User:Tommy2010/RFA

Hi there. As I've become more involved with the Wikipedia community and !voted in the RFA process, I've developed a general guideline in what I expect in candidates. These are just guidelines, and exceptions will be expected.

I support the idea that becoming a sysop is not a big deal. However they are powerful tools and misuse of them can seriously damage Wikipedia's reputation.

Generally, there are two types of candidates or a mix of the two: vandal fighters and traditional content builders. Each have their corresponding ideals:

Content builders
Users interested in becoming an administrator based on their content building experience have more lax standards for me than vandal fighters. This is due to several reasons, mainly because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and needs to be growing, but also because creating content is more stressful and is more work than reverting vandalism. An ideal candidate in this area has:


 * Approximately 6,000 edits of copyediting, expanding, discussing improvementes, etc.


 * At least 9 months to one year tenure, based on editing Wikipedia in all; ie- IP editing counts towards this, although a huge majority of editing must be made with the account.


 * No "small" blocks in the past 8 months; with no "sporadic blocks." This means if you're blocked, you learned your lesson and avoid a future block; not a record of good behavior and then disruptive behavior. "Small" blocks include blocks shorter than a week for reasons such as edit warring, insertion of unverifiable information and NPAs out in anger; however the latter depends on the severity of the attack. Admins do not need to be perfect.


 * No large blocks ever. These include reasons such as violating the sock policy, disruptive editing, trolling, legal threats, harassment, advertising or having a battle mentality.


 * At least 3 DYK's and 1 good article or 1-2 featured articles, depending on involvement. Created articles should not have tags on them.


 * Having Rollback and/or Autoreviewer is a huge plus.


 * An ability to demonstrate maturity in disputes and show a strong understanding of helping newcomers.

Vandal fighters
Vandal fighting candidates have higher standards, as vandal fighting is fairly simple and straightforward, and the user may not necessarily require sysop tools for their tasks if frequent mistaggings or mistakes are made. The user also needs a higher level of demonstrated trust. Vandal fighting candidates should have:


 * 1 and a half years of sustained editing.


 * 15,000 – 20,000 reverts; including semi -automated edits. This may seem high, but with Huggle, it is very easy to rack up edits very quickly.


 * No abuse of rollback in the 7 months prior to the RFA.


 * No serious complaints regarding reverting in the last 5 months before the RFA either at ANI or on the user's talk page.


 * Accurate CSD taggings and able to show a reasonable level of assuming good faith with new users.