User:Lee Vilenski/Incubator/adminythings

General note to self regarding Admin issues.

What people want to see
RfA contributors want to see a record of involvement and evidence that you can apply Wikipedia policies calmly, maturely and impartially. What are often looked for are:
 * Strong edit history with plenty of well referenced material contributions to Wikipedia articles.
 * Varied experience. RfAs where an editor has mainly contributed in one way (little editing of articles, or little or no participation in AfDs, or little or no participation in discussions about Wikipedia policies and processes, for example) have tended to be more controversial than those where the editor's contributions have been wider.
 * User interaction. Evidence of you talking politely and helpfully to other editors on talk pages.
 * Trustworthiness. General reliability as evidence that you would use administrator rights carefully to avoid irreversible damage, especially in the stressful situations that can arise more frequently for administrators.
 * Helping with chores. Evidence that you are already engaging in administrator-like work and debates such as RC Patrol and articles for deletion.
 * High quality of articles. A good way to demonstrate this is contributing to getting articles featured, although good articles are also well-regarded.
 * Observing consensus. A track record of working within policy, showing an understanding of consensus.
 * Edit summaries. Constructive and frequent use of edit summaries is a quality some RfA contributors want to see. If you haven't already set your defaults to force an edit summary with every edit, it is worth doing so before RFA and stating this in your application. See Edit summary.
 * A clean block log as evidence of good editing behavior (if you have any blocks from more than one year ago, people will expect an explanation as to how your editing has changed to make this unlikely to happen again).

These points are not mandatory and there are always exceptions, but if you think back over your contributions and any of these is missing, it may be better to broaden your experience before an RfA.

There are also several other things that contributors will raise, such as whether you have an email address set. This is important for administrators, who may need to be contacted by users who have been blocked from editing.


 * Complete answers to the RfA questions. Curt or uninformative answers to the standard questions are mildly offputting for some RfA contributors. Spend a bit of time preparing your answers; there is no time limit to the acceptance of a nomination.

Some editors have listed their individual rough criteria for support on the Advice for RfA candidates page.


 * Strong edit history over 20,000 edits.
 * Varied experience - extra work needed - active in plenty of wikiprojects, as well as DYK, AfC.
 * User interaction. Need to generate diffs of user interaction
 * Trustworthiness. Need to generate diffs of user interaction
 * Helping with chores RC Patrol, articles for deletion. Need extra for use of tools
 * High quality of articles. Multiple GAs.
 * Observing consensus. diffs required
 * Edit summaries. See Edit summary - require edit summaries
 * A clean block log - ✅

Standard Questions

 * 1: What admin work do you intend to take part in?
 * A: I am looking for the tools to help out more within WP:DYK and WP:AfD, but would be willing to help out wherever is needed. However, I am a firm believer that the tools should not be used on a whim, and that I would ease myself into new areas only when I am completely happy with the current areas I was working on.
 * 2: What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
 * A: I have worked in many different WikiProjects, but most of my best content is within cue sports articles, specifically snooker and pool. I have over 30 good articles and three featured articles in an area which has traditionally not gotten much content to this stage; but also do work in video games, professional wrestling and football. My best article contributions include the 2019 World Snooker Championship, 2019 Tour Championship and Eddie Ryan. However, I feel some of my best contributions are in creating articles and expanding them to Did you know, such as 1985 World Snooker Championship, Ground billiards and Kristina Tkach. In addition, I like to offer my help on the help desk.
 * 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 am very easy going and not the type to receive stress regarding volunteering to update Wikipedia. Every user receives conflicts over editing, and I firmly believe in Bold, Revert, Discuss and good faith. I have even been around strong debates on content, including items such as the removal of move-lists on professional wrestling articles where there was drama, frustrated discussions and name calling. I reminded users to stick to policy keeping a cool head. In addition, I have also been involved with fixing MOS:FLAG issues on cue sport articles such as here. I always seek to fix issues, but be compassionate with other editors as we are all trying to build an encyclopedia. I am quite happy to comment on potentially controversial conversations, whilst trying to gain a suitable consensus without adding to the conflict at hand.