← :: RfA
IF YOU ARE READING THIS PAGE: You likely found this page by reviewing by edit history, and if so please take no specific note of this page, and don't be concerned that I'm Hat Collecting or anything else. Also significant activity on this page doesn't indicate that I'm planning or will be seeking nomination anytime soon. If you check the edit history this page has been in place since 2011 - I just do housecleaning on it from time to time and it keeps a nice log of that I've been up to, things I'm proud, or not so proud of.... I have been approached multiple times about an RfA, which I haven't felt ready for. I finally created this page to help myself keep track of various things I want to make sure I'm ready for before accepting a nom from various existing admins. I am honored by the requests from admins, but I'm not ready today...but maybe tomorrow... |
The idea of an RfA came with this message on my talk page recently:
“ | Just looked over your edits. You appear to have the right attitude. You should have the extra tools. I can nominate you if you like. You can contact me on my talkpage or by email. SilkTork * Tea time 11:39, 25 May 2011 (UTC) | ” |
As of November 2015, processed 824 account creation requests, approved 532. Full stats here. A top 15 active account creator, and top 31 all time [1]
I spend a good deal of time when I am online monitoring and contributing on the helpdesk. I believe that it is very important to help develop our newer Wikipedians. I am always thrilled to hear from people asking for help before jumping into the deep end. There I would say the majority of questions I answer have to do with COI/YFA/OR;
I also have been helping out part time on the helpdesk IRC.
I actively involve myself in contributing to page move requests and non-admin closing discussions when appropriate.
Obviously delete tools would be helpful to avoid requesting a CSD#G6 for more complicated moves. Additionally there have been some G6 page moves slip through the cracks because of the delay between the G6 and actual deletion, and the current inconsistency between how the deleting handles the G6 -- that is, some will do all of the post-move cleanup, and others will just delete the requested page (which might result it might be hours or days before I see it again to wrap up the move.) As of 2021 it appears that there is a new role called WP:PAGEMOVER which resolve the majority of the times an admin is needed for a move to be performed.
This move request was complicated due to the way the organization renamed two different cups, the resolution was this interesting page move/redirect rework documented here User_talk:Tiggerjay#Women.27s_CEV_Top_Teams_Cup
This was an interesting closure, where an interested editor was offended, perhaps assume a bit of bad faith and we hashed it out on my talk page to a satisfactory result.
This was a case of an editor who thought the move request was performed improperly and requested a move review. All three who participated in the review endorsed by closure of this RM and encouraged the requester to consider relisting the RM, but to date the requester hasn't done anything.
Prior to consensus, user Deltasim ( talk · contribs) copy-paste moved the page, but later, since there was eventually consensus on the talk page, the copy-past move was cleaned up with {{ Copied}} tags by me in order to complete this RM and retain proper page history and attribution.
After a contentious discussion over the move for Kim Davis that I closed, a very involved editor opened a Move Review which resulted in an 'endorse close'. [2]
A currently ongoing discussion about creating a primary redirect for Gladstone. Was closed by a non-admin, who through my request, reverted their closure. Among the editors it appears some have forgotten WP:DETERMINEPRIMARY which defines what it's a criteria for determining PRIMARY.
Thanks to Twinkle, my CSD Noms can be found:
You can view my AfD !voting at: [3] As of November 2015, the number of AfD's where my vote didn't match result: 6.5%
Since we're looking at statics, a look over at my !voting for RfA and I found that only two of my votes didn't align with the final results.
Who doesn't love Britney Spears -- okay perhaps a lot of us don't :) But I was asked to help with this dispute regarding specific discography numbers. This was a very contentious discussions, so I created the subpage to work with several admins to resolve the issue. In the end, everyone involved in the dispute accepted the results of this team. Tiggerjay ( talk) 00:52, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
This was a talkpage diaglog with a very POV pushing editor and the various discussions which took place to help bring this editor into a constructive place. Tiggerjay ( talk) 00:52, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
for User:Dhoom4 - major rework with user to create a WP acceptable article.
