User:Friday/admin
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
My own personal guidelines for what would cause me to support a candidate at WP:RFA (or continue to support an adminship if it came into question):
The primary requirements that make an editor suitable for use of the admin tools are reasonableness and temperament. A suitable admin candidate should also demonstrate that the good of the project is his top priority.
To me, things like featured articles are irrelevant. You could be a great editor and a poor admin, or vice versa. Editors who want to revert vandalism would make better use of sysop tools than those who do nothing but write great articles. But, I don't care how much or how little a potential admin would use the tools- I only consider whether I think they'd do harm or good with them. Being able to peacefully work through disputes is essential- disputes will find you whether you want them to or not.
A primary indicator of being an unsuitable candidate is drama-seeking behavior. Someone who tends to escalate disputes instead of diffusing them will make a very poor admin. A good candidate will be a harmonious editor. The ability to handle problem editors while continuing to assume good faith is very important. A willingness to be held accountable and admit when mistakes are made is very important. Someone who's willing to participate in something like this is a great indication of the proper mindset for an admin.
