User:Aaron/AdminCoaching

Admin coaching · Aaron

Session 1 - Conflict resolution

Hi, Aaron! Here's a scenario to get our admin coaching session started. Please respond in the indicated spots, and under the section titled Coaches' comments, we will give you suggestions, tips, etc. in response to your answers. Refer to policy pages if needed. Best of luck! (Note: This scenario was copied shamelessly from this page by Sango123 and Banes.)

Two editors, Goo and Foo, are in a heated edit war on some controversial article, like War on Terrorism.

1. You, kindly, try to intervene and mediate between these two clowns. How would you go about it?

• Well, first of course I'd check to see if either or both Goo and Foo are newbies, as I wouldn't want to go against WP:BITE and I can't expect anyone to know all the rules if they've only been around a few days. If either or both were newbies, I'd proceed very slowly and carefully, explaining to either or both via their talk pages that they have a number of options for dispute resolution. Assuming they weren't newbies and were fully cognizant of their actions: First I'd check to see if either one is being particularly more egregious in his actions than the other, looking for 3RR or WP:NPOV violations, edits or statements that go blatantly against WP:AGF or WP:NPA, etc. If so, I would warn either or both accordingly on their user talk pages. But if they're both acting in good faith and just being buttheads, I'd leave notes on both their user talk pages asking them to get together on the article talk page and try to come to a consensus, offering myself as an informal mediator. --Aaron 02:12, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

2. Goo responds negatively to your intervention, attacks you personally, and claims you are biased toward Foo. Do you back off and leave the whole thing alone, or do you reply to Goo and try to reason with him?

• Nah, I'd block him for three months and vandalize his user page to say rude things about his mother. (Just kidding, heh heh.) Simply backing off isn't an option; all that would do is cause the problem to grow and end up in some other admin's lap. I would gently remind Goo of WP:NPA, and offer to either bring in an uninvolved admin to take a look at the matter, or offer to hand it off to WP:WQA or WP:3O (if my own participation was still so minor as to not have yet effected the editing of the page, and both Goo and Foo agreed to accept the outcome of whoever took on the request on either of those pages). --Aaron 02:12, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

3. Foo also starts to grow peevish, and does the same as Goo. How would you react?

• At this point, I think the response least likely to further inflame matters would be to hand the issue off to another admin, and remove myself from the matter to the extent possible. I'd go make a post at WP:AN or on IRC or whatever secret cabal discussion area you admins have ;) , explain the situation and ask for assistance. I'd also make them both aware of the availability of Wikipedia:Mediation and offer to take them through it (slow though it may be). --Aaron 02:12, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

4. Goo calls for an RfC against you. Bogus though it is, it'll make you stressed. What would your reaction be?

• I'd calmly point him to WP:RFC and tell him that if that's what he wishes to do, I'll be happy to participate. From my monitoring of other admin's user talk pages over time, I've seen plenty of editors threaten admins with RfCs over whatever action they didn't like. Out of all of them, I've only seen one editor ever actually file one, and IMHO it was a case that truly did deserve to be filed. (I would, however, also point Goo towards Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment#Alternatives_to_RfC to make sure he realized there were other, far more informal ways to get outside opinions on a dispute.) --Aaron 02:12, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

5. Say somehow these two clowns eventually end up at RfAr (after the first four events), and you are notified by the ArbCom as an involved party. What would you do?

• (I am going on the assumption that in this hypothetical situation, I have not done anything wrong myself, and I have either merely been roped in by Goo and Foo, or the ArbCom is simply looking for evidence.) This one is easy: I'd go to the RfAr page and give ArbCom whatever information it wanted and I felt was relevant. I fully admit I'd be nervous, as I know I could find myself watching people end up voting on the accuracy of false "proposed findings of fact" thrown in by Goo and Foo such as "Aaron has failed to assume good faith" or "Aaron has behaved in a way unbecoming of an admin" that could, in theory, end up with me being desysopped. But complaining about the false accusations would only make the arbitrators more suspicious of me, so there's nothing for me to gain by doing anything other than following ArbCom procedure to the letter and otherwise keeping my mouth shut until the matter was closed. --Aaron 02:12, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Coaches' comments

First of all, I'm impressed with your answers! I especially like the way that you explicitly state that there would be a different way for you to handle the same dispute if one or both users were newbies - I believe that the way a newbie is treated during his or her first conflict, can be very influential on the further 'career' (motivation, attitude, etc.) of that Wikipedian. Your answers to me show a good grasp of policy in this area, and they indicate that in situations like this you try to stay fair and not heat things up, but at the same time you don't run away from them. For now (but that can be due to me not having had my first coffee of the day yet ;-)) I don't see any 'errors' or anything that I would have done completely different, but maybe Mailer Diablo has different opinions about that :-) Just a hint, regarding to what you wrote on my talk page: if you're a perfectionist (I have a tendency towards that too ;-)) don't try to do your admin duties too perfect. It will cost you a lot of time and energy that way, and result in not doing stuff because you don't get around to doing them perfect in the way you'd like to see them in an ideal world. I wouldn't say that to every aspiring admin, since you don't want admins to slack, but as someone once told me: perfect can be the enemy of good :-) You will make mistakes, since every admin actually using the shiny buttons and not staying on the safe side will one day! Be prepared to make them and be prepared to admit them... (Hm, I've been seriously drifting away from the topic here, sorry about that!) --JoanneB 10:02, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

• Your response is excellent in general, and remember that there is not really any fixed answer to this. This is a case scenario of some common disputes, and in the course of editing you will probably meet up with one of your own. If you approach them in a manner similiar to the way you have answered as per above, you should do pretty fine. :) - Mailer Diablo 11:52, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Session 2 - Copyright

This session aims to familiarise yourself with the processes of copyright, and its workings on Wikipedia. Don't be afraid to make mistakes (it's the learning process that counts!), and good luck! - Mailer Diablo 12:16, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

1. One fine day, you were doing new page patrol, and you found a huge unwikified page dump.

a) You suspect that it is a copy-and-paste from another website. What are the steps you would take?

b) You confirm that it is a copyvio. What would you do next?

c) Later, you realise that the author claims that he/she owns the copyright. How would you deal with this?

2. On Images

a) Which following images should be uploaded on Wikipedia Commons, and which ones otherwise :

• You own photo
• A newspaper clipping
• Logos
• A black-and-white photograph

b) You have uploaded an image, but you were notified that it was marked for deletion within 7 days unless the following problems are ressolved. What would you do :

• If the reason is no source, and the image is taken from a blog?

• If the reason is no copyright status, and the image is taken from a website?

• (Bonus Question) If the reason is no source, and it is a photo taken by yourself?

c) An angry message, threatening to sue Wikipedia was posted on your talkpage. He/She gives the reason that images owned by him/her were on Wikipedia without his permission, and wants them down immediately.

• ...if the complain is valid, what would you do?

• ...what if you strongly feel that it is in compliance with fair use?

Any other questions or concerns

If you have any other questions or suggestions, please post them below.

Suggestions for topics for next sessions

• Session 3: Road to Feature Articles, & Collobration - Mailer Diablo