User:Fingerz/Adoption

Howdy, FingersOnRoids, and welcome to Wikipedia. First, I'd like to ask you some questions about yourself so I can see where you could be used to the fullest here on WP. If any of the questions make you uncomfortable, feel free to not answer them and delete the question (or part) you don't like. This is your right, as it is part of your userpage.

Introductory questions

Where are you from (don't be too specific) and how old are you?
- I am from Michigan, and I am currently a highschooler.
  - I'm from upstate New York, I'm 22, and I'm a graduate student in structural engineering.
What brings you to Wikipedia?
- The service that Wikipedia provides is outstanding, and I have used it many times before. This is my way of trying to give back.
  - Ditto.
What are your interests and what have you edited so far while you've been here?
- I have a wide variety of interests. So far I've been monitoring the new pages and adding speedy delete tags; I've also done some copyediting and some categorizing of the new pages. I also occasionally edit new articles that are Wikipedia worthy that aren't very well written. I'm also looking to get into WP:Afd, but I need to get more of a feel for the guidelines first.
  - Step lightly at WP:CSD and always err on the side of keeping an article if you can. If you're not entirely sure, try WP:PROD and then WP:AFD. Resentment from the community can form later if you make errors with speedy deletion.
Have you taken a look at any policies or guidelines yet? They are very important (we will get into that more later).
- Yes, I have.
  - Perfect. Well have a look at my general comments below.

General responses

Thanks for the answers; they give me the opportunity to get to know who in fact I'm dealing with! I have a few general responses you should look over.

The most respected users typically start out as content builders. This includes adding to articles, adding citations to articles, and copyediting articles. You can also take part in new page patrol, recent changes, and wikignome type work.
There are some policies you should skim just so you know what it's like to be a Wikipedian. First and foremost, we always assume good faith when reasonable. It is expected that any new user will be a positive addition to the project until they prove otherwise. Also, we are always civil with each other and we never bite newbies. You seem to already have a grasp of the last two; well done. In addition, we preach being bold because if you're bold, the worst thing that can happen is a revert, but typically it ends up being discussed and at least some content is added. WP:CRYSTAL, WP:SPEEDY, and WP:CREEP are also important (lol, I only discovered WP:CREEP the other day!). Sometimes (not on a regular basis though) we need to ignore all rules to add to the value of WP. But, most importantly, we work on consensus. You may want to check out WP:5.
There is an heirarchy here based solely on trust and wikipast:
- IP users (trust per AGF)
- established users (trust per wikipast)
- admins (aka sysops) (trust per WP:RFA) - there are currently about 1600 (but, on that note, see WP:NBD)
- bureaucrats (aka crats) (trust per WP:RFB) - there are currently 30
- Jimbo and the board of directors themselves
I would suggest being careful with speedy deletion. You may want to start at recent changes, in which you'll need to revert vandalism and then warn the given user for vandalizing (see this page for templates). Improper speedy deletions can be held against you in the future.
I'm very impressed with you already. I'll tell you from experience that there is always something new to learn here. Nobody knows everything about WP and nobody ever will. Take advantage of your Watchlist - you'll become addicted.
Do your best to use edit summaries.

~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 23:25, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Questions from the adoptee

If, for any reason, you have a question for me (policy, technical, formatting, social, it doesn't matter), feel free to post it here and I'll answer ASAP. I'm watching this page, so you needn't leave a message on my talk page to tell me you have a new one. If I don't know the answer, I'll get someone that does to post the answer here. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 23:25, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Hey there, I'm not sure that you still have this on your watchlist, but I'm thinking about going for adminship somewhere down the road. Any advice? FingersOnRoids♫ 23:40, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
- I'll keep it on my watchlist, so feel free to use it in the future. I just finished looking over your contribs and you look good. At first I didn't see much wikiproject work, but it looks like more recently you've been tagging for wikiproject microbiology, which is excellent (keep that up, and consider joining another wikiproject and becoming active in its administration). For adminship, you're going to want more edits, and more edits that aren't made with Huggle. While everyone appreciates vandal fighting with automated tools, RfA voters typically hold it against you since edits are easily racked up with these tools (Exhibit A). You can check out my RfA criteria for an idea of what I expect, but note that my criteria is a bit liberal compared to many. You may also want to do some admin coaching. While this can be done by a non-admin, you'll get more respect than if you don't. I would also wait (humbly, unfortunately) to be nominated for an RfA rather than nominating yourself, unless you can really shine. Check out my (failed) RfA. Otherwise it's a learning process and even if you get the edit count up, many users won't consider a user for at least 6 months after they became active (some feel it's implied thru WP:NOTNOW, but that's an opinion). Some also dislike less than 40% edits in articles (see the link to your edit history below; you're currently above that.) Also make sure to keep up with edit summaries; many people will hold that against you as well. In the RfA process, make sure to answer the questions thoughtfully, genuinely, and thoroughly. Short, poorly written answers will not bode well for you. Also, don't badger people. You may want to start voting over at WP:RFA so people will know who you are when you go through. Even one positive experience can cause an editor to vote for you as long as they know you're running. Any other questions, toss it right here. See list of reading below. ~ ωαdεstεr16_♣T^C♣ 00:57, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

