Here are my standards for an RfA. It is based off of Coffee and Coldplay Expert's own RFA standards but some things are different.
NOTE: I may not always !vote based off of these standards.
| Criteria | Things that may cause me to !vote Oppose | Things that may cause me to !vote Neutral of influence my vote for Support or Oppose | Things that may cause me to !vote Support | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Edit Count | The editor has less than 3000 edits. | The editor has 3000 - 4500 edits. | The editor has 5000+ edits. | |
| Type of edits | The editor has few edits other than reverting and warning vandals. | The editor is a rollbacker. | 1000 edits to the Mainspace and has Rollback. | |
| Edits to... (If you have over 50% to talk pages because of vandal fighting, you are exempt form this certain criteria) | The editor has 50% or more of their edits to user talk pages. | The editor has 25% of their edits to articles. | The editor has above 25% of their edits to articles. | |
| Edit Summaries | The editor uses edit summaries less than 60% of the time. | The editor uses edit summaries 60% - 70% of the time. | The editor uses edit summaries above 80% of the time. | |
| CSD | The editor improperly tags articles for CSD. | The editor does not do CSD work. | The editor tags articles for CSD per the CSD policy. | |
| Amount of time spent on Wikipedia | The editor has been actively editing for less than 3 months. | The editor has been actively editing for 3 - 5 months. | The editor has been actively editing for more than 6 months. | |
| Blocks | The editor was blocked less than 6 months ago. | The editor was blocked more than 6 months ago. | The editor has never been blocked or was blocked on accident. | |
| Explanation of blocks (for edits who have been previously blocked) | The editor downplays their block and/or does not explain why s/he was blocked. | The editor answers all questions about a previous block after being asked about it. | The editor tells the voters about their previous block and answers all questions about it thoroughly. | |
| Civility | The editor has a record of being uncivil. | The editor is usually civil but can still break when under pressure. | The editor is able to work well under pressure, and reacts civilly during disputes. | |
| Answers to questions | The editor answers questions uncivilly and interprets policy incorrectly. and/or they answer using cut and paste policy. | The editor answers questions in a way that shows that they don't fully understand the policy. | The editor answers questions politely and according to policy. | |
| Response to opposes | The editor responds to opposes in an attacking and defensive manner. | The editor responds to almost every oppose in a polite manner. | The editor responds to all opposes in a civil manner. | |
| View of adminship | The editor views adminship as symbol power, and thinks that it means that they are better or more important than other editors.. | The editor views adminship as a tool maintenance but still sees it as a trophy. | The editor views adminship as helping with maintenance. | |
| Admin coaching | The editor was not admin coached. | The editor was admin coached after an unsuccessful RFA. | The editor was admin coached. | |
| Range of participation | The editor helps out with only a one or two topics or WikiProjects. | The editor helps out in handful of areas of the Wikipedia space, but usually sticks to one topic, or WikiProject. | The editor helps out in a wide range of topics and several WikiProjects. |
Current RFA's
|