 | This page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference. Either the page is no longer relevant or consensus on its purpose has become unclear. To revive discussion, seek broader input via a forum such as the village pump. |
Qualified adminship voting aims to ensure that legitimate concerns are not overruled by Wikipedia's need for more admins, but that good candidates are not denied adminship by frivolous or irrelevant concerns. The primary reason for not considering RFA as a formal 'vote' at the moment is because of these frivolous concerns - for example, if the current RFA was a 'vote' then a Support on the basis that the candidate has written 3 featured articles would be given one quarter (since Support must equal 4x Oppose) of the weight as a 'Only has 1999 edits, my standard is 2000' Oppose. By ensuring that ALL opposition is on a valid basis, this procedure would allow consensus voting
The actual procedure (nomination, length of time etc.) would stay the way RFA is just now - there is no particular problem with that.