Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Standards/Measurement

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Why this page?[edit]

While everyone agrees that a good administrator is characterized by many skills, most voters rely on edit count as their main criterion. This current imbalance is probably due to the desire to use measurable criteria. Therefore, I would want to encourage my fellow Wikipedians to come up with other measurable criteria. I would like to see this page as a chance for brainstorming.

(Disclaimer: I got this idea when I nominated Paul August. However, this proposal has nothing to do with this nomination since he easily meets all edit count standards.)
Sebastian (talk) 22:18, 2005 May 24 (UTC)

Editcount[edit]

See http://kohl.wikimedia.org/~kate/cgi-bin/count_edits.cgi .

Top rate[edit]

Top rate counts how many of the last 250 major edits in article space carry the “(top)” marker.

How
Enter "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=User:<username>&offset=0&limit=250&hideminor=1&namespace=0" in the browser; use some tool (e.g. a word processor) to count occurrences of “(top)” and divide by 250.
Pro
This count is higher for conscientious editors whose edits are perceived by the community as good as they stand.
Con
Editors get punished for marking minor edits as such. There are more arguments against. See Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship/Standards/Measurement.