User:H/Review by Dlohcierekim
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hi, thanks for asking me to think about your RfA prospects. I've been looking over your edits and talk page and am ready to provide some feedback. I would !vote support based on edit count, time with project and civility.
In reading your talk page, you come across as polite, intelligent and articulate. (However, I'm not sure what was happening with the Blood of the Fold discussion on your talk page.) Mailer opposed in your last RfA based on !FA. That's no longer a bone of contention, but it looks like you have taken part in Featured Picture discussions. You also take part in policy discussions. You are helpful to others. Your "learning is fun" attitude is a plus. Your involvement in the community is a plus. The question then becomes use of the tools and the requisite knowledge. I see that your last RfA mentioned media ion and vandalism as reasons for requesting the tools. Are you a member of the Mediation Committee or the Mediation Cabal?
Despite User:KimvdLinde's oppose vote, sometimes Mediators find the block handy for calming things down and getting the attention of the distracted or overly excited. Mediation work counts extra with me. I see some recent vandal reversion, but few warnings and reports to WP:AIV. A lot of !voters at RfA will oppose for not enough experience in the expressed area of interest. They like to see that a nom understands progressive warnings and that they know when to report to WP:AIV. You did not mention *fD in the last RfA. I see a lot of Welcoming. Welcoming is good. If you are also reviewing new articles and tagging the speediable for Speedy Deletion, then that shows WP:CSD experience. Clearing the WP:CSD backlog would also be a good use for the tools.
I would recommend waiting a couple of more months before trying again. In that time, I would increase my vandal reversion/warning/reporting to AIV edits. You didn't mention *fD, but it would help your case if you take part in *fD discussions. Some !voters require expertise outside the expressed area of interest. They want admins to be well rounded and to have a good understanding of policies, even if they don't want to work in all areas.
That's just my opinion. Two admins who voted support on your last RfA are User:Tone and User:Tyrenius. You might want to ask them for an editor review to see what they think. If one of them would be willing to nominate, that would be helpful too. Nominations from admins increase the likelihood of success. Hope this helps.Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 18:54, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
