User:LedgendGamer/RfA

This is a work in progress. I am currently using this page to organize my thoughts on RfAs.

This is a list of criterion I generally judge RfAs on. This is by no means restrictive, and I will certainly not think twice about voting outside of the criteria expressed here if I should have a reason to.

Users may find that I vote somewhat more harshly than these imply, or that these are harsh enough already. I believe that admins should be well-equipped to deal with the demands of the job, and I will not hesitate to be a little harsh. I'm well aware that I fail my own criterion.

Chart
Any box shaded red denotes an instant-oppose.

Additional expectations
In addition, I expect certain things from users who intend to work in the following areas:

Anti-vandalism

 * 8000+ edits
 * A decent number of mainspace edits unrelated to anti-vandalism
 * Wikignoming helps, but content creation is really good here
 * Accuracy and judgement
 * 100+ good reports to AIV
 * Keeps a cool head when attacked or approached by vandals (which will happen!)
 * Proper warning of vandals

NPP and CSD

 * A good number of good CSD taggings (possibly 500+?)
 * Proper use of other maintenance tags, if applicable
 * Accuracy and judgement

WP:XfD

 * Several good, well-reasoned !votes and noms that accurately interpret policy
 * This means avoiding the type of scenarios in WP:AADD - I want to see applications of policy.
 * Clear levels of clue

Articles

 * A significant understanding of the policies with relation to the articles you generally deal with
 * A good understanding of most other article-related policies (WP:N, WP:MoS, WP:V, WP:RS, etc)
 * Articles created by the candidate should be in good condition
 * No issues with referencing, quality of writing, notability (if applicable), etc
 * A featured article always helps, but I'm not going to be ridiculous about it
 * So does membership and activity in wikiprojects
 * No edit warring

Files

 * Just know what you're doing.

Other stuff

 * If I come across a candidate that I'm just uncomfortable supporting (recent issues, oversights in judgement, etc), I'll probably !vote neutral for the time being.
 * I try to avoid !voting based on edit counts, and instead focus on experience and judgement. It just so happens that, sometimes, an edit count is an indicator of experience.