Wikipedia talk:Adopt-a-user/Criteria

message: ===Rules or guidelines===
Impossible to enforce if these criteria are rules, therefore should be guidelines. If someone becomes an adopter who does not meet the guidelines then adopter and adoptee should be informed of concerns raised. Adoptee should also be encouraged to have "co-adopter".
Approve:
#Lethaniol 13:47, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Should also depend on the intensity (length) of the block. —¡Randfan! 01:39, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I would prefer 1,000 edits, and that should exclude edits on the user's own user page. Anthony.bradbury 16:54, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this (500 edits) is fine. I mean, when I write this I have 1397 edits (), less than many, however I believe I've shown myself to be a solid editor. 500 is fine, and of course, we here can, as we said before, notify the adoptee if their adopter does not meet requirements. CattleGirl  talk | e@ 06:24, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

text: That I approve anddisapprove you, Cattlegirl. I rather think the Adopter has 500 mainspace edits and 1000 totals edits. Edits from other wikis are fine ^_^--GravityTalk 11:49, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

text:  I have a little over 1300 edits, with less than 500 mainspace edits (according to wannabe Kate).  I feel that I really don't have the experience to adopt anyone, and furthermore, I'm hesitant to say that I have "graduated" from AaU - in spite of Lethaniol saying that I'm good to go.  Yes, I started strong, but now that "real life" is stepping in and I can't be on the computer 24/7, the edits are becoming a little more challenging, a little more in-depth, and a lot less in number.  I would like to think that I'm becoming a better editor, but an editor ready to mentor someone else?  nope.  My "two bits" would be at least 1000 edits total AND 500 mainspace edits.  This way, if someone wants to experiment around with their userpage, they can - but they still have to get out there and edit articles to be ready to adopt.  Just my opinion.... - NDCompuGeek 08:14, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally, I do not believe that there should be a requirement for mainspace edits as some of us are metapedianist. After I made over 2300 edits, only 300 edits were to the mainspace and 200 to userspace (I have a "status alert" thing which is often edited). Greeves (talk • contribs • reviews) 03:01, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

text: As of right now, I have 222 edits with 104 in the mainspace. I think that 500-600 total edits w/250+ in the mainspace would be a good requirement to be an Adopter. I know I am not experienced enough with Wikipedia to guide someone else (among other things, I have a tendency to not use the "Preview" button), but I'm not sure if that would always be the case for everyone. Anyway, I think a  good portion of the user's 500-600 edits should be required to be in the mainspace. Thingg (talk) 02:57, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Further debate on specific issues

message: Impossible to enforce if these criteria are rules, therefore should be guidelines. If someone becomes an adopter who does not meet the guidelines then adopter and adoptee should be informed of concerns raised. Adoptee should also be encouraged to have "co-adopter".
Approve:
#Lethaniol 13:47, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rules or guidelines

message: Should not have been blocked (exclude autoblocks applied inadvertently) in the last 6 months or vandalised in the last 3 months.
Approve:
#Lethaniol 13:47, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Should also depend on the intensity (length) of the block. —¡Randfan! 01:39, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Blocks and Vandalism

message: Adopters should have a minimum number of 500 edits. 
Approve:
#Lethaniol 13:47, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would prefer 1,000 edits, and that should exclude edits on the user's own user page. Anthony.bradbury 16:54, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this (500 edits) is fine. I mean, when I write this I have 1397 edits (), less than many, however I believe I've shown myself to be a solid editor. 500 is fine, and of course, we here can, as we said before, notify the adoptee if their adopter does not meet requirements. CattleGirl  talk | e@ 06:24, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

text: That I approve anddisapprove you, Cattlegirl. I rather think the Adopter has 500 mainspace edits and 1000 totals edits. Edits from other wikis are fine ^_^--GravityTalk 11:49, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

text:  I have a little over 1300 edits, with less than 500 mainspace edits (according to wannabe Kate).  I feel that I really don't have the experience to adopt anyone, and furthermore, I'm hesitant to say that I have "graduated" from AaU - in spite of Lethaniol saying that I'm good to go.  Yes, I started strong, but now that "real life" is stepping in and I can't be on the computer 24/7, the edits are becoming a little more challenging, a little more in-depth, and a lot less in number.  I would like to think that I'm becoming a better editor, but an editor ready to mentor someone else?  nope.  My "two bits" would be at least 1000 edits total AND 500 mainspace edits.  This way, if someone wants to experiment around with their userpage, they can - but they still have to get out there and edit articles to be ready to adopt.  Just my opinion.... - NDCompuGeek 08:14, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally, I do not believe that there should be a requirement for mainspace edits as some of us are metapedianist. After I made over 2300 edits, only 300 edits were to the mainspace and 200 to userspace (I have a "status alert" thing which is often edited). Greeves (talk • contribs • reviews) 03:01, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

text: As of right now, I have 222 edits with 104 in the mainspace. I think that 500-600 total edits w/250+ in the mainspace would be a good requirement to be an Adopter. I know I am not experienced enough with Wikipedia to guide someone else (among other things, I have a tendency to not use the "Preview" button), but I'm not sure if that would always be the case for everyone. Anyway, I think a  good portion of the user's 500-600 edits should be required to be in the mainspace. Thingg (talk) 02:57, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Minimum number of edits

message: I have two questions:
* Why is there no time-based criterion?  Does it make sense, for example, for a user to adopt after less than a months' experience?
* If someone offers to be an adopter, but does not meet the criteria (e.g. for blocks), should they be encouraged to indicate this in their entry?
Thanks, Bovlb (talk) 22:18, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The specific user I had concerns about has now been indefinitely banned, but for future cases, I think we should expect at least 6 months.  For comparison, what's the quickest anyone became an admin (recently)?  500 edits is nothing to some of our newbie edit-counters, but typically they are not especially qualified to mentor. Bovlb (talk) 23:32, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You are right. Someone may have done 500 edits of balderdash, or maybe they were typing letter by letter. And someone may type a million paragraphs of useful info every edit even though they only have 50 edits. Kayau (talk) 10:47, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Other issues

message: Am I eligible to adopt a user?   --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 11:08, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps. The criteria are more or less rhetorical. Do you feel you are experienced enough to adopt a user?Smallman12q (talk) 03:02, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

text: I do, but I'm a bit restless at times, and if something goes wrong, I tend to go crazy.. -_Rsrikanth05 (talk) 10:34, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Am I