10,000 edits - 2009: 44 (36%), 2010: 20 (26%), 2011: 5 (18% so far)

• The overall user criteria averages bear out as aiming for a minimum of a Journeyman editor - 2,000 edits plus 6 months experience

• The more recent (vetted) criteria bears out as aiming for a minimum of 3,700 edits plus 9 months experience. (Closer to a Yeoman Editor but not quite)

• Besides edit count and length of membership, the next largest concern is the blocklog - with half of those concerned wanting to see a clean block log or an average of 10 months clear.

• After the blocking issue, edits to specific areas (generally mainspace), civility, policy knowledge, and edit summaries were equally important in the criteria stakes. The rest were a bit all over the place.

This table is also shown on the Unsuccessful RfAs page along with additional data on failed candidates.

(Research and data by courtesy of Kudpung)

• There are no averages or mean for edits as they would provide a false picture.
• 2nd or subsequent attempts are generally not listed because these users would hardly be beginners.
• NA = Some RfA were closed before the X-tools data could be posted (NA); in this case the current data is provided, and some candidates were not opted in for X!-tools.
• Most of the withdrawals or 'no consensus' were regular experienced editors.
• Months are the full consecutive months of activity since a Wikibreak of over 30 days.
• NAC: Non admin closure
• NNEng: Non native English speaker
• VYU: Very young user (where age is known - generally under 15)
• UP: User page edits

Data as of 30 June 2011 (Recovered by Kudpung).
Due to some non updated pages in their various RfA related pages, there may be ambiguities leading to minor inaccuracies in this information.)

Notes

Dutch

• Adminship is nominally for one year and will be reconfirmed if there are less than four oppositions.
• Bureaucrats and stewards can temporarily accord admin rights.
• Admins with less than 50 edits in 12 months are automatically desysopped.

French

• Candidatures are posted to the VP, and sent out on mailing lists. Edit count opt-in is automated.
• 'Significant' contributions for voters:
  • Writing and improvement of an Article in general.
  • Entries in spaces Category, Template, Reference, Images, help
  • The addition of an article in a group
  • Adding or editing aTemplate
  • Adding or editing a reference
  • Adding animage'for an article
  • Contributing to help pages (significant non-encyclopedic)
  • The addition of interwiki links on an article.
  • The correction of spelling on an article.

German

• Nomination transculsion partly automated.
• Candidate's RfA page has a button to test voters' rights.
• 'Neutral' votes are not taken into consideration.
• Votes may be commented, but if more than one paragraph, should be on the talk page.
• Votes should not be commented on by others, except on the talk page.
• Admin status is revoked after one year of inactivity, and must be reacquired through a new RfA..
• Inactive admins are broken down into many list which include among others:
  • 6 admins have not edited for 6 months
  • 34 handed their tools in
  • 74 Non re-elected after lapse of tenure.

Italian

• Pass rate is expressed through a complex quorum that is set by the average of votes on the previous four RfA elections: (based on a much improved Google translation):
  • To prevent an administrator to be elected without a sufficiently large number of Wikipedians expressing their its support/a quorum on votes, a quorum is defined as follows:
  • For the election to be successful, the number of voters in favor of greater or equal to the value of a quorum.
  • The election is valid for the next calculation of the quorum will be necessary that the number of voters (favorable + against) is greater than or equal to the value of a quorum.
  • The quorum will be calculated by multiplying 2/3 of the average number of voters (counting only for and against) on the last four concluded elections.
  • The calculation shall take account only of the elections in which a quorum has been reached.
  • In cases of elections that take place concurrently, in the calculation of the quorum will be based on the one that received the most votes.
  • More concisely the quorum Q can be expressed as follows: Q = 2 / 3 × [(x + y + z + w) / 4] = (x + y + z + w) / 6
• Reconfirmation after 1 year. If 15 qualified users oppose the tacit confirmation, a vote of confirmation is initiated with the same RfA system except it requires 66% to pass.
• Adminship automatically lapses after 6 months of inactivity, or if in the last 6 months the tools were not used.
• Lapsed admins must wait 3 months before reapplying.
• Resigned: 51
• Not re-elected: 14
• Lost automatically after 6 months of inactivity: 6
• Total former admins: 71

Spanish

• Candidatures are posted to the VP, and sent out on mailing lists.
• Votes are generally not commented.
• Discussion, if any (rare), takes place on the talk page.
• It is recommended that oppose votes are commented. However, votes are reminded that that a policy of not Personal attacks is in effect, so inappropriate comments about the candidates are not allowed into the discussion.
• Closure by any admin. Technical rights changed by bureaucrat.
• Almost all admins are bureaucrats as well.
• There is no 'neutral' voting section.
• Nominations must be notified in the Wikipedia: Billboard events, Café and the mailing list for the information of other users. To file a third of your confidence as a librarian candidate must obtain prior consent.
• 28 admins have handed their tools in. One admin was desysoped.

Swedish

• Votes are generally not commented.
• Discussion, if any (rare), takes place on the bottom of the page.
• Nominal 1 year, then re run at same conditions
• No set procedure for desysoping