User:Ikiroid/Admin coaching

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

This is an admin coaching page. Discussion threads regarding my admin coaching are placed here.

More to come!

Please place your queries first. i will try to answer them. I will start questioning later. Shyam ^(T/C) 05:40, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

First question regarding XFD closes

If you offer an opinion in an XFD, and then the nominator withdraws the nomination, is it in bad taste to add {{subst:at}}'''withdrawn''' ~~~~ {{subst:ab}} and formally close it? As I understand it, you shouldn't make a closing decision if you have voted, but a withdraw means there is no closing decision, per se. I ran into this a few days ago in this afd, where I saw the withdrawing statement and I didn't know if I could close it formally or not. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 20:05, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, you could do it yourself in the case of withdrawal, even you have voted. Because the debate has already been closed by the nominator. So I do not seek any harm in it. Shyam ^(T/C) 20:45, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick answer! That helps clear up that part of my judgement for future reference :-) The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 22:32, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Second question regarding relistings

I've read about how to relist AFDs, but when should it be done? Specifically, I just saw this AfD and I am contemplatig relisting it. Although it looks like it was simply mis-tagged as a speedy and it shouldn't be deleted, there are only two or three comments, not much for a fair debate. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 22:32, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

I suppose for nominating an article for AFD for second time, you must have strong arguments. Two or three lines could be sufficient for an article to sustain. But sometimes the article does not match with the style of biography person, the article is not fatual/verificable, neutral, then the article could be proposed/nominated for deletion. If the article is totally senseless or about non-notable person, then it could go for speedy deletion. e.g. Rajendra Bahadur Bhandari may not be succesful if you re-nominate the article for deletion. The article is about a notable person. IMO, it could be marked as a stub-article. Shyam ^(T/C) 06:01, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Wow! I'll try to keep all of that in mind. Thank you for such a thorough answer. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 19:24, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Edit speed

I see you made six edits in one minute! That's an edit every ten seconds! How do you edit so quickly? The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 19:24, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Admins have rollback button to revert vandalism speedily. By clicking rollback button it would simply revert last edits made by a particular user simultaneously. Shyam ^(T/C) 19:52, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I know about rollback (I often use non-admin rollback while RC patrolling), but you tag images very quickly too. Do you simply copy the edit summary to save time? The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 20:32, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, the edit summary comes in the toolbar automatically once it has been used. I use the same edit history for similar edits. Shyam ^(T/C) 21:12, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

The administrative position

What was something that turned out different from what you expected as an administrator? The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 03:16, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

CSD Exersise

Ok then, here are some articles that were really up for deletion. Take a look at them and say if you would have deleted them and why. Exercise created by EWS23 for admin coaching purposes. Shyam ^(T/C) 05:03, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay, this is a test to make sure you understand the policies of speedy deletion. The following are actual cases that I have come across while clearing out CAT:CSD. Assume that the title of the page is everything following User:EWS23/CSD/. You are allowed to use any technique that you might usually use to assert notability (e.g.- Google), but you are not allowed to use Wikipedia in any way (you cannot see if the page still exists on Wikipedia, go through my deletion log to see if I deleted it, and any Google searches you do should use "Subject -Wikipedia" which is a good tool anyway to help eliminate Wikipedia mirrors).

Assume for this exercise that you are an administrator. View the page, but do not edit it (I plan on using these for multiple coachees). Then, return here and comment below the entry in question. Write whether you would delete the page or not. If you would, cite the specific criteria at WP:CSD that you would use to delete it. If you would not delete it, state why, and state what you would do to the page (simply remove the tag, redirect it somewhere else, keep it but remove certain information from it, etc.). Good luck!

Halo 3 trailier

Ugh, nice spelling. Well, my first step was to search for articles about trailers on wikipedia. As it turns out, there are no articles about trailers for films or games on wikipedia. Does anyone really care about a trailer, of all things? Halo 3 itself seems notable enough to have its own article, but this article seems to be a factoid of information that should be in the main article. And who looks up a video game trailer, anyway? I would migrate all notable information into Halo 3 and delete. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 00:51, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Union Millwright

I would speedy delete because the page is not an article, but merely a set of links, and wikipedia is not a webhost. It does not assert any notability, so even if it was notable the page isn't worth anything to the topic. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 06:50, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Webs

Neil Haverton Smith

Here's my first assertion of the CSDs. This one is a clear delete: few Ghits. I checked the first dozen or so and none returned about a gay activist. In order to broaden my search, I typed in simply "Neil Smith," although none of the listed Neil Smiths pertained to LGBT issues. This one is a speedy delete. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 22:26, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Fall Out Boy

Wow. I've heard of this band (although I've never actually heard the band, I'll admit :-S ) on the internet very often, so my initial reaction was a speedy keep, and I'd check up on who nominated the article to see if they were in an edit war over the article or they hated the group. After reading through the article, I went back and double-checked WP:MUSIC, and sure enough, the first criteria states that a band is notable if it "Has had a charted hit on any national music chart," which is fulfilled under #Singles, where it shows that two of their songs have reached the top ten on the US charts, as well as the UK chart. This alone qualifies the band, so my assertion would be speedy keep. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 22:37, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Nathaniel Bar-Jonah

The editor cited G1, but upon an initial examination, I would also cite G3, G10, and A1 (basically G1 in this case). Also, the article attacks a living person, not conforming to WP:LIVING. I was all about to make my assertion until I ghit him, and found this! Notability and Beyond!

