User:MattWade/Admin

Home Talk Admin Awards Photo Gallery Panorama Gallery Restoration Gallery Gallery Featured and Valued Pictures Userboxes Home Talk Admin Stuff Awards Photo Gallery Panorama Gallery Restoration Gallery Using My Images Featured Content Userboxes

[edit] 

Admin-related stuff

RFA Criteria

This page in a nutshell: Overly net postitive to the project, extremely trustworthy, and no major skeletons ≈ Support

To gain my support during an RfA, one must meet certain criteria that I have set forth below. The list is placed in general order of importance. At any time I may sway a little from it depending on the user. I will only consider candidates that exceed the WP:NOTNOW criteria. You will be graded upon:

1. Full disclosure of past issues (expose all skeletons);
   • This is vital; if I don't feel you're trustworthy, you won't get my !vote. Anything you may try to be hiding will be found by another user
2. Thorough and truthful answers to questions;
3. Explicit mention that tools will be used with caution at first;
4. Proof of a sense of humor;
5. Edit count ≥ 2500 (for the most part);
6. If you've been blocked, I want a full and thorough explanation as to why;
7. High edit summary (it needn't be 100% but at least 90% is preferable);
8. Some featured work (pictures, articles, lists, sounds, valued pictures, etc);
9. Some interaction in WikiProjects; and
10. Anything else I may deem appropriate at the time. Feel free to try to sway me. The goal is to get to know you well and judge you by your character and wikipast.

I do not vote neutral. If I feel you're right on the cusp between oppose and support and you seem like you can be trusted with the tools, end up being a net positive, and there's no huge negative in your past, a neutral will be a support (mostly per WP:WTHN). Also, just because I !vote one way at one time is not a guarantee that I will not switch later on based on more information; this can be both good and bad: prove to me you deserve the role, I could go oppose→support; someone unearths bad dirt on you, I could go support→oppose.

Also important to note: A few mistakes can be overlooked if the candidate has an otherwise positive and constructive history. Admins may have more powers, but can only cause so much damage, and a minor mistake by an admin is easily fixed. Everyone has a learning curve and everyone learns on the job as a new admin.

See my RfA voting record.

Rollback

This page in a nutshell: 200+ edits, devoted vandal fighter, use of warnings ≈ Rollback granted

To gain rollback permission from me, I expect a few minimum qualifications, such as:

1. 200+ edits (roughly; I don't limit this to article space). You need at least some edits to prove you're into the project;
2. Vandal fighting must be obvious from a quick glance at your contributions; and
3. You must be using warnings to inform vandals that their actions won't be tolerated. Warned IPs and new users could easily become productive members of the community if you offer them a friendly—yet welcoming—warning.

Any of these above requirements may change on a case by case basis.

Remember, rollback is only to be used to revert blatant vandalism. It's not to help users edit war, make a point, or abuse the system. It takes two clicks for any admin to remove the permissions.

Upon gaining rollback, be sure to read and fully understand this before use.

Autoreview

This page in a nutshell: General knowledge of policy, 25+ articles created ≈ Autoreview granted

To gain autoreview permission from me, I expect a few minimum qualifications, such as:

1. General showing of knowledge of Wikipedia policies (especially with WP:BLP and WP:N); and
2. Having created about 30+ articles (not stubs).

Any of these above requirements may change on a case by case basis.