User talk:Williamborg/sandbox4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

This section is an examination of my recent failed nomination to Admin status ot learn what I can about Wikipolicy. Several issues came up during the discussion, such as my poor knowledge of Wikipolicy, which resulted in a reevaluation of my role in Wikipedia.

Contents

[edit] Comments

  • See Williamborg's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool.
    • 100% for major edits and 88% for minor edits. Based on the last 150 major and 150 minor edits in the article namespace

Total edits     6317
Main:           4358
Talk:            339
User:            349
User talk:       672
Wikipedia:       315
Wikipedia talk:   47
Image:            41
Image talk:        2
Mediawiki:         0
Mediawiki talk:    0
Template:         19
Template talk:     1
Help:              1
Help talk:         1
Category:        152
Category talk:     5
Portal:           13
Portal talk:       2

Taken from Interiot's Edit Count Tool.

Questions for the candidate

[edit] 1. OVERVIEW OF INTERESTS

While I've done a share of vandal tracking, voting on AfD, deletion patrols, etc., I do it to master Wikipolicy, concentrating on managing my personal-interest pages so I don't have to request help of administrators.
"Writing crystallizes thought," so I develop Wikipedia articles which interest me and interact with the others who do so. The beauty and strength of the Wikipedia is that there is so much which is of interest and so many willing to do their bit. Wikipedia is a true intellectual community.
The intellectual community that is Wikipedia is an important home for long tail information. Unlike Encyclopædia Britannica (EB), which is constrained by physical size and number of editors to a limited number of broad articles and must focus on big topics, Wikipedia can cover both the big topics and the niches, helping people find their way to that relatively obscure material that they are actually interested in. Wikipedia is, in spite of those who suggest otherwise, a relational database which can link diverse topics in ways that EB and kin can not. There may be a lot of dross in minor articles, but there are diamonds too, and among those diamonds, insight awaits.
Such views have logical consequences; I incline toward inclusionism (I thought I was a devout inclusionist until I started AfD & RC Patrols and discovered how bad the nonsense and vandalism can get). Regardless, I strongly believe in fixing and extending articles rather than pruning them where possible. I strongly believe in the value of the less-popular topics. Obscure but healthy articles should be encouraged, nurtured and linked. Weed articles should be rooted out quickly.
I also hold with Halldór Laxness's magnificent novel, Kristnihald undir Jökli or Christianity under the Glacier (published in English as Under the Glacier), where he states that, "The difference between a novelist and a historian is this: that the former tells lies deliberately and for the fun of it; the historian tells lies in his simplicity and imagines he is telling the truth." We Wikipedians must ever be open to the possibility that what one has previously read and what one "knows to be true" is simply wrong. We must be open and intellectually honest. We must attempt to use the Wikipedia, not as a pulpit for our world-view, but as a method to develop a more rational and less jingoistic world view.

[edit] SYSOP CHORES (Administrator's Roles and Responsibilities)

