|
The following is a list of standards that can be applied to a nominee seeing editorship.
- Quality of edits. Some people, such as those on Wikipedia, determine a potential editor's work by the quantity of edits. However, since Battlestar Pegasus is concentrated on a specific topic (i.e. Battlestar Galactica), quality of an article is weighted more than the quantity of an edit.
- Civility. Generally, an editor is the "leadership" of Battlestar Pegasus and is held under high regard by the rest of the community. So the questions that may arise to confirm or deny the nominee's civility may include the following: Does the nominee in question demonstrate an open mind? Has there been a difficult situation that the nominee has had to face? If so, how did the nominee deal with the situation? Was it dealt with in an amicable fashion?
- Level-headedness. While civility is key, there is also the intellectual portion that must be assessed by the voters. Is the nominee impulsive? Does the nominee talk things through using the discussion/talk pages?
- Length of time contributing. It is believed that time spent on the site is a factor. To some, the length of time the user has spent contributing to Battlestar Pegasus determines his or her dedication -- not only as a contributor, but also as a potential editor.
- There is also the sub-issue of the potential user's consistent use of Battlestar Pegasus. Is the user infrequent or does the user consistently contribute? While this doesn't necessarily go against the user, active editors are obviously more desirable as they are seen as being committed and better involved with the site.
Actions on other sites (i.e. Wikipedia, Battlestar Pegasus) may also be factored in -- however experience on Battlestar Pegasus is a prerequisite for editorship.
| 
