Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Optional RfA candidate poll

"WP:RFAP" redirects here. For requesting the autopatrolled right, see WP:Requests for permissions/Autopatrolled.

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. ~~~~

NoobThreePointOh: February 5, 2024

NoobThreePointOh (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)

Hey guys, so I've been thinking for several months of applying for adminship, and my contributions, while they're not much have been over 7,700 edits, a good history of reverting vandalism, and creating one article so far (I've already made a draft of another article which might be my second one later). How much do you think are my chances of succeeding at adminship?

• Hello! Out of curiosity, what do you intend to use the adminship-toolkit for, if you were to have it available? Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 04:15, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

I would use it to help me revert vandalism. Otherwise I would also use it to help settle disputes at the incidents noticeboard, or just simply help the community by improving articles even more. Again, admins aren't considered more important than the users, right? I'd rather someone treat me like I'm a regular user rather than simply someone who has more privileges than them. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 11:10, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

@NoobThreePointOh: Admin tools don't make it easier to improve articles or revert vandals. Blocking them, sure, but it makes no difference for reverting. Hey man im josh (talk) 11:33, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

@Hey man im josh That's true. Although, settling disputes at the noticeboard is something the admin has to work hard at, I'm sure. I know that blocking is the last resort that I would go to if that vandal continuously refused to listen, but wouldn't heed by my warnings. Blocking is definitely something that I would avoid in most situations unless it gets really out of hand, then I would need to block the user for some time. Again, if the vandal won't listen even after multiple blocks, then that's when I need to block indefinitely. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 11:39, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

I've already understood how blocking works for registered and IP users. I know that if a registered user is truly trying to make constructive edits to Wikipedia, but keeps making mistakes to the point where affirmative action is needed, then probably block for a bit. If it's clear that the user is WP:NOTHERE, then that's an indefinite block.

For IP users, they can't get blocked indefinitely. If the IP makes mistakes repeatedly where they cross the line, then they may get blocked, roughly 31 hours. More mistakes later, and they'll get blocked even longer. It's hard for me to explain it properly, but I've got a really good grasp at how the policy works. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 11:45, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

The admin toolkit contains some very good vandal-fighting tools, and many admins circle back to vandal fighting after achieving sysop because the tools are so good and so many of the admin backlogs are anti-vandal related (AIV, RFPP, etc.) However, in modern RFA, it is unusual for the candidate's primary wiki activity to be vandal fighting, in my opinion. –Novem Linguae (talk) 16:49, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

• Got any content creation under your belt, such as a good article? This is kind of essential to have a smooth RFA. Also, some recently declined drafts on your user talk page could cause concern for some. Being very proficient in notability seems to be another expectation at RFA nowadays. –Novem Linguae (talk) 16:51, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

  I do wish the only article I created, U.S. Route 30 in Wyoming, was a good article. Sadly though, it's only at a C-class rank. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 18:04, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

  The annoying part is that most road articles don't tend to be at a good article or featured article status, which makes me pretty disappointed. I honestly wish that I was more active at article creation AND all of my articles were good or featured. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 18:09, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

  Noob, in order for an article to be designated GA, you have to nominate and defend it at WP:GA. It doesn't just happen, it's a process you have to start. Valereee (talk) 21:32, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

  That's something I still didn't know about. I always kept searching around Wikipedia of how to promote an article to GA status, and now that you've pointed me to it, I feel like an idiot for not looking even more. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 21:35, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

  I also had another question. Does nominating existing articles (like ones I didn't create) as good or featured articles go towards participation as much as nominating my own articles? NoobThreePointOh (talk) 21:47, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

  You do not have to create it, but you must have significantly worked on it and continue to work on it, based on the feedback by provided by the reviewer, whether it is improving prose, finding more reliable sources or whatever other feedback. In any case, I think you would get more insightful questions to editing different areas of Wikipedia at the relevant areas, for example WP:GA related topics at Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations etc.. you're an active and very productive editor and that's far more important than any WP:HAT or permissions you gain. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 21:58, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

  Interesting. I gotta think of that as much as I can. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 22:10, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

• I don't think you would pass. No GAs will be a major reason for many to oppose- creating one C-Class article is insufficient. Also, you have never participated in AfDs. I am also afraid you still need more understanding of different user permissions on Wikipedia. For instance, you signed up to the NPP backlog drive a while ago despite not being one, and also misunderstood recently how AWB works. I do commend you on your antivandalism, but do 1) improve an article to GA and 2) work on another area such as deletion. VickKiang (talk) 23:02, 6 February 2024 (UTC)