Wikipedia:RfA reform 2011/Possible proposals

Ideas for reform
The following is a list of ideas for RfA reform, some of which are adready under discussion in the sub pages above. At the moment, they are suggestions only, and some of them may be contradictory. These suggestions have not been endorsed or evaluated by the task force, and anyone is free to add suggestions or start discussions on the talk page.

Candidates & nominations (suggestions)

 * 1) Minimum qualifications for candidacy: make a synthesis from all the user RFA criteria essays.
 * Taking into  account  the discussion  on the talk  page here, and the tables and stats that  have been provided at RfA reform 2011/Candidates and Wikipedia talk:RfA reform 2011/Candidates, it  seems that  a possible threshold could be set  at  three consecutive months of activity  prior to RfA, and a minimum of 1,500 manual edits. Other Wikis have much  higher requirements, however  our suggestions are for preventing  the obvious NOTNOWs.  There is a suggestion  to  support this threshold with  a software block against  transclusion.
 * 1) Nominations to be made only by admins (see self nom below).
 * 2) Self nom must either be seconded or co-nominated by an admin, or carry a declaration: "I have read the instructions, and I meet the requirements for candidacy." This will be checked by an admin before transclusion, and denied if not correct.
 * 3) Fresh start candidates: must declare, in confidence, their intention to run for RfA to an ARBCOM. Confidentiality is assured, no need for the candidate to justify or reveal reasons for their fresh start as part of the RfA voting procedure, cannot be used as an 'oppose' rationale.

Qualifications for voters

 * Apply for a 'right to vote', in the same way as 'autopatroller', 'rollbacker', 'reviewer', etc.
 * No users who have a history of mainly only voting 'support', or mainly voting 'oppose'.
 * No WP:SPA RfA voters - users whose contribs to Wikipedia are exclusively voting on RfA).
 * Users 2 months autoconfirmed,
 * 2 months block free,
 * 2 months 3rr free.
 * Minimum number of manual edits to article/project space
 * No participation from IP users (because IPs can be shared and sockpuppeted).

Voting conditions

 * Uncommented support votes are considered a support of the nomination. Commented votes will carry more weight in the crat's evaluation of consensus.
 * No oppose votes without clear, logical rationale (cuts out 'I don't like him/her')
 * Oppose votes backed up with stats and/or diffs will carry more weight in the 'crat's evaluation of consensus.
 * No 'half' !votes qualified by such adjectives as weak or strong - either state in your rationale how you feel, or !vote neutral, or don't !vote. Qualifying adjectives will be struck by a 'crat or an admin.
 * All votes should be commented in a way that demonstrates that the voter has done their own homework.
 * No off-topic threads or comments. Threads limited to six posts (e.g. Statement, Reply, Statement, Reply, Statement, Reply). The RfA process is not WT:RfA.
 * All votes/comments limited to 250 words (Hmm... BEANS?)
 * Definitely no misplaced humour or humour in poor taste, snarkiness, cynicism, or sarcasm (will be removed by 'crat, or possibly also by admins).
 * Definitely no incivility or personal attacks (will be removed by any 'crat, or possibly also by admins).

'Crat monitoring & closing

 * Closing rationale will be based on 'successful', 'did not succeed', 'no consensus', or 'withdrawn by candidate'. No consensus defaults to 'not promoted'.
 * All RfA to have a closing summary from the closing 'crat.
 * RfA with fewer than 30 support votes to be re-run, extended, or closed as 'no consensus'.
 * 'Crats to immediately remove any crap !votes, PA/incivility, and inappropriate questions.
 * All 'pass', 'fail' decisions to be seconded by a second crat (or perhaps an uninvolved admin). Close run cases must have a crat-chat.
 * Neutral votes to be taken into consideration in close-call cases.

RfA Questions

 * Three standard mandatory template questions.
 * User questions are definitely optional.
 * No oppose vote can be made for not answering. Neutral vote can be made for not answering.
 * Questions from voters only, and possibly only from experienced editors.
 * Maximum of one question per user.
 * No compound questions
 * No follow-on questions.
 * No discussion threads in the question section except one answer from the candidate.
 * Relevant questions only (see User:Kudpung/RfA criteria)
 * No trick questions deliberately contrived to lead the candidate to err on the side of negativity.
 * A maximum number of user questions.