Awareness and general performance
  1. Administrators monitor the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard (WP:AN) and act as appropriate
  2. Although Administrators don’t specifically resolve disputes (see Wikipedia:Resolving disputes – WP:DR), they should hold to a higher standard in avoiding them (See Wikipedia:Requests for administrator attention – WP:RAA) & work to minimize disputes which they become aware of.
  3. Administrators monitor backlog to major Wikipedia processes & tag the process with {{tl|backlog}}, as well as watch Category:Wikipedia backlog (WP:BACK) to be aware of and help resolve backlog.
Vandalism (See Wikipedia:Vandalism - WP:VAND & Wikipedia:Long term abuse - WP:LTA)
  1. An administrator can repair damage made by a malicious user more quickly than other users: if someone is making multiple damaging edits it is easier for an editor to report them than try to repair everything themselves
Blocking & Unblocking editors (See Wikipedia:Blocking policy – WP:BLOCK)
  1. Administrators block vandals who have been appropriately warned (see Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism – WP:AIV) Note: There are numerous block types and even experienced admins get confused about the types so set up a template.
  2. Administrators check the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR (WP:AN/3RR) & block those who violate the Wikipedia:Three-revert rule (WP:3RR).
  3. Administrators check the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (WP:ANI)& may block someone for some other reason on an ad hoc basis.
  4. Administrators evaluate unblock requests made via their User page or at the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard (WP:AN) and unblock as appropriate.
  5. Administrators are responsible to unblock those they have blocked after the “term has been served”.
Page Deletion & Undeletion (See the Wikipedia:Deletion_policy – (WP:DEL))
  1. Administrators closeWikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:AFD) after 5 days by implementing the consensus (deleting if appropriate).
  2. Administrators are empowered to speedy delete (Wikipedia:Candidates for speedy deletion – WP:SPEEDY) if the page appears nonsensical or just someone testing the wiki
  3. Administrators can Undelete a page & view a deleted page following the process of Wikipedia:Deletion review (WP:DRV). (See also Wikipedia:Undeletion policy – WP:UNDEL)
Moves
  1. Administrators perform complex Wikipedia:Requested moves (WP:RM).
Category Deletion & Undeletion (see Wikipedia:Categorization – WP:CG)
  1. Administrators close Wikipedia:Categories for discussion (WP:CFD ) discussions
Page Protection
  1. Administrators protect (lock) & unprotect pages following the guidance of Wikipedia:Protection policy (WP:PPOL) and Wikipedia:Requests for page protection (WP:RFPP) using {{tl|editprotected}}
  2. Administrators authorize edits to a protected page on the talk page or the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard (WP:AN)
Redirect (see Wikipedia:Redirect - WP:R)
  1. Administrators delete redirects as the consensus in Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion (WP:RFD) dictates
Enforce arbitration rulings (See Wikipedia:Arbitration policy - WP:AP)
  1. Administrators may provide Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Arbitration enforcement (WP:AE).

[edit] Qual Card

[edit] Moving

I am familiar with the Wikipedia:Moving guidelines for administrators. This is an area which requires careful thought and which is underserved. I expect to participate in clearing backlog.

I am familiar with moving articles. See for instance:

  • 19:28, 25 July 2006 Williamborg moved Talk:Tana River (Finland) to Talk:Tana River (Norway) (Interesting progression of prior moves: Tana River → Tana River (Finnland) → Tana River (Finland). Since it is called the Tana river in Norwegian but the Tenojoki in Finland one must infer that the person making the prior moves mistook Finnmark (in Norway) for Finnland. (revert)
  • 19:28, 25 July 2006 Williamborg (Talk | contribs) moved Tana River (Finland) to Tana River (Norway) (Interesting progression of prior moves: Tana River → Tana River (Finnland) → Tana River (Finland) Since it is called the Tana river in Norwegian but the Tenojoki in Finland one must infer that the person making the prior moves mistook Finnmark (in Norway) for Finnland. (revert)
  • 20:19, 9 March 2006 Williamborg (Talk | contribs) moved Eidskog road to Vinger Royal Road (More common usage) (revert)

[edit] RC Patrolling

This user is a recent changes patroller. This user is a newpage patroller.

[edit] Newbie tests

Please do not bite the newcomers.

{{subst:test}} ~~~~
Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks.
{{subst:test1a}} ~~~~ (a variant suitable for blanking)
Please be careful not to remove content from Wikipedia without a valid reason, which you should specify in the edit summary or on the article's talk page. Thank you.
{{subst:test2}} ~~~~
Please stop adding nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you.
{{subst:test2a}} ~~~~ (a variant suitable for blanking)
Please do not remove content from Wikipedia; it is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.

[edit] New user patrol

Access to new users can be found at Special:User creation log. Add the template {{Welcome}} and other approriate comments.