Holy crap! Sometimes vandalism doesn't do obtuse truth justice. I suppose this is the trick question of the group, and a clear speedy keep, severe cleanup. As the admin, I might consider deleting and recreating the article. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 22:52, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree with most of your answers. In Webs, article does not contain any useful information to make Wikipedia an encyclopedia as the article contains personal information. So, IMO, G1 is suitable. For Nathaniel Bar-Jonah, I am not sure what do you want to say with As the admin, I might consider deleting and recreating the article. The article is not qualified for speedy. If you think, it should be deleted because of NPOV and BLP issues then consider nominating it for deletion. Shyam ^(T/C) 15:08, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

What I intended to say was that the only and initial edit of the article of Bar-Jonah was poorly worded and offensively unencyclopedic to the reader, so wikipedia would not lose anything if this edit was removed. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 22:32, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion candidate trouble

I found the article Ayappaswami Temple, near Ganesh Nagar, beside KC canal. It needs to be renamed if it is kept (the correct romanization is Ayappa swamy, or perhaps Lord Ayappan) but is it notable? I can't find anything helpful through google, and List_of_Hindu_temples#India does list a large number of temples, although I don't know about this one. Any advice would be appreciated. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 23:44, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

The contents on the article are not sufficient enough to exhibit its notability. So it qualifies the criteria for speedy. Rather than having a seperate article for this temple, an article, mentioning all the Ayyappan temples and describing about Ayyappa swamy, could be created. Shyam ^(T/C) 15:18, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

OK. Thank you! The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 22:30, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Question session

Okay, we start a small question session here. First question comes from the RfA standard question 1:

Q.1. What sysop chores do you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Administrative backlog. Shyam ^(T/C) 15:36, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

In terms of deletion, I'd like to close XFDs, namely AFDs and TFDs. I'll also help out with speedy deletions from time to time. I've spent some time scanning newpages and tagging crap for deletion, and I see that the speedy deletion category is often bloated with candidates. I'd also like to help clean out WP:AIV, but I am not sure about how much time should be put on blocks. (for example, when does one apply a 24 hour block, and when is it 72?) I do not plan on becoming a hardcore admin, I also enjoy writing articles, but the times that I spend around deletion and vandalism (about half of my wikipedia time) could benefit from the tools. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 19:12, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Good, if you want to know about the time span of blocks, you may have a look on guide to blocking times. Some admins consider having a look on block log, how much time has been banned and may be considered for a longer block than previous ones. Shyam ^(T/C) 06:34, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, thank you for the response and the link to the appropriate section. I'm adding it to my userpage. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 18:28, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Q.2. Have you closed any kind of XFDs previously?

Yes, many. I've closed a fair number of tfds and afds, as well as a few mfds. I usually stick with ones that have a unanimous decision to keep or merge the topic, or a near-unanimous decision (perhaps the dissenting voice is a one-word vote). I like closing these debates, because they are often overlooked, especially non-afd debates. I try to still vote though—I don't want to end up being a souless mediator :-P The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 18:28, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Q.3. What are your best contributions on Wikipedia? Where did you enjoy working mostly? Shyam ^(T/C) 06:34, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Wow. That is really hard to answer. Well, I resurrected WP:WPW from going defunct through recruiting help and cleaning up a large amount of pages concerning writing systems. I started a variety of templates, such as {{Infobox Writing system}}, and while I didn't do the most work on the code, I organized the effort to construct it and I've done a lot of work implementing it into articles. The same goes for {{WP Writing systems}}. I got help from User:Betacommand, who used his bot to populate all of the relevant talkpages with the template. I helped bring IPA and Gwoyeu Romatzyh up to good status, and I've cleaned up a variety of pages related to Proto-Indo-European language (see here for an example). I am also one of two people who maintain Portal:Language. I made a banner for it, too. I enjoy working on linguistic topics, although I often find myself reading (and sometimes editing) articles whose topics simply tickle my fancy. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 21:14, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Another question to the coach

What was something you found yourself surprised about when you became an admin—something you didn't expect beforehand? The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 19:01, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I did not find anything surprising as such as I was already associated with admin works. But an admin can expect his/her talk page very active and (s)he has to answer many queries regarding her/his action. I found rolback button a little new and very helpful too. I am going to ask some standard thigs before going for RfA. Please complete it asap so that your RfA can be done before my another break.

Edit count - 6231, 2200 in mainspace, 1712 in user talk, 858 in wikipedia, see here for more
Time since - November 10, 2005, anon editing since August 2005
First edit - 17:00, 10 November 2005
Email enabled? - Yes
Contoversial userpage? - No
Any blocks? - No
Stupid signature? - I don't think so, I'd be willing to change it though
Edit summaries - 100% since August 2006
Civil? - Yes, I hope so
Personal attacks? - I haven't given any, though some anons have occasionally left implicitly insulting comments to me
Any edit warning? - One accidental one recieved
Any edit warring? - The closest thing was this, which was reverted. We worked it out on the talkpage here.

Please fill those things properly. They could be used in your RfA. Shyam ^(T/C) 16:25, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the response I've filled out the above sections as you requested as well as added another part at the bottom concerning edit warring. I will go for an RFA when I get your "OK" on the above. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 21:33, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I believe that you are very well aware of the administrative position. You can go for an RfA now. It could be better if you mail me the answers of standard questions before going for an RfA. if still, you are in any doubt, then please do not hesitate to ask via wiki or mail. All the best, Shyam ^(T/C) 21:56, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

OK, I'm looking over the questions right now, and I'll hopefully get them to you later today or possibly tomorrow. Thank you for volunteering to look over them Shyam, a second pair of eyes is always valuable :-) The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 22:51, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.