Forum:Administrator Document (including set selection process)

Working List of requirements

 * 1) VOTES IN GENERAL - Support votes count as +1 toward an applicant's total; Oppose votes count as -1 toward an applicant's total; Neutrals neither add nor subtract from an applicant's total. An applicant's vote total can be found by adding up the supports and opposes. For example, an applicant receives 5 support (+) votes and 2 oppose (-) votes. His or her vote total is +3.
 * 2) REQUIREMENTS FOR VOTING IN AN ADMIN/ROLLBACK ELECTION - To vote, a user must be a member for at least one month and have 150 mainspace edits.
 * 3) ELECTION PROCEDURES AND RE-APPLICATION - Each election will run for 2 weeks. If the applicant gets enough positive votes in that time, then he or she shall be given admin status. If he or she does not meet the required votes, the request will be archived as "opposed". The applicant may and should inform other users of his or her application. After a failed request, both for rollback and admin, a user must wait 4 weeks (1 month) before requesting again.
 * 4) REQUESTING ROLLBACK RIGHTS - An applicant must have a minimum of 400 mainspace edits and 2 months of active membership. He or she must obtain a vote total of +4 or higher to be promoted.
 * 5) REQUESTING ADMIN STATUS - To be promoted, an applicant must obtain a vote total of +6 or higher and must fulfill one of the following sets of requirements:
 * A minimum of 750 mainspace edits and a 2-month tenure of rollback rights, in which he or she displays proper use of the rights.
 * A minimum of 1250 mainspace edits and a 6-week tenure of rollback rights, in which he or she displays proper use of the rights.
 * In special occasions, a user may apply if he or she has less than the required time limit of active membership under the discretion of active admins (To be discussed on talk pages).

Ideas
Rollback should be required before someone should be allowed to pursue adminship. Even if they have an insane amount of edits they must apply for rollback first, then there must be a set amount of time before they can purse adminship. Its better sercurity against vandalls and just doesn't have people apply for rollback then immediatley saying "I want to be an admin. bla bla bla nah nah nah" shorta stuff, no? User:Ccbermanzzpedia 5:44, April 17th 2009

How does "how many edits x person does" factor into who votes? Not saying that it doesn't matter, just thinking of idea so that if any some Tom, Dick, or Joey asks "why can't I vote!" Then you have an answer to them, no? User:Ccbermanzzpedia 6:35 aprIl 17tH 2009 (UTC) (Whitch I always forget) (UTC)

Decisions

 * Bumping this up due to moving a bunch of forum pages.--Richardtalk 23:39, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

K. Everything is cool here. only problom i have is the emphases on quantity over quality. Maybe if x person says that the edits they made have been have been quality edits then they should be asked to present proof of their edits. just think that it would really help to see who is really dedicated to the site, no? User:Ccbermanzzpedia

Or they could have to have a certain quanity and then the voters will decide the quality?  Metroidhunter32  22:01, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, that sounds just about right. Maybe they could say ok i have x amount of high quality edits and then say you can check it out here. that sounds a little bit more fair, no? User:Ccbermanzzpedia

K. But what will stop people from just making 150 samll edits and then applying? Nothing. Just want people to put the time in and quality. Maybe it should be that could make a lot of small edits, but a have a reduced amount of quality edits so that way it takes the same amount of time all the way around. Jeez just want this to be fair. User:Ccbermanzzpedia