A select list of projects I contribute to:
The following is a selection of SOME of the pages I have created.
These pages were not created as part of the Requested Move process
Here is a brief selection of pages which I provided MAJOR contributions to:
I am not super active with BLP (~5% of all main space edits), with the majority of my edits coming as the result of other project activity such as Helpdesk & COI (as well as previously from Counter vandalism)
See: [9]
Counter vandalism was the first place I started to really contribute to the project outside of content creation/editing - I was the target to vandalism several times, and eventually by page was by an admin...
Some silly encounters include:
However since 2013/14 is has really become a very minor activity for me, instead I've been focusing on more constructive, positive efforts in the community, and leaving the dirty work to those really interested in it. I found it was affecting my AGF approach to other editors. A lot of automated edits come from here, but that percentage is quickly falling. [10]
Edit countitis is a dangerous thing... However I know some people look at edit counts as the experience of an editor. You'll see my numbers have dropped since I stopped CVI activity, but you can see, aside from 2014, by annual edit counts are pretty stable.
Because during an RfA, people work very hard to dig up mistakes or other errors, here is a journal of mistakes I have made in the past... The goal isn't to avoid mistakes, but to learn on how to manage those mistakes well and to learn from them.
It's always good to know where conflict has come up and how it is dealt with, here are some examples of recent conflict that I believe illustrates how I resolve contentious issues:
{{Relisting}}
for page moves and if it is an administrative function, who should be able to relist, and if that relister subsequently votes, it is seen as a
WP:SUPERVOTE. Consensus as of
this edit revision to be about 50/50 split between the two viewpoints.I have participated in the 2013 and 2015 RfC for RfA Reform. Overall my views have maintained fairly consistent between the two reform attempts with the exception of the idea of breaking out the tools and a probationary period. I am currently against both of those proposals.
I believe we have a very good process currently, and these reforms are just the natural requirement to make things even better. See the links for the diffs involving my edits which explain by viewpoints in context. Please feel free to ask questions on any of these:
It is also interesting to see how far we have come since this 2005 RfA.
← :: RfA
IF YOU ARE READING THIS PAGE: You likely found this page by reviewing by edit history, and if so please take no specific note of this page, and don't be concerned that I'm Hat Collecting or anything else. Also significant activity on this page doesn't indicate that I'm planning or will be seeking nomination anytime soon. If you check the edit history this page has been in place since 2011 - I just do housecleaning on it from time to time and it keeps a nice log of that I've been up to, things I'm proud, or not so proud of.... I have been approached multiple times about an RfA, which I haven't felt ready for. I finally created this page to help myself keep track of various things I want to make sure I'm ready for before accepting a nom from various existing admins. I am honored by the requests from admins, but I'm not ready today...but maybe tomorrow... |
The idea of an RfA came with this message on my talk page recently:
“ | Just looked over your edits. You appear to have the right attitude. You should have the extra tools. I can nominate you if you like. You can contact me on my talkpage or by email. SilkTork * Tea time 11:39, 25 May 2011 (UTC) | ” |
As of November 2015, processed 824 account creation requests, approved 532. Full stats here. A top 15 active account creator, and top 31 all time [1]
I spend a good deal of time when I am online monitoring and contributing on the helpdesk. I believe that it is very important to help develop our newer Wikipedians. I am always thrilled to hear from people asking for help before jumping into the deep end. There I would say the majority of questions I answer have to do with COI/YFA/OR;
I also have been helping out part time on the helpdesk IRC.
I actively involve myself in contributing to page move requests and non-admin closing discussions when appropriate.
Obviously delete tools would be helpful to avoid requesting a CSD#G6 for more complicated moves. Additionally there have been some G6 page moves slip through the cracks because of the delay between the G6 and actual deletion, and the current inconsistency between how the deleting handles the G6 -- that is, some will do all of the post-move cleanup, and others will just delete the requested page (which might result it might be hours or days before I see it again to wrap up the move.) As of 2021 it appears that there is a new role called WP:PAGEMOVER which resolve the majority of the times an admin is needed for a move to be performed.
