User:OverlordQ/Admin Coaching

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hey there Q,

Well, I've been looking over your edits and past RfA I have no doubt that you should fly through your next RfA. That assumes a few things:

  1. That you become somewhat active in article building/development. This does not mean that you have to develop an article for FA and a hundred GA quality articles. It simply means that you need to show some familiarity with the process of article building. You are free to go about that anyway that you like. If you don't have any idea as to where to begin, here are few suggestions---Peer Review, Good Article Review, Good Article Candidates, Featured Article Review, Articles for Creation. The advantage of finding articles at these locations is that you will probably find other editors who are willing/interested in taking an article and pushing it to GA or even FA status. While GA/FA's are not required for adminship, they definately help.
  2. That you gain familiarity with wikipedia policies and procedures. This does not mean that you don't already know them, but you need to demonstrate that you know them. There are several ways to demonstrate this. First is Admin Coaching---I will have several excercises for you during our stint together. Second, participation at various aspects of the Wiki Community (which some will be included in your coaching.) Third, participation in XfD's. I really want you to hit them hard. When you !vote at XfD's, follow these rules:
    1. NEVER !vote with just "Delete" or "Keep"
    2. NEVER !vote with "per nom" or "per above."
    3. Always give a reason for your !vote. The key is not to get it right, the key is to show your reasoning for your position.

If you can fill those gaps, then (if you don't do anything stupid) your next RfA should pass easily.

That's the good news, the bad news is that you won't be able to run for Adminship until May. The general rule of thumb is that if you fail an RfA, you should wait at least 3 months before running again. Passing an RfA is like going to school---you are expected to have certain skills/experiences that you may never again use. But in order to get what you want, you still have to achieve them. My goal is to have you so ready for your second RfA that it passes near unanimously!

To that extent let me ask you a few questions:

  1. What are your plans for increasing your article building resume?
  2. Besides XfD and Coaching Admin, are there any areas or things that you've considered where you might gain experience with policies/procedures?

Finally, one of the things that came up during your RfA, was the issue of fast track to adminship. Somebody mentioned that many perceived vandal fighting as the fast track to Adminship, and you said you thought it would be the other way around. Here's the skinny. A vandal fighter can rack up thousands of edits in a very short period of time---especially if they use a tool. This allows vandal fighters to get their edit counts up there with relatively little experience. As a result, Vandal Fighter RfA's are a dime a dozen---there are probably 3 times as many RfA's from people who are primarily vandal fighters as there are from people who are primarily editors. A person who is primarily an editor might make 500 edits a month---a vandal fighter can match that in a day. Thus when an editor goes for RfA with 3-5000 edits, they are often better received than a vandal fighter with the same number.Balloonman (talk) 05:18, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Your edit history

Hi Q, I try to go over my coachees history to see if there are any issues we might need to address and to get a feel for who/what they are. Also to give them a heads up related to potential issues. This does not mean that there are issues, but rather by highlighting potential one's we eliminate some potential problems down the road.

