User:Pats1/RfA review

Welcome to the Question phase of RfA Review. We hope you'll take the time to respond to your 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.

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 and linked to from the responses section, but will have the contributor's details removed. If you have any questions, please use the 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:


 * 1) Candidate selection (inviting someone to stand as a candidate)
 * 2) Administrator coaching (either formally or informally)
 * 3) Nomination, co-nomination and self-nomination (introducing the candidate)
 * 4) Advertising and canvassing
 * 5) Debate (Presenting questions to the candidate)
 * 6) Election (including providing reasons for support/oppose)
 * 7) Withdrawal (the candidate withdrawing from the process)
 * 8) Declaration (the bureaucrat closing the application. Also includes WP:NOTNOW closes)
 * 9) Training (use of New Admin School, other post-election training)
 * 10) Recall (the Administrators Open to Recall process)
 * 1) Election (including providing reasons for support/oppose)
 * 2) Withdrawal (the candidate withdrawing from the process)
 * 3) Declaration (the bureaucrat closing the application. Also includes WP:NOTNOW closes)
 * 4) Training (use of New Admin School, other post-election training)
 * 5) Recall (the Administrators Open to Recall process)
 * 1) Training (use of New Admin School, other post-election training)
 * 2) Recall (the Administrators Open to Recall process)
 * 1) Recall (the Administrators Open to Recall process)
 * 1) Recall (the Administrators Open to Recall process)

When thinking about adminship in general, what are your thoughts and opinions about the following areas:


 * 1) How do you view the role of an administrator?
 * 2) What attributes do you feel an administrator should possess?
 * 1) What attributes do you feel an administrator should possess?

Finally, when thinking about Requests for Adminship:


 * 1) Have you ever voted in a request for Adminship? If so what was your experience?
 * 2) Have you ever stood as a candidate under the Request for Adminship process? If so what was your experience?
 * When I stood as a candidate in October 2007, my experience was mainly positive. However, there was one thing that I thought negatively defined the process. I don't have the time to pull up the diffs, but I was asked by two different users to comment on the extent of belief in certain Wiki essays (3 pillars, etc.). These were optional questions, however, I felt that in both cases, the questioning editors had an interest in introducing their essay materials (as both editors were active participants in the creation of the essays that I was questioned on), and not in my actual RfA. Advertising, if you will. I brought this concern to the forefront during the process, and both editors, as a result, gave their objections to my RfA (one called it the "strongest objection in my time on Wikipedia). This concerned me, as their decisions were solely based on my responses to their optional questions.
 * 1) Do you have any further thoughts or opinions on the Request for Adminship process?
 * 1) Do you have any further thoughts or opinions on the Request for Adminship process?

Once you're finished...
Thank you again for taking part in this review of the Request for Adminship process. Now that you've completed the questionnaire, don't forget to add the following line of code to the bottom of the Response page by clicking this link and copying the following to the BOTTOM of the list.

*   added by  at

Again, on behalf of the project, thank you for your participation.

This question page was generated by RFAReview at 01:45 on 21 June 2008.