User talk:Sphilbrick/RfA reform

We are part way there

Looking at RFAs, especially the sort of influential !votes that others oppose per, it is very common for people to cite diffs. I'm pretty sure from research I have done on things like number of viewers of candidates user pages that the vast majority of RFA !votes involve little actual research. I suspect that most RFA !voters do little more than read the RFA and perhaps look at a few stats, the few who do research can be very influential when they find things, and I'm assuming that many of them first read the RFA before trawling through diffs. That doesn't mean that people won't sometimes deliberately go over the same ground, if you know that someone with very different standards than you re deletion has checked the candidates CSD log and is happy with it then that doesn't mean you will be happy. For my part, if someone more inclusionist than me is OK with the candidate's deletion tagging then I am unlikely to check that for myself. For other's that same person's green light migt prompt them to scrutinise the same issue for themselves. ϢereSpielChequers 21:09, 12 July 2020 (UTC)