  1. Watch the repeated characters in your edit summaries. They can be seen as uncivil.
  2. [1]bleh might be seen by some as uncivil.
  3. watch those edit summaries
  4. As it stands now, what tags should be added to this article?
  5. I liked your response here. Don't shy away from your weaknesses or pretend they don't exist, but show how you can over come them and how your contributions elsewhere outweigh the negatives of not having the specific expertise. Unfortunately, article writing is considered by many to be just as important, if not more important, than XfD's in RfA's.
  6. looking at your XfDs... start giving more elaborate reasons. Per nom/per aboe, or just delete/keep don't bode well.
  7. When you find somebody who has vandalized one page check that users contribs to see if they've vandalized elsewhere... you could have cleaned up this users mess and stopped him from further damage.
  8. Using Twinkle is a good way to build edit count, but it doesn't demonstrate your ability to rationalize and interpret policy.Balloonman (talk) 06:03, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Well, for number one, I've noticed you've found the WAC article I've been working on. Took a break on it while I try to find some more sourced historical references on its construction and such.
Besides that, I really don't know where else I can contribute to article creation. Since it's such open ended I really don't know where to begin, most the subjects I'm interested in are mostly well fleshed out already, and I really do better fiction then non-fiction, so my style of writing really doesn't the encyclopedic tone.
As for tags for the WAC article, I'd probably give it {{cleanup}}, {{unreferenced}}, possibly {{Sectionrewrite}}. I know Im probably missing a bunch, but those come to mind off hand. Q T C 00:19, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I found your WAC article. I try to go through my coachees past thousand edits to make sure there are no surprises come your RfA. I'd rather bring up issues now, than wait for somebody else to find them, that way they can be addressed and rectified. As for the tabs that you've identified, those work for me.
As for article creation/contribution to articles. Let me give you a couple of places to look:
  1. Take a look at FAC/FAR.
  2. Take a look at GAR/GAC.
  3. Take a look at Peer Review.
  4. Take a look at Suggestbot.
  5. Take a look at any Wikiprojects that you might be interested in. Wikiprojects often have collaboration of the week/or articles needing improved.
  6. Request for Article Creation.
  7. Did you know.
  8. Redlinks on articles that you read/monitor.
Any of these places would be a good place to find ideas and or articles where people are looking for help to improve/enhance. You don't have to have to come up with new/novel ideas and write articles from scratch, but most RfA !voters will be looking for a decent contribution in this arena, particulalry from you since it was highlighted during your first RfA. You just might discover that somebody is working on an article right up your ally. (Oh yeah, as an FYI, when I admin coach I will very rarely link to articles/pages unless I am trying to accentuate a point. My philosophy is that I expect you, as a prospective admin, to be able to figure out where Peer Review or FA can be found. Being an admin isn't about knowing everything, but it is about being able to demonstrate that you can find things. Thus, I expect you to provide links to support your comments.Balloonman (talk) 03:04, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RFA Questions

[edit] Questions for the candidate

Usually, I will ask admin coachees to answer the basic questions posed to admin coachees. Since you've already answered them, let me critique your answers:

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?
A: As GlassCobra mentioned above, I'm heavily involved with Vandal patrolling, as such the main areas I wish to help contribute to are the ones most closely assoiciated to this such as WP:AIV, WP:3RR, WP:UAA. These three areas usually pop up the most when browsing the RC feed, and having the mop available, I feel, will help me improve in these tasks. In addition, I wish to further help the open proxy project, which is lacking in active admins to enforce the decisions. Furthermore, I would be willing to help with other housekeeping tasks such as WP:DYK, and taking care of Speedy Deletions in the less controversial WP:CSD#G7, WP:CSD#G8, Redirects, and User Pages until I had more experience in this area.
The positive sign is that you showed a definite need for the tools. The problem is that you didn't accentuate your qualifications for using said tools. I think you might be a niche admin in two areas that most admins are unfamiliar. First, your background with Proxy/TOR is something that most people are unfamiliar with. In fact, prior to reading your history I didn't know what they were. Thus, in answering this question next time, rather than simply provide a link to the project page, I would briefly explain what that project is and how admins are needed. I would also highlight your technical/bot background---does that area need more admins? If so, for what? I've said it before, but vandal fighting admins are a dime a dozen, so I would make that a supporting point, not your main drive. I also wouldn't bring up CSD/AFD's until and unless you build a solid history at XfD's.


