[WikiEN-l] Requirements for Adminship

[geni]

On 2/20/07, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> It's entirely unclear what is being advocated. I'm seeing long
> invective-filled posts that tell me to go look for examples to support
> the ranters' positions myself, but no actual case examples. And let me
> remind you I'm one of the ones who thinks RFA is utterly broken and we
> probably need about twice as many admins.
>

The numbers I've seen suggest otherwise. Assumeing the number of
hyperactives amoungst the new crop stays constant the increase needed
is probably going to be closer to 50%. This converstation has been
short on stats. Lets have some:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dragons_flight/deleterlist

Gurch was running a bot which messes the figures slightly but I think
it is safe to say that ~45 admins handle ~50% of the deletions

In the top ten of those figures we appear to have lost 3.


Your 100% increase figure is more in line with this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Actionsperadmin.png

Which appears to show ~100% increase in actions per admins although
with various bulk deletion and semi automation tools I don't think a
100% increase in admin power is required.

I can't prove it but going by those figures I suspect we have between
150 and  200 hyperactives who do most of the admin tasks (probably
towards the 150 end)

Juding by the backlogs and the burnouts I'd tend towards the position
that the hyperactives are maxed out. The upshot of this is that unless
we can find more hyperactives or get more of the long tail to join the
hyperactives we are going to have problems.

Lowering the standards on RFA is meaningless unless you can show we
will get more hyper actives rather than more paper admins.

Increaseing the activity level of the long tail is the other option
but no one appears to have any ideas on how to do this (ok we could
try to start admin action countitis but people tend to object to that
suggestion.

-- 
geni