User:Phantomsteve/RfA standards
Appearance
These are indicators of what I look for in an RfA candidate.
However, as each candidate is a unique individual, I will consider each candidate on their own merits — and I may not always follow what I have written below — although generally, I would go by a consensus of what is below.
Criteria | ![]() to support |
![]() to oppose |
![]() to neutral |
---|---|---|---|
Reconfirmation RfAs (If this would be "inclined to support", then I would look at the other criteria here, plus the candidate's admin action) | |||
Why it has been started | Valid concerns were raised at either Editor review, or (preferably) at RfC/U | No RfC/U has been done | ---- |
Account and edits | |||
Age of account | 9 months+ | --- | 0-9 months |
Number of edits (including deleted) | 2000+ | --- | 0-2000 |
% Automated edits | <60% | 70%+ | 60-69% |
Blocks (unless clearly an accidental block) | >9 months ago | <6 months ago | 6-9 months ago |
Admin areas | |||
CSD tagging (based on undeleted and warnings left on user talk pages | 50%+ deleted | --- | <50% deleted |
PROD tagging (based on undeleted and warnings left on user talk pages | 40%+ deleted | --- | <40% deleted |
xfD contribs (excluding 'per xyz' with no reasons) | 6+ | 0-2 | 2-5 |
RfA contribs (excluding 'per xyz' with no reasons) | 3+ | --- | 0-2 |
Participation in AN/ANI/ANEW etc | Evidence of constructive comments |
Evidence of personal attacks |
Insufficient evidence |
Attitude | |||
Discussions with other editors (on talk pages) | Evidence of constructive comments |
Evidence of personal attacks |
Insufficient evidence |
Willingness to change opinion based on others' reasoning) | Evidence found | Evidence of personal attacks |
Insufficient evidence |