User:Vianello/RfA review

Welcome to the Question phase of RfA Review. We hope you'll take the time to respond to your questions in order to give us further understanding of what you think of the RfA process. Remember, there are no right or wrong answers here. Also, feel free to answer as many questions as you like. Don't feel you have to tackle everything if you don't want to.

In a departure from the normal support and oppose responses, this review will focus on your thoughts, opinions and concerns. Where possible, you are encouraged to provide examples, references, diffs and so on in order to support your viewpoint. Please note that at this point we are not asking you to recommend possible remedies or solutions for any problems you describe, as that will come later in the review.

If you prefer, you can submit your responses anonymously by emailing them to gazimoff (at) o2.co.uk. Anonymous responses will be posted as subpages and linked to from the responses section, but will have the contributor's details removed. If you have any questions, please use the talk page.

Once you've provided your responses, please encourage other editors to take part in the review. More responses will improve the quality of research, as well as increasing the likelihood of producing meaningful results.

Once again, thank you for taking part!

Questions

When thinking about the adminship process, what are your thoughts and opinions about the following areas:

1. Candidate selection (inviting someone to stand as a candidate)

   Though response to problems is usually quite satisfactory, with as long as some grevious problems hold on, there is clear evidence that either more people need to be encouraged to step up to apply for adminship, or more applicants need to be accepted. With the resources available, there is little legitimate reason for some of the vandalism/abuse problems we've had to hang on as long as they have.

2. Administrator coaching (either formally or informally)

   Criteria for admin approval seem to vary so incredibly wildly that the idea of "formal" administrator coaching seems a bit meaningless. Someone can train a user toward their own criteria, but that may completely fail to apply for others.

3. Nomination, co-nomination and self-nomination (introducing the candidate)

   I have no particular opinion here.

4. Advertising and canvassing

   This is a toughie. Getting someone's opinion by drawing their attention to the page has the same end result as if that person had weighed in on their own. BUT, it's likelier to draw 'positive' intercession. In the end, since it's not a vote (to my knowledge?) but a consensus issue, I don't think it matters overmuch.

5. Debate (Presenting questions to the candidate)

   I have no particular opinion here.

6. Election (including providing reasons for support/oppose)

   I have no particular opinion here.

7. Withdrawal (the candidate withdrawing from the process)

   I have no particular opinion here.

8. Declaration (the bureaucrat closing the application. Also includes WP:NOTNOW closes)

   I have no particular opinion here.

9. Training (use of New Admin School, other post-election training)

   I have no particular opinion here.

10. Recall (the Administrators Open to Recall process)

    I have no particular opinion here.

When thinking about adminship in general, what are your thoughts and opinions about the following areas:

1. How do you view the role of an administrator?

   The statement that "adminship is not a big deal" seems contradicted by essentially every single step of the process of becoming one, I'm afraid.

2. What attributes do you feel an administrator should possess?

   Honest intentions, and the knowledge and awareness to use their authority properly.

Finally, when thinking about Requests for Adminship:

1. Have you ever voted in a request for Adminship? If so what was your experience?

   I have not.

2. Have you ever stood as a candidate under the Request for Adminship process? If so what was your experience?

   It was quite positive. I was declined, but with mostly logical reasons and legitimate, well-explained suggestions for improvement. I came away benefitting from it despite the declination.

3. Do you have any further thoughts or opinions on the Request for Adminship process?

   Although I do say the "adminship is not a big deal thing" is contrasted, this isn't a huge complaint. I think adminship SHOULD be a somewhat big deal. I just feel that stating it isn't is a little dishonest, as far as matters appear to me.

Once you're finished...

Thank you again for taking part in this review of the Request for Adminship process. Now that you've completed the questionnaire, don't forget to add the following line of code to the bottom of the Response page by clicking this link and copying the following to the BOTTOM of the list.

* [[User:Vianello/RfA review]] added by ~~~ at ~~~~~

Again, on behalf of the project, thank you for your participation.

This question page was generated by {{RFAReview}} at 19:20 on 20 June 2008.