Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Standards/Measurement

Top Rate
Cute idea, but I'm afraid it isn't a very effective metric of anything apart from on how many pages someone has top. Yes, a vandal will have top on very few pages, but for anybody who doesn't either spend all his edits vandalising or edit-warring, the "top rate" is going to be determined almost entirely by the size/popularity of the last 250 articles they've edited. Also, someone who works on a few articles a lot is going to have a very low top rate (you can only have top on an article once), and someone who does RC-patrol is going to have a very high rate (lots of reverts on lots of different, rarely-edited articles). That last factor is probably not bad, we want RC-patrollers to be admins, but still on the whole I don't think this metric is useful. --W(t) 02:49, 2005 May 25 (UTC)

I'm afraid you make some very valid points. I should have done some more research before proposing it here. Hmm, so is there really no way to find some metrics of how much the community approves of a user's edits? &mdash; Sebastian (talk) 03:21, 2005 May 25 (UTC)
 * There's one excellent way of assessing community support, but you're not going to like it: start an RfA on them, and see how many respected users vote support and oppose. --W(t) 03:24, 2005 May 25 (UTC)