- - And not to be the bearer of bad news, but age is a big deal too. Some people won't vote for anybody under 18. See this current discussion for more information. ~ ωαdεstεr16_♣T^C♣ 01:39, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh. That's a bummer. It is a disappointment that my age supersedes any contributions that I may make, in regards to supporting for adminship. I would think that maturity level would be more of an issue, and that if you can't tell that someone is obviously a ten year old by their immaturity in their actions, it wouldn't be a problem. It is a sad thing that some irresponsible teenage wikipedia contributors can cast a bad light over the entire group. I'm guessing that I wouldn't have much sway over editors who already believe in this? FingersOnRoids♫ 02:38, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

It may be worth a shot still, but you still need some more time and experience. You've only indicated to me that you're in highschool. One could AGF that you're now 17.75 years old and in three months will be 18. By then an RfA might be reasonable. The more time you wait, the older you are, the more experience you have, and the more believable you'll be when you say you're older. If you've released your actual age somewhere on WP though, somebody will probably find out during your RfA and if you're found to be lying about your age, that will most likely kill the RfA (for lying, not for age). But if you haven't yet given out your age, I'd advise not doing so... Ageism is something close to my heart; I'm on a school board in my home town and am sometimes not respected by my "peers" b/c they think I don't have "enough" life experience, yet being in Gen Y, I have much better input on many issues that these same people. I would have no problem with, say, a 15 yr-old candidate as long as they show the same attributes that I expect. Many younger users are more productive and helpful than older ones since they're more computer-skilled. Consider doing some admin coaching in the near future (maybe in two months?). Candidates are much more respected when they've done coaching. ~ ωαdεstεr16_♣T^C♣ 02:55, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

It seems admin coaching is has been inactive for around a year, looking at the backlog, and the fact that some requests have not been handled from over a year ago. Do you have any alternatives? Regards, FingersOnRoids♫ 01:03, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Find yourself a friendly, experienced, and willing admin. Start voting at RfA; you'll get to know some. ~ ωαdεstεr16_♣T^C♣ 03:36, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Agenda

Adoption usually is somewhat like coaching. I plan on giving you general tasks to make you a net positive to WP. They will be small and not too time consuming, but will give you experience in essential areas of WP. Have fun!

Citations

Assignment: Insert a verifiable source into an article that interests you to make it more trustworthy as an article. Insert a link to the article diff below, under Outcome. An article diff is what you see when you click on History of an article, then choose between two versions. It will show what you added compared to what was there before. Just copy the link and place it below. Your citation must be in the {{cite}} format (see WP:CIT below) and must be as complete as possible.

Sources:
1. WP:V
2. WP:RS
3. WP:CS
4. WP:CIT

Questions: Sorry, didn't see that there were questions at the bottom for me to do until now. I've written a few dyk articles already, so do you think I could skip this assignment? By now I'm pretty well rehearsed in the importance of verifiability, and I know how to provide references. Oh, I'm going to be on vacation for the next week or so, so I'll probably be inactive for a little while. ƒingers^on_Roids 02:44, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Yea, yea, no need to finish it. Just ask me questions as they come up if you need help with anything. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 03:00, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Outcome:

Update

Hey, it's been a while. How are my edits looking? Any tips/things I need to work on? ƒingers^on_Roids 22:05, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Gimme a little bit and I'll take a look. You may also want to consider editor review. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 23:14, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Take your time, I know you must be busy with your RFA. ƒingers^on_Roids 15:52, 10 May 2009 (UTC)