User:Tofutwitch11/Coaching

Okay, here we go!

There are a dozen or more 'methods' devised by admins here and gone to help wannabe admins lose the 'wannabe'. I use a hybrid of three of those paths.

We'll divide this into four phases.


 * Phase I is an assessment fo your strengths and weaknesses, to show me your best contributions, and
 * Phase II will be all about policy. I'll ask you several series of questions dealing with policy, or questions that often come up in RfAs.
 * Phase III will have to do with Wikiphilosophy (inclusionism/deletionism, orthodoxy on Wikipedia, etc.). Wikiphilosophy questions often pop up on RFAs, and I want you to be prepared for these.  to help you examine your approach to the project while contrasting it with the views of other editors and the public.
 * Phase IV is a phase where you will explore other areas of editing and areas that you may come across as an admin. I will provide minimal guidance in this phase, and will only answer questions rather than pose questions.

If I feel that more time spent in a particular phase will help you then more time will be added, but if I feel that continuing a phase won't be beneficial to you, then I'll simply move on to the next.

We're not in a race - if you don't have time to answer something one day, don't worry about it. I'm in no hurry, and I have a real life too, so let's agree now not to pester each other about speed of either questions or answers. When I see you've completed some answers, I'll ask more questions, but it's not the SAT - no time limit or deadlines. Likewise, if I don't add some more work here for a couple or three days, don't think I've forgotten you, because I promise I haven't. :-)

Now, a few provisos, a couple of quid pro quos...

So let's get started with...

Phase I
Now, you know some of the answers to these questions already, and I know the answers, and I you know I know. Answer them anyway - it's a self-assessment tool for you also. It's kind of like a pat on the back, like, "see how much you've already done? chill, dude." ;-)

This phase is going to take about a week, give or take a couple of days. Describe the circumstances surrounding each situation and any end result or lesson learned. Be as thorough or brief as you wish, and I'll probably ask followup questions.

editing activities
Have you ever...


 * ...!voted in an RFA? Was your opinion born out by consensus - did you oppose candidates who passed, or support candidates who failed, vice versa?
 * ✅ Yes I have indeed, you can view my record here Tool is working again (with alt. link) . I don't recall ever opposing anyone who has passed (hard to tell as tool is down), but I have supported those who have not passed. My criteria is not very high; and if the canidate has not shown any recent problems (6 mo's) and have decent experience, I am likely to support.
 * Keep participating there. Since you said your criteria isn't very high, I'm guessing you don't have a concrete set of benchmarks which a candidate must meet. I don't either - I tend to look at a sample of edits, weighted toward the previous few months, and at recent comments they may have made in the project space. I'll usually support unless I find a reason not to. It's a gut feeling kind of thing with me.


 * ...requested a page to be protected at WP:RfPP?
 * ✅ Yes, two in fact, both for edit warring, they were San Juan International Airport and Gatwick Airport
 * I see you were participating in the combat in the first one. Warring over 'begins' vs. 'resumes'? Really?!? Go read WP:LAME - top to bottom - and tell me why I shouldn't add it to that list. (I'm kidding about adding it to the list, but can you see how silly edit wars are, at least in hindsight? I mean, the sun's going to rise Monday morning if that articles says 'begins' or 'resumes' or 'follows the yellow brick road.'
 * Indeed, but I stopped short of an edit war, I do love my clean block log :) Argh.


 * ...had an editor review?
 * ✅ Yep -- See here
 * Noted.


 * ...used automated tools/.js tools such as Twinkle, AWB, or Huggle?
 * ✅ Yes, Huggle on the blue moon, and Twinkle for simplifying tasks, however I do not really see twinkle as autmomated because nearly the same amount of work goes into placing tags/temps etc using twinkle then otherwise.
 * My .js page is a mile long and I don't know what I'd do without it. AWB is the real automated deal, but I've never used it because I'm on a Mac. The list of editors who ended up banned or blocked misusing AWB has to be a mile long.


 * ...contributed to an XfD (not Articles for deletion - looking for participation at Categories, Templates, Files, and/or Miscellany for deletion)
 * ✅ Once or twice I believe, not my thing.
 * Addressed below.


 * ...answered a question at the help desk?
 * ✅.... No Just today infact!...and other users have come to me for help, and I have adopted User:Captjosh
 * Good. For a short period several months ago, there was a small group of editors basically using the help desk to make their own little comedy show, making fun of the questions and, sadly, the questioners. I'd like to see you continue to participate there.
 * They must still be there this is rude, derogatory, and certainly unacceptable. I have messaged the user.


 * uploaded an image?
 * ✅ A few.
 * mediated or otherwise acted as a neutral party in a dispute?
 * ✅ I've been in many, many discussions here, and I am sure I have acted as one -- I have been asked to join a discussion as a nuetral party.
 * participated in discussion in WP:AN or WP:ANI?
 * ✅ Been there, done that.
 * helped out on the Account Creation Toolserver Interface?
 * ✅ Have permission to use the interface, however, I am always beaten to creating the account.
 * requested and received/been denied for Rollback?
 * ✅Yes, I have rb and reviewer here.
 * had a previous RFA?
 * Good thing?
 * Written a DYK?
 * Unfortunalty, not.

more questions

 * What are your favorite contributions to Wikipedia? Your best contributions?
 * Well Well Well, Bradley International Airport shows much of my editing, and I have worked on it since I started here on Wikipedia over a year ago (woah..Time Flies :P). I have made many major updates, and try to keep it up to date as well as I can. I don't tend to focus on "one" article to much, because there is so much more work to be done. I have a list of about 40 things I want to get to, but one step at a time.
 * I know the feeling. During our time together, you should bring this article to at least GA status. Particularly since I'm now the third editor to say so.
 * Sounds like a plan.


