User:Tuspm/RFA Criteria

Although I am not an administrator myself, I think I have been around Wikipedia long enough to know who is admin material and who is not. Below are my personal standards of what I look for when voting. If you would like to see what other users look for when voting, check out this page.

My standards

Requirements

The elements below are all required for my support.

1. Should have an edit count of at least 3,000.
   1. Should have at least 1,500 mainspace and Wikispace edits combined.
2. Be registered to Wikipedia for at least 5 months.
3. No involvement in edit wars.
4. No warnings of any kind.
5. A clean block log.
   1. An exception will be made if user is blocked accidentally.
6. Always acting civil.
7. 85% major and 85% minor article edit summary usage.
8. Handles stress well.
   1. I put the element above as a requirement because as an admin, you'll be exposed to more stress and it's important to know how to handle it.
9. A friendly user that won't abuse his/her power.
10. A good understanding of what an admin does.

Positives

Note that these elements are not required but will increase the chance of me (and maybe others) support you.

1. RC patroller/vandal fighter.
2. Newpage patroller.
3. Participation in AFDs and RFAs.
4. Good answers to RFA questions.
5. A member in at least one WikiProject and/or Esperanza.
6. An eye-catching signature.

Negatives

Note that if you meet one of the elements below, it does not necessarily mean that I'll oppose your request but you should have more positives than negatives.

1. Not a member of at least one WikiProject or Esperanza.
2. Bad answers to RFA questions.
   1. Answers show that you have no use for admin tools.
3. Lack of interest in being an admin.

How I vote

After reading your edit count and the answers you provided to the questions, I determine whether to support your request, oppose it or vote neutral.