This move request was complicated due to the way the organization renamed two different cups, the resolution was this interesting page move/redirect rework documented here User_talk:Tiggerjay#Women.27s_CEV_Top_Teams_Cup
This was an interesting closure, where an interested editor was offended, perhaps assume a bit of bad faith and we hashed it out on my talk page to a satisfactory result.
This was a case of an editor who thought the move request was performed improperly and requested a move review. All three who participated in the review endorsed by closure of this RM and encouraged the requester to consider relisting the RM, but to date the requester hasn't done anything.
Prior to consensus, user Deltasim ( talk · contribs) copy-paste moved the page, but later, since there was eventually consensus on the talk page, the copy-past move was cleaned up with {{ Copied}} tags by me in order to complete this RM and retain proper page history and attribution.
After a contentious discussion over the move for Kim Davis that I closed, a very involved editor opened a Move Review which resulted in an 'endorse close'. [2]
A currently ongoing discussion about creating a primary redirect for Gladstone. Was closed by a non-admin, who through my request, reverted their closure. Among the editors it appears some have forgotten WP:DETERMINEPRIMARY which defines what it's a criteria for determining PRIMARY.
Thanks to Twinkle, my CSD Noms can be found:
You can view my AfD !voting at: [3] As of November 2015, the number of AfD's where my vote didn't match result: 6.5%
Since we're looking at statics, a look over at my !voting for RfA and I found that only two of my votes didn't align with the final results.
Who doesn't love Britney Spears -- okay perhaps a lot of us don't :) But I was asked to help with this dispute regarding specific discography numbers. This was a very contentious discussions, so I created the subpage to work with several admins to resolve the issue. In the end, everyone involved in the dispute accepted the results of this team. Tiggerjay ( talk) 00:52, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
This was a talkpage diaglog with a very POV pushing editor and the various discussions which took place to help bring this editor into a constructive place. Tiggerjay ( talk) 00:52, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
for User:Dhoom4 - major rework with user to create a WP acceptable article.
A select list of projects I contribute to:
The following is a selection of SOME of the pages I have created.
These pages were not created as part of the Requested Move process
Here is a brief selection of pages which I provided MAJOR contributions to:
I am not super active with BLP (~5% of all main space edits), with the majority of my edits coming as the result of other project activity such as Helpdesk & COI (as well as previously from Counter vandalism)
See: [9]
Counter vandalism was the first place I started to really contribute to the project outside of content creation/editing - I was the target to vandalism several times, and eventually by page was by an admin...
Some silly encounters include:
However since 2013/14 is has really become a very minor activity for me, instead I've been focusing on more constructive, positive efforts in the community, and leaving the dirty work to those really interested in it. I found it was affecting my AGF approach to other editors. A lot of automated edits come from here, but that percentage is quickly falling. [10]
Edit countitis is a dangerous thing... However I know some people look at edit counts as the experience of an editor. You'll see my numbers have dropped since I stopped CVI activity, but you can see, aside from 2014, by annual edit counts are pretty stable.
Because during an RfA, people work very hard to dig up mistakes or other errors, here is a journal of mistakes I have made in the past... The goal isn't to avoid mistakes, but to learn on how to manage those mistakes well and to learn from them.
It's always good to know where conflict has come up and how it is dealt with, here are some examples of recent conflict that I believe illustrates how I resolve contentious issues:
{{Relisting}}
for page moves and if it is an administrative function, who should be able to relist, and if that relister subsequently votes, it is seen as a
WP:SUPERVOTE. Consensus as of
this edit revision to be about 50/50 split between the two viewpoints.I have participated in the 2013 and 2015 RfC for RfA Reform. Overall my views have maintained fairly consistent between the two reform attempts with the exception of the idea of breaking out the tools and a probationary period. I am currently against both of those proposals.
I believe we have a very good process currently, and these reforms are just the natural requirement to make things even better. See the links for the diffs involving my edits which explain by viewpoints in context. Please feel free to ask questions on any of these:
It is also interesting to see how far we have come since this 2005 RfA.