Even to strict ruling german courts, there is no problem accumulating and publishing data on persons, that is "easily accessible for everyone" by conventinal means. E.g. looking up how many entries a person has in the public phone book and reporting the count (without the phone numbers) would not be objectable.

That said, I do not assume that giving the magnitude of edits would be a general problem. Especially not for admins, who are by understandable and publicly available and agreed-upon rules required to have a certain 'reputation by numbers' of edits, etc. and thus must have implicitly accepted the rules, when they choose to go for a voting.

Imho it would be sufficient to state in the [[Wikipedia:Admin]] pages, that admins are subject to some public scrutinity and control which means ... etc. (don't run for a pubic office, if you don't like the implications, including some pubic attention to your person)

Btw. German law has a notable exception (somewhat wider than anglo-saxon, or EU understanding of the same) in that, what they call "eine Person der Zeitgeschichte" - a person of contemporary history - has considerably less rights to privacy than others. That means, when you are in a public office, or run for one, or are a well known actor, artits, tv-personality, trade unionist, lobbyist, economic leader, scholar, author, etc. you cannot prevent media reporting on you. You can demand truthfullness, fairness, and to some extent decency, but you cannot e.g. (as every nobody can) control which photographs they use, provided they where taken on public ground, in public, or at a press-covered appearance, etc.

In a lesser extend, the same idea could imho be applied to admins, as far as their role as admins is concerned, and the data directly related to, or describing, their work as admins.

Of course such ideas need to be laid down, discussed in the various communities, and accepted. I assume that some diversity will arise from that process. I think the international foundation can and should point to the need and somehow collect pointers to the individual rule sets a they become available, and possibly destill some very basic principles from them and publish these in simple sentences, but the foundation cannot determine the rules - neither do they have the man power nor the knowledge, and it's not their job. A need may arise to moderate needs or ideas of various communities, when compatibility is questionable, so as to find a workable overall solution. This might be done, or initiated / coordinated by the foundation, details and fine print likely to be treated by a specially appointed international expert group, though.

My opinion (tm).

Purodha