User talk:Pedro/RFA Standards
Suggested copy edits[edit]
Great work, Pedro. I have copy-edited for spelling, punctuation and phrasing; here's the edited set of standards.
- I believe that RfA is a discussion. Therefore I will allways try to add value to the discussion rather than just a support or oppose. This is particularly important in the event of an oppose.
- I promise to review at least 2,000 contibutions, or as many as the candidate has if this is fewer, randomly sampling some from various areas such as article writing, user talk and contributions to project space.
- I promise to review the candidate's talk and user pages.
- If I have had previous interaction with an editor that has been positive then I will allow this to weigh heavily in support.
- If I have had previous interaction with an editor that has not been positive then I will try not to allow this to weigh heavily in oppose.
- If I find something troublesome in the contribution history, I consider it my duty to bring this to the attention of the community, even if I still support or go neutral.
- I promise to try to be fair, but I am human so will make mistakes.
- Never say Never. In almost all cases an oppose does not mean I will never support a candidate in the future.
Cheers, Majoreditor 17:50, 30 November 2007 (UTC)