User:JustBerry/Wikipedia:RfA Train

You may be looking for Requests for adminship.

When a request for adminship is filed and an editor points out either a positive or negative aspect about the candidate, a trend, referred to here as the RfA Train, takes place.

For example, let's say there's candidate Bob. The RfA nomination of Bob refers to their work ethic, edit count, diversified edits, and unique qualifications or skills. A voting editor passes by and points out that Bob had issues in certain areas, providing diffs for the issues. Prior to conforming to this view, it is often advised that editors review the candidate's contributions, etc. themselves to provide due weight to the critique given by the editor. It should be noted that this advice can also be applied to a passing voting editor that provides positive diffs in support of a candidate.
 * Acknowledge: Acknowledge that a positive or negative aspect of the RfA candidate has been mentioned.
 * Contextualize: Look at the situation as a whole. Has the voting editor been involved in content disputes with the RfA candidate in the past? Did the editor truly mean what the voting editor interpreted the edit to be?