User:Pedro/Admin Coaching Kimu
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Reference
[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/RC-0722
[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/RC-0722 3
[edit] Reasons for Failure
- Quite soon after 1st RfA
- Lack of Diversity
- Perfunctory Answers to The Questions
- Problem with signature links
[edit] First Steps
My suggested first steps;
- Continue with RC Patrol, enuring reversions are accurate, C:CSD tags are correct and users warned where needed
- Consider some participation at WP:AFD bringing some valuable input to the table. Cite Wikipedia policies and guidelines for your decisions.
Try and comment on 15 AFD discussions and then let's see how that went for you.
[edit] Evaluation
Okay, some good input there. Some pointers - be careful with "delete/merge"- make it very clear that you recommend one or the other. You can't delete and merge an article. Don't "serial vote". I appreciate you might have reviewed several articles and then commented all at one time in their various debates. But a string of five or six comments within a few minutes or so of each other looks like "fly by voting" as the term has come to be known.
RFA input. I've seen some good stuff here, but try and and add more value. If you're supporting perhaps demonstrate why e.g. - Support, excellent article writing and this diff [insert diff] shows how well the candidate works with new editors. That kind of thing.
Blast a few more AFD's, and keep on remembering policy and guidelines - particularly if no other editos has quoted that policy before. Also - read other debates and see what guidelines other editors work by.
Done Now what? RC-0722 247.5/1 00:12, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
- Hm. Good stuff. that was spot on and indeed echoed the result. This was a bit odd - I appreciate you erring on the side of caution, but that really was a clear G1 / G3 and could have been tagged for speedy. As a general note your speedy deletion requests seem to be very accurate. I could only find a few deletion debates you've commented on though, rather than created. Are you also reading through some debates, without commenting? Are their any new guidelines you've found? I think you need to keep up adding some commentary to already open AFD's, bringing real value, as well as speedy deletion stuff. Give me another 10 or so AFD contributions to have a look at, when you have a mind to venture down that line! Pedro : Chat 08:01, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Evaluation, End of April 2008
okay. All looks good with the exception of the edits to Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed we discussed before. Now there were no 3RR warnings or anything like that but you did come close. Hopefully you've learned from this before. When you did take your concerns to the article talk page it resulted in a good and fruitful conversation aimed at gaining consensus - exactly what should happen.
Are you still reviewing things at XFD? That really helps you know. I haven't seen you at WP:RFA so much either - allways wirth looking at what the community is currently thinking, as things change so fast.
Good collaborative stuff on other user talk pages - that's great. Just learn the lessons from the No Intelligence Allowed article.
