User talk:Wbm1058/Amakuru RFA

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Amakuru

Hello

Hi Wbm1058

A very belated happy new year to you, and I hope you're well. I just happened to stop by your page as I was perusing the requested moves space, and thought I'd say hello! — Amakuru (talk) 14:31, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Amakuru! Yes, requested moves is backlogged, as it usually is. Nice surprise to see you post on my page. Sorry, I didn't follow up here, I suppose I hesitated because I wasn't an admin yet myself, but I finally put myself through the hazing four months later and passed the test. So, I just did a another check on your background (as an admin I can see a bit more) and am still impressed more than ever. It's become a bit embarrassing to the project that in the six months since I became an admin, we only have had seven more. So, if you're ready, I think we should turn that red link blue. I would be happy for the opportunity to make my first recommendation at RfA. Given that some of the guys who gave me a hard time there have left the project, and the recent efforts at implementing new moderation of discussion there, I think you would have a lot easier experience there than I did. Best, Wbm1058 (talk) 15:45, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind message. I didn't realise you'd acquired the bit since we last spoke - congratulations on that! I'll have a look through the candidacy to get some more pointers on what the people were saying. And that's fine about not replying before. Thank you as well for your kind words. I would be definitely interested in a run for adminship, it would be a big help with working through the RM backlog, for sure. My concern would be whether people might feel I lack experience in certain areas, such as AfD or blocks. I guess I'll only find that out by testing the waters! I don't think I've seen a candidacy with a profile exactly like mine - prolific in content writing, RM administration, and random WP:GNOME activity as I find it, but not so much in some other areas... — Amakuru (talk) 11:10, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Amakuru, take a look at my RfA (comments and congrats). I said that "mostly I expect to use the move function, when an admin is needed to move over a page that's not a simple redirect", and I've kept to that. I said, "My deletion activity will be limited to speedies, as I haven't been active at WP:AfD, nor do I expect to be soon. Likewise, I have minimal experience at WP:RFPP, WP:AN3 or WP:AIV, so don't expect to page-protect or block much". I've kept to that too. My admin actions stats:

Block: 3 x
Protect: 22 x
Delete: 480 x
Import: 0 x

Just say what you expect to do, and not do much, and point to your user log which clearly shows the extent of your drama-free help at WP:RM. Your talk page and its archives also look good and drama free. I don't have much content-creation work here, beyond my showcase article, which I still need to get around to putting up for "featured list" status. Most of the drama on my RfA was related to my relative lack of content work; I was hassled some for good-faith gnoming activity (some redirects I created were subsequently deleted, because the articles they redirected to were deleted). On the other hand, I see that you do have some featured articles, and for a part of the world where Wikipedia is notorious for its general lack of editors and weak coverage (bonus points for that). I think you would do fine. Just be prepared for the possibility of some unexpected criticism, and politely defend yourself if it happens, while mostly just letting whoever wants to vent do that. But I think that, for the moment at least, RfAs are being watched and refactored to limit the amount of drama there. wbm1058 (talk) 13:58, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Userbox lame

He he, you picked up on the user box thing! I guess it wasn't really the worst thing in the world, but gave me my first taste of wiki disputes, and how you can stop seeing the bigger picture. All the other editors in that dispute have since retired I believe. — Amakuru (talk) 18:00, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, do you think we're almost ready to transclude the adminship nomination? I've answered the initial three questions on the page now, and I've read through a lot of the literature out there on the process. My calendar's probably as clear today and this weekend as it would be at any other point in time, so I'm ready. Can you think of any other preliminaries we should do? Thanks — Amakuru (talk) 13:24, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, either one of us can do it. Let me know if you want me to. I thought you might still be waiting for a co-nomination from Jenks24. I think the timing is excellent right now. See WT:Requests for adminship#Please come forward. wbm1058 (talk) 13:30, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, done! I've transcluded it. Let's see how this goes...... Thanks — Amakuru (talk) 15:43, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Amakuru: Looking good so far! *knocks wood* Sorry I'm not around much at the moment or I would have co-nom'd, not that I think it will make a difference. I wouldn't worry about the current oppose, he is a serial opposer who actually opposed two such redoubtable candidates as Wbm and myself if you can believe that. My only word of advice would be to be careful not to respond to many more opposers (if there are any). It's a stupid thing because RfAs are meant to be discussions, but you will get pile on opposes for "badgering" if you do. Good luck, Jenks24 (talk) 23:26, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Jenks24: thanks, yes, it's been a nice process so far. I've really enjoyed seeing the positive comments, as well as people prepared to defend me on the couple of down votes so far - this is a rare chance to get mass feedback on myself as an editor rather than any particular article or process I'm working on, and it means a lot to be complimented by seasoned Wikipedians in this way. Obviously not over yet, I'll continue answering the questions, and make sure not to badger anyone. Apologies for not waiting for your co-nom, I suddenly got the bit between my teeth yesterday and decided to just get it up there! Your support is much appreciated. Thanks — Amakuru (talk) 11:12, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Amakuru: No worries. As I say, it wouldn't have made a difference and the only important thing about RfA is that it's at a good time for the candidate. And I agree it is interesting to get mass feedback, I've sometimes thought rolling reconfirmation RfAs every five years or so would be valuable for just that reason. For example, I've been an admin for almost four years now, but have no real idea how the community as a whole thinks that I'm going. I get the odd complaint on my talk page about decisions I've made, which I assume is just the norm when you make a significant number of decisions, but I'm not sure I'd even be aware if that somehow grew into a critical mass of people who think I'm doing a poor job. Jenks24 (talk) 10:02, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Precious again

Precious again, your nomination of Amakuru for admin!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:34, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you

		The Special Barnstar
		For making me your first nomination for my recent successful RfA, persuading me to run, and providing helpful and accurate advice throughout the process. I look forward to working with you in adminship in the months and years to come! — Amakuru (talk) 14:02, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]