Content admins are Wikipedia administrators who also write or edit articles. They can be identified by a high percentage of edits to mainspace or by having had one or more articles promoted to good or featured status. Some definitions of this group limit membership to those who have continued to demonstrate these identifying characteristics after receiving adminship, as some argue that adminship results in lower content contributions due to non-mainspace time demands (in dispute resolution and other projectspace areas).
The debate surrounding adminship as it relates to content creation is frequently raised at requests for adminship, where voters disagree as to whether a demonstrated record of content contributions affects a candidate's suitability for adminship. Arguments raised by the pro-content voters include that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia project, that administrators have power over non-admin content editors, that administrative actions generally affect content and thus that admins should have content experience, and that writing good/featured content requires both collaboration and a solid knowledge of Wikipedia policies/guidelines. Arguments raised by voters against this view include that not everyone's area of competency is article writing, that admin tools are not directly related to content creation, and that contributions in other areas (particularly dispute resolution) are equally valuable.
In early 2006 there was a proposal that administrator candidates should be required to have at least one featured article credit. For an essay in favour of that criterion, see User:Jguk/admin criterion; for an essay against that criterion, see User:Stifle/No featured articles.