User talk:Southpw

December 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to North Catholic High School has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Ipatrol (talk) 23:31, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I removed it again as it was still unreferenced, and it was added by a user who has vandalised in these edits:. The first part of the edit is unreferenced, and is likely to be opinion or original research, and lists of people should not be in articles unless they are either lists of notable people, or are particularly significant aspects of the article's subject. — Snigbrook  00:11, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 23:35, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

reply from Dloh  cierekim  (UTC)
Thanks for your note. Before becoming an admin or offering to help others I would suggest gaining greater familiarity with our policies and guidelines. Particularly, you need to be sure to remember to have reliable sources for your information and to make sure it is neutral in tone. Another problem is that you also need to take a less confrontational tone with others-- too forceful and aggressive in your edit summaries. My thoughts on requests for adminship can be found atUser:Dlohcierekim/On RfA. I am generally more willing to support requests for RFA than many thers. Cheers,  Dloh  cierekim  01:54, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

RFAs
I saw that you are interesting in becoming an administrator. It generally takes 6-12 months of regular editing, and several thousand edits, before you can learn the ropes of Wikipedia enough to be an administrator. Also, it generally takes that many edits before people can "feel good" about giving you access to things like deleted articles, the right to block people, and other tools. Any request to become an administrator before then will almost always be met with a "not now" response and your request will not succeed. Please keep editing, writing and improving articles, and participating in article- and non-article discussions. davidwr/ (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  02:27, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I have your page watchlisted, you can reply here and I'll see it. A few comments:  If you've been editing consistently with the same IP address, you can say so on your user page, then, when you do decide to nominate yourself or you get someone else to nominate you, you can ask that a person with checkuser rights confirm that you edit from that IP address.  This will give us some additional history.  However, because that is so unusual, it may actually count against you more than it helps.  If you want to be an administrator, wait at least the usual amount of time and edits before trying, or your request will almost certainly be shot down.  If you do it in the next 3 months it will almost certainly be rejected early under WP:SNOW, and if you do it in the next 6, that still might happen.  One other thing:  Your edits on this account generally seem inexperienced. The "you scratch my back I'll scratch yours" is not the Wiki way, and non-standard-English punctuation and lack of using capital letters in comments on user pages will make people wonder if you pay attention to detail where it counts.  I'm not saying that's fair, only that that's the way it is in almost any collaborative project, including Wikipedia.  I think with some attention to detail, some good editing, and some good discussions, you may have a real shot at passing an RFA in late 2009, but probably not sooner.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  02:39, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

the improper english and such isnt how i write articles and edits its just for user pages just give me shot man you guys could give me a couple month trial please help me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Southpw (talk • contribs) 02:50, 20 December 2008
 * Sorry, that's not the way WP:RFA works. Adminship is an all-or-nothing approach under current processes, and it's without a time limit.  There have been discussions in the past to change this, but for now and for the forseeable future, to become and admin you have to go through the RFA procedure and there has to be a strong WP:CONSENSUS that giving you the tools now would be helpful to the project.  There are no "trial periods."  The fact that you didn't research this already would in and of itself probably doom your chances if you were to run in the next few weeks, even if you'd been here a year and had a few thousand edits.  By the way, if your RFA fails, you will probably be encouraged to try again later, but probably no sooner than 6 months from your last RFA or 6-12 months from your first edit under this account, whichever is later.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  03:28, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
 * By the way, please add ~ to all your comments, it will be changed into your name and the date. Also, use colons to indent your comments when you are replying to an existing comment, so the flow of discussion is more readable.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  03:28, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Overthrow the admins?
Re: User_talk:Dlohcierekim: What guy? Besides, the admins don't "run" the place, they are for the most part just caretakers, hence the symbol "mop" for administrators. By and large, decisions are made by all editors who wish to participate in decision-making discussions not administrators, but some types of decisions have been delegated to other groups. For example, the decision to block users or protect a page is usually delegated to administrators although sometimes to other groups like the elected arbitration committee, and the decision to protect Wikipedia from outside legal action and to solicit funds belongs mainly to the Wikimedia Foundation. davidwr/ (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  03:44, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

i think the username was The Only Dash

Suggestions
The most important thing that you could do would be to forget about adminship for a while. Adminship is no big deal. Admins are trusted, experienced users with the additional ability to block other users, protect pages against unconstructive editing, and delete articles in accordance with the deletion policy. The road to becoming a trusted, experienced editor runs through improving the 'pedia.

Instead of thinking of adminship, you should look at ways to improve articles. All articles are supposed to have reliable sources as a basis for verifiable information. A good place to start would be to go through the articles listed at Category:Articles_lacking_sources and its related categories and do what you can to source those articles. Some articles are not as well written as might be expected in an encyclopedia. You could go through the articles at Category:All pages needing cleanup and see what you can do to make them better. Cheers,  Dloh  cierekim  04:51, 20 December 2008 (UTC)