User:KnowledgeOfSelf/Admin coaching

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is a page for coaching of KnowledgeOfSelf (talk · contribs) by Keilana (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves • rights) for the purpose of reacquainting the former with the admin tools.

Contents

[edit] Blocking

Blocking policy hasn't changed, really. Be sure to review WP:BP. Here are a couple of questions, hopefully you aren't too rusty.

  1. What is the difference between a block and a ban?
    Well a ban is an indefinite block, given to users who are acting in a detrimental manner to the encyclopedia/community. Bans can be made by ArbCom, Jimbo, admins (in the case of vandals) and the community. A block is essentially a quasi-ban, that is used to either cool off an editor, or to prevent damage to themselves/other people. Blocking is not a punishment.
  2. How do you do a rangeblock, and when are they appropriate?
    You enact a rangeblock by going to Special:BlockIP, and manually inputting the desired range. The mediawiki software only supports a 16-32 range. They are appropriate as a last resort to stop massive disruption/harassment/vandalism etc, etc. They should not be long term blocks. I try to keep them under 1 hour.
  3. How long should open proxies be blocked?
    I honestly couldn't tell you a "right" answer to this. (I've never blocked an open proxy!) I'd personally go from 6 months to 2 years. Depending on if the proxy was being used in a malicious manner or not.
  4. How long should you block school vandals? (Give some examples of different block lengths - 3 hours, 48 hours, 1 week, 1 month, 6 months, 1 year, etc.)
    I like to double the length for every time a school IP is blocked. So for a first blocking I'd go with 1 week, a second blocking 2, a third 1 month, and so on. I personally only do AO when blocking school IPs.
  5. When should you not block? (Again, specific examples, please.)
    When you don't know the entire situation, (barring trolling/disruption/vandalism), or when you are involved in a dispute with the editor in question.

I'll go comb some more RfAs for questions, these should be enough to get you started.

I had to think a bit on these. Good questions. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 20:36, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Awesome, your answers look good. Here are some more. (Some may be duplicates, just ignore them. :) Keilana|Parlez ici 23:11, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Blocking redux

  1. When would you block a vandal/user with no final warning?
    If the vandal was a repeat or long term vandal, i.e. WoW like vandalism. I'd also do it for users who have had a recent final warning for vandalism (2 weeks), or at least a recent block for vandalism. (up to 1 month with a long history)
  2. When would you block someone with no warnings? (Multiple examples, please.)
    Again any long term vandals, a vandal that displays the exact same behavior that an other user just was blocked for. (i.e. an IP gets blocked for inserting a picture of Kobe Bryant to the Dick article, and 2 minutes later a logged in user, or a different IP does the exact same act.)
  3. When would you unblock yourself?
    I wouldn't. (Except for tests and accidents)
  4. Would you do anything stupid enough to get yourself blocked? (I hope not...)
    lol. I should hope not. :)

[edit] Other stuff (mostly cribbed from Lar/John)

  1. What do you consider an uninvolved admin? Where do you draw the line?
    Two part answer!
    An uninvolved admin is someone who is....uninvolved. In a content dispute you draw the line at your rollback, as does the rollbacker user. (if they have it) You don't use rollback for a content dispute, you to take it to either the talk page of the article, or if you have a personal grievance with the editor you take it to the user talk space and you discuss the problem. Don't post your personal editorial problems on the talk pages in article space!!! Avoid wikidrama at all costs!! You don't protect the article during the dispute. You work it out.
    The second part of this answer will be a continuation of "when to draw the line".
    You draw the line when you have to block a longtime established editor in good standing, that you have had previous conflict with. If they really deserve a block someone else will most likely do it for you.
  2. What do you anticipate being difficult about regaining the tools?
    Well, me going through this coaching answers that. I've been out of the loop for a few months, and I'm a bit rusty. Most of it is coming back, but I still would like to be as seasoned as possible.
  3. What do you anticipate being good about regaining the tools?
    I'm a vandal hunting machine. (at least I used to be!) I've been an admin since December 2005, and I think my experience is beneficial.
  4. What would your criteria for admin recall be?
    I don't have one, and could not provide one.
  5. Would you let yourself get dragged into something like this? Thoughts?
    No, which is why I didn't comment on that one in the first place. Going through RfA when it is not needed or warranted is just asking for trouble. If you were an admin back in the real old days when only 7-25 people actually commented on an RfA, I could see a user removing that access and going through RfA again. (I've seen that happen and thought it was a wonderful gesture)
  6. What is wheel warring? Is it ever appropriate? Have you ever wheel warred? (fwiw, I have, it didn't turn out well. Don't wheel war. Just say no.)
    I take wheel warring down to the low brow. You reverse an other admins actions more than once you wheel warred. And no I never have.

[edit] Categories

  1. What is your opinion on CAT:AOR? (Not just would you join, but should it exist, etc.)
    I don't believe in that category personally. I haven't looked at it all that often, but I wouldn't put myself in it. If I deserve to lose my adminship it'll be taken away from me.
  2. What about Category:Rouge admins and Category:Eguor admins?
    Humor is a good thing if not taken too far. Harmless.

[edit] Other Policy

  1. In what situations would you apply WP:IAR?
    When it benefits the encyclopedia, while not being detrimental.
  2. When would be a really bad time to apply IAR?
    When it will create unneeded drama, and angst.
  3. What should you do with BLP violations?
    Fix 'em or remove 'em.
  4. What should you do when another admin removes material citing BLP violations but you disagree, and the material is encyclopedic?
    Discussion and investigation. :)

[edit] Rollback

  1. When should rollback be used?
    Short answer: vandalism. Long answer located here
  2. When should rollback not be used?
    See above long answer. :)
  3. When should you/should you not grant rollback? (You were gone for this, admins now have access to Special:Userrights in order to grant and revoke the rollback tool. See WP:RFR for more.)
    I was here for the start and quasi-adoption of that, but how it evolved I don't really know. I don't envision myself using that feature, because I believe that the 'crats should only be able to give rights on en.

[edit] Protection

  1. When should you salt a page?
    When the creation of the page is repeatedly abused.
  2. When should semi be used?
    When sock or mass IP attacks occurs. (Userspace, talk space, project space, etc also apply)
  3. What about full protection?
    Cool off edit wars, during a dispute or revert war, or if semi-protection is not viable.
  4. When would you use certain time limits on protection? (Be specific!)
    If I semi-protected a highly visible or high traffic page, I'd try to keep it to 1 month at the most. Full protection, indef on pages such as a userpage, because you or someone else might not want to experience vandalism. Common sense and the policy page on protection apply. ;)
  5. If you were involved in an article, when would it be acceptable to protect it?
    When heavy vandalism or other abuse happen to it.
  6. Two users are edit-warring on a page. You revert the user who performed the most recent edit in the revert-war (either with rollback or a manual revert), and then fully-protect the page? Is this appropriate? Why or why not? (directly plagiarized from Acalamari)
    No because you technically just participated in a revert war. Only time it would be acceptable is to restore the version that most closely follows wiki policies, and protecting it to prevent a full out revert war..
  7. Due to a dispute you are having with another user (in this case, a non-admin), a page is fully-protected. You notice an error in the article. As an admin, you can edit fully-protected pages, but it was partially your fault that the page was protected in the first place. How do you deal with the error in the article? (again, cribbed from Acalamari)
    Well, learning from the incomparable Rfiend, you shouldn't "edit" the page. It wouldn't take long for someone uninvolved to do it, especially if you asked an uninvolved admin for assistance, as long as a clear consensus existed for that edit to be made.