2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: I believe my best contributions to Wikipedia have been my contributions to Vandal Fighting. While we have the lovable ClueBot doing a large percentage of the grunt work, there is still a vast amount of small scale vandalism that is done and easily gets past the Vandal Bots and needs a human eye to detect, and in some cases reporting to WP:AIV. In addition, the other main area where I've made important contributions is the technical side. I currently run one Bot which monitors the Introduction and Sandbox, and am putting the finishing touches on a second which will help identify the biggest contributors of vandalism by IP, Range, and ISP in order to help vandal fighters better focus their time and increase efficiency.
Good answer... again I would probably put the BOT piece first because it makes you stand out.
3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
A: I believe the only real incident of stress between myself and another user has been some respectful banter with AzaToth over some subtleties in how WP:TWINKLE works and whether or not a certain bug existed. While this didn't get beyond the point of spirited discussion, I believe the best way to reduce stress, and to prevent it, is to step away and do a non-wiki activity, giving yourself time to cool off and approach the situation with a clear mind.
When discussing your past conflicts, provide a link to the conflict so that others can find it easily.Balloonman (talk) 06:31, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
I tried to find it, but I couldn't remember which page it was on, nor the exact timeframe in which it happened. Q T C 16:28, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] EWS23's Speedy Deletion Excercises

Hey there Q,

Here are some Speedy Deletion Excercises that EWS23 came up with. Follow the instructions and we can discuss when you are done. We're in no rush on this.Balloonman (talk) 08:00, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

The following is a test I have designed to make sure that admin coachees understand the policies of speedy deletion. The "articles" here are actual cases that I have come across while clearing out CAT:CSD. Assume that the title of the page is everything following User:EWS23/CSD/. You are allowed to use any technique that you might usually use to assert notability (e.g.- Google), but you are not allowed to use Wikipedia in any way (you cannot see if the page still exists on Wikipedia, go through my deletion log to see if I deleted it, and any Google searches you do should use "Subject -Wikipedia" which is a good tool anyway to help eliminate Wikipedia mirrors).

Assume for this exercise that you are an administrator. View the page, but do not edit it (I plan on using these for multiple coachees). Then, return to your coaching page and comment on each entry in question. Write whether you would delete the page or not. If you would, cite the specific criteria at WP:CSD that you would use to delete it. If you would not delete it, state why, and state what you would do to the page (simply remove the tag, redirect it somewhere else, keep it but remove certain information from it, etc.). Good luck! EWS23 (Leave me a message!) 00:44, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

P.S.- In real cases, you should ALWAYS check the page history before making a decision. Sometimes the page is a legitimate article that got vandalized, or page moved, etc. In this case, the page history won't tell you anything (I'm the only contributor), but remember that in real cases the page history is important. EWS23 (Leave me a message!) 00:44, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Note to fellow coaches: You're welcome to use this exercise or even expand it if you'd like. You probably have a good opinion on what the "right answer" is on each of these, but if you want my take on it, you can check out the first time I administered this exercise here. (Note to coachees: Of course there are a lot of ways to "cheat" on this exercise, including clicking on the link I just mentioned. I feel you get the most out of this if you do it on your own without help from others. We often learn best from our mistakes.) EWS23 (Leave me a message!) 00:44, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bot Related Home Work

As you are my bot expert admin and like that technical end... I have a home work assignment that is right up your ally. As an admin people may come to you seeking answers to questions---as a person who deals with bots you may be asked questions about bots. 1) Explain to me the criteria that COIbot and the bot that notifies people that pages are up for AfD uses. 2) Which bot do you feel that every user should have familiarity with and why? 3) Pick two bots that you haven't worked on, and explain to me what they do. 4) Explain one of your bots to me. Keep the answers long enough to explain them to show your understanding, but keep them short and simple enough that the layman can understand.Balloonman (talk) 20:59, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Heads up

I've contacted you on your talk page, where you indicated a continued desire for admin coaching. But you haven't updated/responded since then. So, I'll post here. But there are others who would be interested in an admin coach. If you aren't interested, then we should terminate this arrangement. If you don't respond by Monday, I will assume that you are not interested in being coached at this time.Balloonman (talk) 07:59, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Since you haven't edited in almost a month, I am assuming that you are no longer interested in admin coaching. I am thus going to move on to other students.Balloonman (talk) 04:03, 10 April 2008 (UTC)