Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by RetiredUser2 (talk | contribs) at 03:36, 9 September 2006 (please see talk). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

• ]

Requests for adminship (RfA) is the process by which the Misplaced Pages community decides who becomes an administrator (also known as an admin or a sysop). Administrators have access to additional technical features that help with maintenance. A user either submits their own request for adminship (a self-nomination) or is nominated by another user. Also note there is a summary of currently active requests.

Please be familiar with the administrators' reading list and how-to guide, as well as the guide to requests for adminship before submitting your request.

About RfA

The community grants administrator status to trusted users who are familiar with Misplaced Pages policies. Administrators are held to high standards of conduct, as they are often perceived as the "official face" of Misplaced Pages. Administrators must be courteous and must exercise good judgment and patience in dealing with others. Nominees must have been on Misplaced Pages long enough for people to see whether they have these qualities. Almost all administrator actions are reversible. Adminship is primarily an extra responsibility as there are rules and policies that apply only to administrators.

Nomination standards

There are no official prerequisites for adminship, other than a basic level of trust from other editors. However, some users set a variety of standards on a personal basis. The nomination statement and responses to questions should indicate that the user is familiar with the tools and roles of administrators.

Decision process

Any user in good standing may nominate any user. Self-nominations are permitted. If you are unsure about nominating yourself for adminship you may wish to try an editor review first. Nominations remain for seven days from the time the nomination is posted on this page, during which time interested users register their opinions or make comments. At the end of that period, candidates who receive a general consensus to promote will be made administrators. The bureaucrats who handle administrator promotions review the discussion to see whether there is a general community consensus for promotion. Consensus is usually taken to have been reached with support exceeding roughly 75–80 percent. However, while the numbers of people supporting, opposing, or expressing another opinion on a candidacy are of course crucial, a request for adminship should not be perceived as simply a vote: there is no fixed pass/fail threshold, and the bureaucrats exercise their discretion in deciding whether consensus for promotion of the candidate has been achieved.

Bureaucrats may use their discretion to close nominations early if a promotion is unlikely and they see no further benefit from leaving the application open. Only bureaucrats may close or de-list a nomination as a definitive promotion or non-promotion. In the case of vandalism, improper formatting or a declined or withdrawn nomination, non-bureaucrats may choose to de-list a nomination but they are never empowered to decide on whether consensus has been achieved.

In exceptional circumstances, bureaucrats may extend the deadline or call for a rerun if this will make the consensus clearer. If your nomination fails, please wait a reasonable period of time before renominating yourself or accepting another nomination. Some candidates have tried again and succeeded within a month, but many editors feel that at least two or even three months is better.

How to nominate an editor for adminship

To nominate either yourself or another user for adminship, follow the instructions on this page.

If you would like to request assistance in creating a nomination statement, please go here.

Voting and expressing opinions

• Who may vote: Any Wikipedian with an account is welcome to vote, except for the candidate

Who may not vote: Editors who do not have an account and/or are not logged in ("anons"). Certain votes may be discounted and certain contributions removed if there is suspicion of fraud. Such may be the contributions of very new editors or if there are other reasons to arise the suspicions of sockpuppetry, as well as meatpuppetry and other activity that may result in illegitemate vote staking.

• To add a vote/comment, click the "Discuss here" link for the relevant candidate. You may then indicate whether you Support or Oppose the nomination by signing your name under the relevant heading. Any Wikipedian, including very new editors and "anons", may participate in the discussion in the "comments" section. The candidate may respond to questions/concerns/comments.
• "Neutral" comments are also permitted, but are not ordinarily counted in determining percentages, although they are considered by bureaucrats in borderline cases.
• Explain your opinion by including a short explanation of your reasoning. Your input will carry more weight if it is accompanied by supporting evidence.

Note: The major consideration for whether a user should become an administrator should be evidence of how the user will use the administrator tools.

• Always be respectful towards others in your comments.
• Threaded discussions are held in the Comments section. Long discussions are held on the discussion page of the individual nomination. Anyone may comment or discuss, including anonymous editors.