[edit] Mark for deletion

Template:Policy list

  • If you think that an article is an uncontroversial candidate for deletion:
  1. Review the article's history to confirm that it has not been recently vandalized.
  2. Add {{subst:prod|reason}} to the top of it. Use an informative edit summary, and don't mark the edit as minor.
  3. Consider adding the article to your watchlist and letting the article's creator know that you have tagged it. You can use {{subst:PRODWarning|Article title}} ~~~~ for this.
  4. Speedy deletes are {{db-nonsense}} {{db-bio}} {{csd-a3}}-article is only external links

[edit] Quality

Uncle G's Primary Notability Criterion and sources! sources! sources! {{verify source}}

[edit] Reasons for deletion

[edit] Wikipedia/PROD patrollers

This user is a proposed deletion patroller.

[edit] AIV

  • AIV: Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism Someone has to revert vandalism and warn the offenders appropriately. I revert vandalism when I come across vandalism. Intend to periodically patrol for vandalism and I'm quite willing to enforce decisions in the AfD.
  1. On the first case of vandalism, you put the first warning template on the user page, namely {{subst:test}}, {{subst:test1}} or {{subst:test1-n|NAME OF ARTICLE}}.
  2. Later vandalism gets test2/3/4, after which the user is blocked.
  3. Stages may be skipped in some cases, e.g. instant widespread vandalism from an obviously experienced vandal may need to be blocked immediately.
  4. To block, {{subst:test5}} or an equivalent like {{subst:block|NATURE OF OFFENCE}} is left.

[edit] AFD closing/re-listing

  • AFD closing/re-listing: Many articles can be saved by expanding and adding context. But I'm quite willing to enforce decisions made by the AfD. And am fully willing to be balanced in my approach.

[edit] Mergers

  • Mergers: I dislike mergers. I strongly dislike mergers. Good short articles are frequently concatenated into long, turgid, ponderous, confusing, unreadable things of limited value. Articles should be expanded, not merged (you can review my reaction on the Atlas mountains merger recommendation). But again I am willing to implement the consensus of the participants; if no one has pursued proper development, then merge it is.
  • CSD: Candidates for speedy deletion should be deleted if they meet the criteria. Darn right I'll do that duty.

[edit] Helping others

[edit] Blocking

Administrators are Wikipedia users who on the basis of trustworthiness have been granted the power to execute certain commands which ordinary users cannot execute. This includes the power to block and unblock other users or IP addresses provided that blocking policy is followed.

Wikipedians assume good faith in the absence of evidence to the contrary. They strive toward a neutral points of view and avoid inadvertent personal attacks and disruption through creation of an unfriendly editing environment. Administrators have a particular responsibility to understand blocking policy & avoid wheel wars (undoing an administrative action by another administrator).

[edit] Other sysop chores

  • Other sysop chores: Requests for Page Protection, 3RR Noticeboard, the Administrator Noticeboard and Incidents are all useful. What must be done will be done. Point me to where you see the most need.

[edit] 2. CONTRIBUTIONS

Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?

  • Time in Grade: Since my first recorded edit was 27 March 2005 and like most folks I actually edited before that, I have probably been around long enough.
  • Edit Count: I almost assuredly have a large enough edit count, especially when you include my work on parallel Wikis and Commons (I've added a few picutres). But edit count doesn't define quality of contributions.

[edit] 3.CONFLICT RESOLUTION

Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future? And admin should have colloborated with rather a few users of engaged in an edit war to understand how Wikipedia works.

Remember to close old cases. The December 2006 Meeting is now open!

[edit] Questions

[edit] Promotion criteria

Where are the discussions on when to promote and not promote?

What do you understand the criteria for promotion to be?

[edit] high standards

adhere to high standards of fairness, knowledge of policy and the ability to engage others in the community.

[edit] Oppose

  • policy and project discussion is a primary feature of admin work.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/i/l/User_talk%7EWilliamborg_sandbox4_1e15.html"