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

[Leif Knutsen]

>
> Jay wrote
>
> "I don't think we all do agree on that.  You appear to think the problem
> is
> that it's difficult to de-admin an administrator.  I think the problem is
> that we are creating administrators who are not part of the community, not
> familiar with its policies and norms, and not particularly interested in
> Wikipedia's goals."
>
>
It seems to me that in order to be an admin, a person has to demonstrate
knowledge of and commitment to Wikipedia's policies, goals, values, etc.
Right now we're leaving that up to a more or less random votes of people who
are inclined to drop in and have their say. Clearly, if only qualified and
committed editors become admins, we'll have fewer problems with existing
admins who are either fools or knaves with their powers.

Would it be too formal to set up a test of some kind that candidates would
have to pass in order to be eligible for adminship? And then set in place an
admin board (separate from the Arbcom) that can suspend or disqualify an
admin for a poor job?

I know that adminship is not supposed to be a big deal, but I do think it's
clear that a lot of well-meaning editors are provoked by questionable admin
calls.