Changes to RfA
edit(Since 11 July)
- A warning now shows when you try to create a new RfA, as well as on transclusion, with suggested reading material and pointing out that users should not undertake an RfA lightly. See the edit notice and WP:Requests for adminship/New message for examples.
- To encourage those editors who would make good admins but who are unwilling to put themselves forward, a new process has been created WP:Request an RfA nomination. The editors there are willing to review candidates, and either write an RfA nomination for them, or explain to why they believe the candidate is currently unsuitable.
- Kudpung's very helpful essay, WP:Advice for RfA candidates, has been moved to Wikipedia space.
Proposals put forward to the community
editNone as yet
Firm proposals
edit- Clerks - a proposal for a new role to oversee the RfA process, similar to Arbcom clerks.
- Minimum requirement - a (perennial) proposal to put in a minimum requirement to apply for adminship.
Other proposals
edit(See What this project is not about)
Still at the drawing board, these proposals need more work before they are presented to the community:
- Improvement to current process
- Radical changes
- User:Tyrol5/De-adminship reform - a separate project, focusing on de-adminship reform.
- Pre-RfA proposal
- Sysop on request