Thread:Spencerz/@comment-6721631-20140425230107/@comment-1713281-20140427103514

There's not really a set process to becoming an admin. More often than not, we see that some of our admins have gone inactive, and we look to our regular contributors to find a replacement. But, the motto of our bureaucrats is that we can never have enough admins, so we're always open to new additions.

We generally like it if a potential admin has 1 year of editing and/or 1,000+ edits, as a rule of thumb to gauge just how active/committed to the site they are, how well they work with other users, and other things along those lines. You meet both of those bars. But there are other things we look at as well, like necessity, for example. At this point and time, we have twelve administrators that are active in some capacity. That's a fairly large number for a Wiki already, so you can see where adding more administrators doesn't make sense. Additionally, we just added our two newest admins back in February.

To address the page moves you mention. I know that we don't really move pages in a timely fashion, and with 12 people on the admin list, it likely makes it look lazy on the staff's part. The thing is, we hardly ever move anything by hand. Our site is so large, and so interconnected, that moving most pages by hand creates at least an hour of work, if not more, because each and every link to the page has to be edited and corrected. For that reason, and many more, we prefer to use bots to move our pages, as they can change every link for us in seconds, as well as editing all the categories and subpages that are attached to a page, saving time and insuring that we don't miss a link somewhere (this gets especially important now that we have made citations a much larger focus on the site).

So, to sum up, there's not really any trick to becoming an admin here; it just kinda happens. But I'll chat with the bureaucrats and see how they feel about another vote.