User:Xenocidic/RFA

=RFA=

Standards
My RFA standards are still being refined, but I rarely base my support on arbitrary cut-offs like number of edits, or length of time editing. More often I will attempt to determine the clue level of a candidate. If high levels of clue are present, they will earn my support, regardless of whether or not they have 5000 non-huggle edits and 6 months of regular activity. This is based on a fairly brief review of their contributions, moreso on their answers to the questions. I have an optional question that I often pose to candidates that helps with this.

Self-noms and the acceptance line

 * Neglecting to follow the bolded instruction #6 to delete the acceptance line in the self-nomination instructions will cause me to register a neutral unless a preponderance of clue has already been detected.
 * I do this because it is a fairly simple and easy instruction to follow. Not following it is (in my opinion) indicative of a deeper tendency to not thoroughly read and follow instructions generally. Adminship is no big deal, but applying for adminship is. The fact that a candidate hasn't fully versed themselves in the process of RFA prior to jumping in doesn't build confidence that they will accurately follow guidelines and policies in applying administrative actions.
 * An example of how this could apply to a real-world admin situation: When blocking for an inappropriate username, it is customary to uncheck the "Prevent account creation" and "Autoblock any IP addresses used" boxes. However, an admin who doesn't thoroughly follow instructions might not do this and as such Wikipedia could lose an otherwise constructive contributor.
 * One user has mentioned that leaving this line in could be justified by ignore all rules. Quite frankly, I disagree. There is no good reason to ignore this rule, and following it is painless. Attention to detail is a quality I value in an administrator.
 * As I mentioned, leaving this line in isn't always a deal breaker and if the candidate's actions indicate to me that this oversight is an anomaly, I may change to, or otherwise support. Furthermore, if they remove the line using only a herring, I will most certainly lend my support, though I may ask that they first bring me a shrubbery.

Participation

 * 1) Thingg - nom, support
 * 2) WBOSITG 2 - support
 * 3) Zginder - neutral became moral support in the neutral column and then oppose
 * 4) Ro098 - oppose
 * 5) Jbmurray - support
 * 6) Vivio Testarossa - oppose
 * 7) Bluegoblin7 - neutral
 * 8) Guest9999 - support
 * 9) Paulyb - oppose
 * 10) Strennman - oppose
 * 11) Tyw7 - oppose (with moral support)
 * Tyw7 2 - oppose, switched to strong oppose
 * 1) Xenocidic - candidate
 * 2) InDeBiz1 - moral support
 * 3) Useight (RFB) - support
 * 4) Tinkleheimer - moral support
 * 5) Ironholds - oppose
 * 6) Kevin - neutral, switched to support
 * 7) Pinkville - support
 * 8) Ali'i - weak support
 * 9) Cenarium - support
 * 10) Soxred93 3 - neutral, switched to support
 * 11) Avruch - support
 * 12) Cedarvale1965-08 - oppose
 * 13) Karanacs - support
 * 14) Plyhmrp - oppose
 * 15) SarekOfVulcan - support
 * 16) Golich17 - support
 * 17) Headbomb - support
 * 18) oren0 - support
 * 19) Ryan - support
 * 20) EricV89 - support
 * 21) Frank - support
 * 22) Masterpiece2000 - neutral
 * 23) JeanLatore - neutral
 * JeanLatore 2 - oppose
 * 1) RyanLupin 2 - support
 * 2) Blakegripling ph - support
 * 3) Lomn - support
 * 4) Shoessss 2 - support
 * 5) Tanner-Christopher 2 - support
 * 6) the demonhog 2 - support
 * 7) TomStar 81 3 - support
 * 8) Cailil - support
 * 9) Lady Aleena 2 - neutral, switched to oppose
 * 10) Red Phoenix - support
 * 11) No longer updating, see my RFA participation report

Thanks
I would like to thank the community for placing their trust in me during my recent request for adminship, which passed 72 13 2. Rest assured, I have read each comment thoroughly and will be addressing the various concerns raised as I step cautiously into my new role as janitor. In particular, I would like to thank Balloonman for putting so much time into reviewing my contributions and writing such a thoughtful nomination statement after knowing me for only a brief period of time (and for convincing me that I was ready to take up the mop now, rather than go through admin coaching).
 * Thank you for your support

To my fellow admins - please let me know right away if I ever take any mis-steps with my new tools. Should I make a mistake, and you reverse the action, I will not consider it to be wheel-warring (but please tell me so I can understand what I did wrong).

To everyone - please feel free to slap me around a bit if I ever lose sight of the core philosophy of Wikipedia as I understand it - the advancement of knowledge through the processes of mutual understanding and respect. As always, feel free to drop by my talk page if I can be of any assistance. =)

Sincerely,

~xenocidic, 01:04, 4 June 2008 (UTC)