User:True Pagan Warrior/RfA/2

So what's this page all about? It's about me thinking about what I learned in my RfA, and deciding what (if anything) to do with that feedback. Feel free to look around; I wouldn't have it in such a public space if I wanted to hide anything here.

Edit count

 * 1) Generally focused more on fluctuations in editing or average edits per month (around 100).

Judgment

 * 1) "Too deletionist"
 * 2) Lacks understanding of CSD criteria
 * 3) Poor nomination choices at AfD

COI

 * 1) References to "Wikipedia research" on home page
 * 2) *Not voiced by a lot of editors but focus of a good amount of answering; the amount of text it covered in the RfA may suggest it was given undue weight, but it should be addressed in any future RfA regardless.
 * 3) *Proposed policy indicates that listing Wikipedia editing on a resume is acceptable, and this could reasonably be extended to a website, but "additional circumstances" may make such an activity unacceptable. Better to err on the side of it being unacceptable than to fight for something which doesn't actually matter.

Other

 * 1) Need more dispute resolution experience (goes to judgment)
 * 2) Consider a second editor review (one person voting has that as a criterion, and it seems reasonable enough; helps to measure how I change based on these criticisms).

Stuff I'm doing

 * 1) Lifestyle change, and, more tediously, moving links from Lifestyle to Lifestyle (sociology). Creating the disambiguation with a move generated a lot of work, but allowed me to identify links that rightly should be pointing to some other article instead.  Future links will be more able to be repaired since it's now a disambiguation page.  Requested a bot's help but in the light of the judgment call probably isn't possible.

Questions about backlogs - answered!

 * Hmm, I don't know about a "top 5" but I'll give you a few that I think are chronically understaffed. The reason for my comment (and it was a neutral- I wouldn't oppose an otherwise fine candidate over that) was that there seems to be a blinkered view amongst editors and admin candidates, especially (but not exclusively) those with relatively little experience either that if you can reel off a list of acronyms like "CSD, AfD, AIV" that it makes you a better candidate or that those are the only (or the "most important") admin areas. While those are very important areas, there are already a lot of admins working there- yes, they get backlogged, but they're monitored by enough people that someone will usually come along and clean them out before they get completely swamped. Other areas that I think are important, if tucked away are (just examples, not an exclusive list):


 * WP:RPP- getting better these days with the help of a few relatively new admins but it can grind to a halt sometimes, especially at certain times (recurring theme but that's to do with UTC v local time zones) and a large number of decisions, especially difficult ones all seem to be made by a small bunch of regulars
 * WP:ERRORS- Obviously the Main Page is fully protected, as are all the templates transcluded onto it but many people don't make the connection between full protection and the need for an admin to fix it. You'd be surprised how often some grammatical error or the odd typo creeps in on what's supposed to be our "welcome mat" that says "look at all the impressive articles we can write- whatever you read in the tabloids"
 * CAT:EP- popular opinion seems to think that using editprotected emits a sound that only admins can hear and causes them to swoop out of the sky. Alas not, it adds the talk page to this category
 * CAT:RFUB- unblock requests awaiting evaluation, sometimes easy (mistaken blocks/autoblocks or the "no chance!"s), some requiring quite a lot of evaluating
 * CAT:PROD- PRODded articles don't delete themselves after they expire and again might require considerable judgement and the recently PRODded are worth patrolling to make sure the concern is legit, some may be eligible for speedy, some should go to AfD
 * WP:UAA- to a lesser extent than the others, but it can clog up and it doesn't get the same attention that AIV does
 * That's 6 and there are certainly more (I could have cite WP:AE but that's a little controversial at the minute and probably not an area a new admin should wander into blindly- I'm very much a subscriber to the "no big deal" philosophy, but adminship is not just about a few "important" or "traditional" areas. Are you considering an RfA of your own?  HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   18:23, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I have been down that road before my name change. I wasn't at all sure what I would have wanted to do with the tools, other than some vague assertion of "backlogs."  If I ever repeat the process down the line I would hope to sound a wee bit more prepared for the essay section the second time around!  This list is just the sort of thing I was hoping for - thanks!--~TPW 03:29, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah. I vaguely remember that so I went back to have a look and I see I was neutral #2. Why the name change, if you don't mind my asking? At a glance at the RfA, if you were to stand again in a few months, you might have a fair chance. Some of the answers are quite weak, but others are strong and well grounded in policy (hence neutral I suppose). If you were to run again, I'd suggest you spend a month or two loitering in admin-y areas, for example, the Main Page (I only use at as an example because I know the area well)- you could get involved at T:TDYK reviewing hooks and moving the queues up as far as possible before the pages are fully protected, weigh in or even nominate and update at WP:ITN/C, keep an eye on T:MP (though frankly I don't like it there- I honestly think the atmosphere at ANI is healthier than there) and WP:ERRORS where you can make useful suggestions for improvements which often means that things can be corrected quicker and before too long, you'll think "this would be a lot easier if I could edit the damn templates!". What many people don't seem to realise is that there is plenty of behind-the-scenes work that doesn't require administrator tools. You got a bit of opposition over your lack of recognised content- contrary to popular opinion, GA is easier said than done (I review them and I've got 4 of my own so I'd know) but by taking up reviewing at WP:GAN, you would have something to fend off the MMORPG-type opposes. I hope that helps if you ever consider sanding again (and I honestly think there;s no reason why you shouldn't). Best, HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   14:39, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * For truly inglorious admin areas, try CAT:NC and CAT:NCT. Shubinator (talk) 16:29, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, they can join the list! I can't say I'm surprised they collect dust, though! Where did you come from anyway? HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   16:33, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Heh, I was spying on you with a telescope from Mars. Nah, I was flipping through some discussions to update myself on the goings-on of the wiki and saw this thread. Those cats used to be fine; now there's a bot that runs around tagging images now at commons (it uploads the pictures to Commons first I think) which is why those cats have exploded now. Shubinator (talk) 16:41, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Well it's always a pleasure to hear from you! You should go over and clean them up with your nice shiny mop! Hardly the most interesting area, though! We ought to make people upload all free images to commons and just leave us with the fair use ones locally (I think simplewiki do that) and then at least there wouldn't be new images to add to the cats every day! I used to think bots created more work than they saved (this being a good example). Then I clerked AIV for 2 days while the helperbots were down. Now I love bots! I haven't seen you dealing with comma complaints on WP:ERRORS lately. What are you doing with that mop of yours? HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   17:15, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'm being given more and more to do in RL, so I haven't been on much. I did duplicate my mop though, and the duplicate's doing well. I try to check in daily to make sure it hasn't deleted the Main Page. Shubinator (talk) 17:22, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Another in that vein: Category:File renaming. Shubinator (talk) 17:33, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh fun! More images, what better way for an admin to prove they're not after glory! Nice going on the bot- I've had a visit or 2 from it. Btw, if you have time (and technical knowledge far superior to my own ;)!) could you have a look a my archive configuration to see if I've done it right (I was hoping the bot would have archived it by now). Cheers, HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   18:51, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The archive config looks correct. I have a hunch why it hasn't archived yet: this page is at 137K, and archiving it would take up a similar amount of space. But you've set the max archive size to 70K. So the bot does nothing. (A smart bot would be able to figure it out and create two archives; I don't know how smart MiszaBot is.) Shubinator (talk) 04:11, 18 April 2010 (UTC)