Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/New questions

The following four questions were proposed by TenOfAllTrades on May 9, 2010 on Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship. 

The rationale was shortened when they were copied here by Maurreen.

The first questions are meant to elicit a wikibiographical sketch, a thumbnail view of the candidates strengths, weaknesses, abilities, and interests. I'm going to paraphrase them, and tweak their sense just a bit.
 * 1) Why do you want the bit, and why should we give it to you? Tell us about the tasks you'd like to perform.  Show us how you've been involved in the related processes already, and demonstrate that you have a Clue about relevant policies and practices.
 * 2) What's some good work you've done on the project? Show us some stuff that you're proud of. Demonstrate that you 'get' what Wikipedia is trying to accomplish.  You don't have to have written reams of text, but you do have to show that you've made our articles better.
 * 3) How do you deal with conflict? If you actually ever use your bit to accomplish anything, you're going to step on someone's toes at some point. Even if you don't use your bit, you're still going to step on someone's toes at some point.  Has this happened in the past, and how have you dealt with it?  (We're going to find out during the RfA, so you might as well come clean now about any skeletons.)  In conflicts where you're not a central party, does your input and participation tend to make things better or worse?

We're missing one of the most important traits in any potential (or extant) administrator. We want people who are conscious of the limits of their knowledge and experience, and who will look before they leap, but we don't want admins who are too fearful to ever take any action.
 * What do you do when you don't know what to do? How do you locate relevant policy pages for your own reference? Can you tell us about any times when you've screwed up, and what you did to remedy the situation?  (Will there be anyone who gives us a less flattering portrait of your behaviour?)  Have you contributed to (asked or answered questions at) the Village Pump, the Help Desk, the Administrators' Noticeboard, the talk pages of policies and guidelines, or the talk pages of other editors?

Contentious question
Rationale: The Huggle-wielding mole-whacking vandal-blocking admins are absolutely essential to the project, but they shouldn't be treated as more valuable or indispensable than the admins who have a lower edit rate but deal with more nuanced issues of content and conduct (from management of complex, Arbcom-mandated probations and paroles to image-use and copyright problem solving).
 * What automated tools – e.g. Twinkle and Huggle – do you use regularly in your editing? What fraction of your edits are made using these tools, and what tasks do you usually perform with them?

Current standard questions
The current questions are below. On the RFA page, these are indicated as optional. But some editors believe that !votes sometimes penalize nominees for not answering the questions.


 * 1) What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
 * 2) What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
 * 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?