Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Header

Purge page cache if nominations haven't updated.

"WP:RFA" redirects here. You may be looking for Wikipedia:Requested articles, Recently featured articles or Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration.

Requests for adminship (RfA) is the process by which the Wikipedia community decides who becomes an administrator (also known as an admin or a sysop). Administrators have access to additional technical features that help with maintenance. A user either submits their own request for adminship (a self-nomination) or is nominated by another user. A summary of currently active requests can be found here.

Please be familiar with the administrators' reading list and how-to guide, as well as the guide to requests for adminship before submitting your request.

Current administrators

Recently created admins

Unsuccessful admin candidacies (since Apr 2004)

About RfA

The community grants administrator status to trusted users who are familiar with Wikipedia policies. Administrators are held to high standards of conduct such as maintaining courtesy and exercising good judgment and patience in dealing with others. Nominees should have been on Wikipedia long enough for people to see whether they have these qualities. While administrators are often perceived as the "official face" of Wikipedia", since they have access to the administrative features of the MediaWiki software, the role of administrator is not a trophy. Access to the administrator tools is granted when consensus is established that the user will employ administrative functions responsibly.

Nomination standards

There are no official prerequisites for adminship, other than a basic level of trust from other editors. However, some users set a variety of standards on a personal basis. There should be some indication either in the nomination statement or in the response to questions that the user is familiar with the tools and roles of administrators.

RfA process

Any user in good standing may nominate any user. Nominations remain for seven days from the time the nomination is posted on this page, during which time interested users register their opinions or make comments. At the end of that period, candidates who receive a general consensus to promote will be made administrators. The bureaucrats who handle administrator promotions review the discussion to see whether a general consensus for promotion is present. The threshold for consensus here is at least 75 percent of the votes supporting the nomination.

Bureaucrats may use their discretion to close RfAs early if a promotion is unlikely and they see no further benefit from leaving the application open. Only bureaucrats may close or de-list a nomination as a definitive promotion or non-promotion. In the case of vandalism, improper formatting or a declined or withdrawn nomination, non-bureaucrats may choose to de-list a nomination but they are never empowered to decide on whether consensus has been achieved.

In exceptional circumstances, bureaucrats may extend the deadline or call for a revote if this will make the consensus more clear. If your nomination fails, please wait a reasonable period of time before nominating yourself again or accepting another nomination. Some candidates have succeeded again within a month, but many editors feel that at least two or even three months is better.

How to nominate an editor for adminship

To nominate either yourself or another user for adminship, follow the instructions on this page.

If you would like to request assistance in creating a nomination statement, please go here.

Commenting and expressing opinions

• Who may comment: Any Wikipedian with an account is welcome to express their opinion, including the nominator.
• Who may not vote: Editors who do not have an account and/or are not logged in ("anons"). Votes of very new editors may be discounted if there is suspicion of fraud such as sockpuppetry. Voting on one's own nomination is not allowed and will not be counted by the closing bureaucrat.
• To add a comment, click the "Discuss here" link for the relevant candidate. You may then indicate whether you Support or Oppose the nomination by signing your name under the relevant heading.
• "Neutral" comments are also permitted, but are not ordinarily counted in determining percentages, although they are considered by bureaucrats in borderline cases.
• Explain your vote by including a short explanation of your reasoning. Your input will carry more weight if it is accompanied by supporting evidence.

Please note: The major consideration for whether a user should become an administrator should be the evidence of how the user will use the administrator tools. Users who have a desire to use the tools properly and also have a history of working at Wikipedia that indicates they will not abuse the tools are the ones who should become administrators.

• Always be respectful towards others in your comments.
• Threaded discussions are held in the Comments section. Long discussions are held on the discussion page of the individual nomination. Anyone may comment or discuss, including anonymous editors.