[WikiEN-l] Worthy admins? (was "The userbox fad")

[Steve Bennett]

> The solution (and problem) lies in the selection of admins, 
> which I believe has become too lax. We need to recognize that 
> adminship on a top 30 website IS a big deal. Even one admin 
> who's unfamiliar with policy or who gets into wheel wars can 
> cause major issues. We need stricter screening of candidates, 
> preferably as soon as possible.

What's strange to me is that it seems that WP is one of the few places
where you could really provide a comprehensive CV of all the good you've
done and why you should be admin.  Why not ask candidates to provide X
diffs demonstrating their dispute resolution skills, and invite
nay-sayers to provide diffs of bad judgement? Simple statistics should
mandatorily be collected which would show roughly what sort of Wikipedia
member they are: How many different talk pages have they left comments
on? How many user talk pages have they left 2 or more comments on? How
long have they been active? What is their activity pattern? How many
edits have all the people voting for them made?

I like stats!

Steve