This page exists mostly as a counterpoint to those administrators who believe that the number of edits a user has made is often (if not always) the determining factor in whether or not to support someone's adminship

An administrator should be "...anyone who has been an active Wikipedia contributor for a while and is generally a known and trusted member of the community", according to Wikipedia:Administrators. Keeping this in mind when looking at an individual, I tend to percieve this to mean the following:

• the user should have been around long enough to have a sufficient grasp of Wikipedia policy to at least understand what an administrator is and how they would use the abilities of an administrator. Edit counts do NOT FACTOR DIRECTLY INTO THIS! If a user has demonstrated a grasp of policy to my satisfaction, they meet this criteria whether they have 100 edits or 10,000 edits. If I've never seen a user give even the slightest thought to policy, I will probably not support their adminship even if they have 25,000 edits.
• the user should engage at least part-time in activities that require or are facilitated by having administrator abilities (RC patrol is the single largest use of administrator abilities and most if not all users performing these tasks should have administrative abilities).
• the user should be civil and calm, rarely (if ever) stooping to the level of personal attacks (this in and of itself requires a certain grasp of Wikipedia policy). This manner of editing builds trust within the community.
• the user should demonstrate the ability to work with the community on issues. This usually means interacting with others on talk pages and building towards consensus in several articles and/or several user talk pages.

Any user that can meet these criteria is deserving of adminship.