Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Optional RfA candidate poll
 | Please read Really simple guide to requests for adminship and Advice for RfA candidates before you add your name to this list, otherwise you might be wasting your own and everyone else's time. Self-evaluation is very important. |
|
Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
This optional polling page is for experienced editors who intend to request administrative privileges (RfA) in the near future and wish to receive feedback on their chances of succeeding in their request.
This page is not intended to provide general reviews of editors. To seek feedback on what you can do to improve your contributions to Wikipedia, ask a friendly, experienced editor on the editor's talk page for help.
Disclaimer: Before proceeding, please read advice pages such as Advice for RfA candidates. The result of a poll may differ greatly from an actual RfA, so before proceeding, you should evaluate your contributions based on this advice as well as recent successful and failed requests. Look at past polls in the archives and consider the risk of having a similar list of shortcomings about yourself to which anyone can refer. You may want to consider asking an editor experienced at RfA, such as those listed at Wikipedia:Request an RfA nomination, their thoughts privately.
Instructions
Potential candidates
To request an evaluation of your chances of passing a request for adminship in the next 3 to 6 months, add your name below and wait for feedback. Please read Wikipedia:Not now before adding your name to this list.
Responders
Responders, please provide feedback on the potential candidate's likelihood of passing an RfA at this time. Please be understanding of those who volunteer without fully appreciating what is expected of an administrator, and always phrase your comments in an encouraging manner. You can optionally express the probability of passing as a score from 0 to 10; a helper script is available to let you give a one-click rating. For more detailed or strongly critical feedback, please consider contacting the editor directly.
Closure
Potential candidates may opt to close or withdraw their ORCP assessment request at any time. Polls are normally closed without any closing statement after seven days (and are archived seven days after being closed). They may be closed earlier if there is unanimous agreement that the candidate has no chance at being granted administrative privileges.
Sample entry
==Example==
{{User-orcp|Example}}
*5/10 - Edit count seems okay, but there will be opposers saying you need more AfD participation. ~~~~
| Start a poll on your chances of passing RfA |
GraziePrego: May 28, 2024
GraziePrego (talk · contribs · logs · block log · page moves · count · edit summaries · non-automated edits · articles created · BLP edits · AfD votes · XfD votes · admin score (beta) · no prior RfA)
Requesting feedback out of curiosity. I don't think I would apply now, but at some point down the track, quite possibly. Would love some feedback on areas to improve upon. I would probably focus on anti-vandal activity with the mop. GraziePrego (talk) 11:44, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- 6/10, if you wait another six months. There will be opposers complaining about low edit count (10,000 seems to be arbitrary number at the moment), although I don't think your actual time contributing will be a concern. You've got just shy of 3,000 non-automated edits in mainspace; probably wait until that's closer to 4,000. AfD contributions look solid, and you've got a bunch of GAs which will please the content-creator voters. You've also got short but accessible articles like TEX14, which I appreciate (I can actually understand the first sentence, which is good for technical articles). But I notice there's an uncited statement there and in a few others of your short articles, which might worry a few voters. You haven't got a lot of contributions in the Wikipedia: or Talk: namespaces, which is my primary concern. If I were you, I'd hang out around XfD venues and RM a
bitlot more, but it looks like you already know your way around AIV and RfPP. XfD venues are good because, even if you're going to focus on anti-vandalism, it shows you have a firm grasp of administrative behaviour and civil discussion. Good luck, Cremastra (talk) 21:33, 28 May 2024 (UTC)