 * Do you tend to concentrate on any one article type to edit?
 * As I am sure you have noticed, Yes, I do. Aviation/Airports/Airplane/Air anything -- you name it, I've probably done it. Unfortunately, there is not much help at WP:AVIATION, and usually about 5 or so of us doing our rounds to keep it up to date. None of those five are admins, and problems often arise that would need an un-involved admin (which, as a non-admin I am usually un-involved, I try to see if I am really needed before I step into disputes). WP:AVIATION/AIRPORTS is in constant need of updating due to the constant change in flights, and would not be what it is without the "crew" (not trying to brag, I am only 1/5 of the crew.) Every time I turn around there's more problems and disputes that need to be taken care of; often involving the same people just not agreeing on the same things, because there are so few people at WP:AVIATION, any change in policy/the way we work there has to be approved by everyone, and if not approved, not changed. I am starting to get into copy-editing, New Page Patrolling (which I have been doing for a while) and cleaning out backlogs, well, non-admin backlogs. To get back to the question, to sum it up, Yes I do, and many of the items on my "to do" list are in WP:AVIATION.


 * That's a pretty good answer. You'd be surprised how many areas/portals/WikiProjects have only a small 'crew' (to use your term) of editors who seem to do 99% of the patrolling and editing. And you've addressed the uninvolved admin problem - just in the last two weeks we've had at least five 'abuse of admin power' screeds at AN/ANI. It's a blessing and a curse to be an admin because you've got the tools to deal with a situation but you can't use them, and it's that judgment thing again. Sometimes another admin will ask me to look into or judge something, and vice versa. Very important to build good relationships here, as both an editor and as a sysop.


 * What percentage of the time do you spend fighting vandalism compared to just editing encyclopedic content?
 * Well, anytime I see vandalism, boom, its gone (as I am sure is true for any other contributor). I used to use Huggle, but I felt my time more useful not clicking the giant red button, rather working on WP. I'd say, Vandalism Fighting to Content work, 2:5. Sorry if the answer falls short.
 * We are here, after all, to build an encyclopedia. Nothing about that answer falls short. I was thinking the other day how much content I have yet to write (first year in WikiCup for me) but all I seem to have time for is protecting pages and blocking vandals.
 * Whilst I cannot attest to the blocking/protecting, there is usually some debate or event of another signifigace that draws my attention from content writing...


 * Have you contributed heavily to WP:AFD?
 * Well, be prepared to read. I slowly started to creep into AFD because I saw that sometimes it was backlogged, and hell, it doesn't hurt to try something new. Well..I was sorely mistaken. I closed 5 AFD's one day as either Keep -- or No Consensus. seemed to have a problem with the close because they violated WP:NACD (Yes, he said they "violated" an essay...). There was a huggggeee discussion on WP:ANI about it, and I was embarrassed. Thankfully, another Admin endorsed my closes, and the discussion began. Cirt and I argued about what I did wrong, and time and time again I reminded him I was just following the leader, and that everything I did "wrong" he had done also, as I had followed his lead. What I was trying to say was "You know what you are doing, I followed you, and now I broke the rules???" After a four day discussion, it was clear I had not done much wrong, (but was very embarrassed by the whole thing), and my closes were kept except for one which was overturned in DRV, but 4/5 remained as I had closed them. That was the beginning to my AFD adventure. A month or so later, I noticed that AFD was backlogged, so, I closed a few more with success, and was not bothered by anyone. I decided to try it again a week or so after that, and bam, my closes were "undone" and I was "yelled at", well actually, just told not to close AFD's anymore, while I think I may not fully grasp the AFD concept, I do think that admins do not "weigh" non-admin closures as they do Admin closures, and are much more likely to overturn a NAC, and an Admin Closure. (I'm not saying every close was correct, but I think that is what came out of the discussions I had) So, unless I am holding someones hand, I am pretty much out of AFD untill/if I have the admin bit. On a good note, I do get along with  now, and even have backed him up in MickMakNee's RFC (don't get me into that). No hard feelings, and we are all back working on the project.


 * *Yeah, non-admin closures should be unambiguous 'keep' only. An admin has to come and delete the article anyway, so it's pointless for anyone else to close others. So one of our focus areas will be the deletion discussions.


 * I was going to have you begin participating in AfD and its cousins this week, but I changed my mind. Unless you have strong feelings about a particular page/template/file, in which case you should definitely weigh in, don't worry about deletions for the time being. I think we should address that separately because it's going to be a big deal. Remember, RfA is about judgment and temperament, and this process we're doing is to help you learn _when_ to use a particular tool, not how to do it.

Question for my Coach :)
Leave this section at the bottom, and post anything above it besides the answers to questions I ask you.


 * What is the hardest part of being an Admin?
 * Hmmm... well, it's probably the knowledge that you've got a target on your back, and that all your actions are under extra scrutiny. That said, it's not nearly as toxic an environment for admins now as it was about three or four years ago when Daniel Brandt managed to drive off more than a dozen sysops (and non-admins too) by threatening outing and/or financial ruin if they continued editing here. After we got a BLP policy with some teeth, which happened after the Badlydrawnjeff ArbCom case, things settled down. Wikipedia Review is still a distraction and there's a lot of schadenfreude over there after admins get fed up and leave, but it's a nuisance now instead of a nuclear threat to the entire project. I know more than a few admins who would say that becoming an admin takes the fun away from Wikipedia. I can see that viewpoint, but I disagree with it. It's my choice what I do and don't do, so I don't like 'victim' arguments.


 * Has an editor ever threatened you, or/have you received threats from an editor off wiki for something you did on wiki?