User:NoSeptember/Intent to file RfA

This is something I have been considering for a while based upon the frequent suggestions that there be a discussion period before there is a voting period on RfAs. This proposal allows for some discussion before an RfA starts, both from supporters and potenital opposers, but all outside of the formal RfA process, conducted in an informal manner. The idea is that it is not good form to tell people that they can not vote on an RfA, so the way to prevent early voting is to have a discussion on a known soon-to-be-candidate before the RfA is submitted. It would work as follows:


 * 1) The Intent to file page. Before a user creates their RfA subpage, they will register their intent to submit an RfA in the near future on the page, Requests for adminship/Intentions to file. Adding a simple dated signature to the list is all that a potential candidate needs to add to the page.
 * 2) *The community is requested to watch this page, so that it can follow up as described below. We want people who are not familiar with the candidate or who have not recently interacted with the candidate to be made aware of the discussion and be able to participate in the discussion. That is why we would have the Intent to file page for all users interested in RfA to watch.
 * 3) *The user may add (transclude) their RfA subpage to WP:RFA at any time after 48 hours have passed since their intent to file has been posted.
 * 4) *The user may withdraw their intent to file at any time.
 * 5) *Any intentions to file that have not been followed up with an RfA within 7 days shall be removed, though this can be extended if there is an active discussion going on about the candidate.
 * 6) The Discussion. It is encouraged that the community discuss potential RfAs with the user and each other on the user's talk page in the first 48 hour period after the intent to file is posted.
 * 7) *It should be understood that the discussion is open to all comers, including opponents of the candidate. Even though it may be on the user's talk page, free and open discussion by anyone should be encouraged.
 * 8) *If a candidate is likely to face a WP:SNOW situation, the community should explain the situation to the user to discourage the start of an RfA.
 * 9) *If there are serious issues that a potential candidate needs to address, these should be discussed with the user before they submit their RfA.
 * 10) *Optional questions can be left for a potential candidate on their talk page, so that they can provide fully answered questions when they submit the RfA or before.
 * 11) *No one but the candidate and their nominator(s) should edit the RfA subpage before it is added (transcluded) to WP:RFA. The nominator and candidate should work on the RfA in a sandbox or other page, and not move it to an RfA subpage until it is ready to be started. Pre-RfA discussion should take place on user talk pages and other informal venues.
 * 12) *No voting should take place before an RfA has started. However, it is the responsibility of the nominator and candidate to make sure this is the case by not creating an RfA page that other users can mistakenly start adding votes to.
 * 13) *Put simply, the "intent to file" period should be used by all parties to address potential issues in an informal way before the start of the RfA, and if the issues are significant, allow the potential candidate to reconsider the submitting of the RfA before it starts.
 * 14) The RfA. Once discussion has significantly concluded, the user should subnit their RfA using the normal procedure, and the community is invited to express their support or opposition to the proposed promotion.