User talk:Jrphayes/Admin Coaching

This page is to be used by me and my admin coach The Rambling Man for the purpose of coaching.

Standard RfA questions

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?

To a large extent the area which I already am most active in, fighting vandalism. Becoming an admin will allow me to protect pages where requested or where it is needed, and to help to clear the backlog of users who have been reported for blocking. I have also been involved in many deletions and would be able to use my admin status to help with this. John Hayes^talk 23:53, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?

I think my best work has been on Big Brother 2007 (UK) and Grand Theft Auto IV. I have spent a lot of time on these articles, updating them with new content, rewriting existing content, making sure that all facts are well sourced; and certainly with the Big Brother and related articles, which had a high volume of vandalism, I fixed a lot of bad edits, and removed a lot of WP:BLP violations. John Hayes^talk 02:22, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?

I have had relatively few conflicts. When I first edited (as an IP user) I initially didn't understand why my work on Grand Theft Auto: Liberty City Stories was being reverted and it took a little bit of discussion to explain to my why it wasn't suitable, but I quickly learnt. More recently I had a number of debates with User:Dalejenkins (for example see User talk:Dalejenkins#Ziggy) about whether certain Big Brother related articles were notable. We discussed them with each other, and with third parties, and in the end a conclusion was always reached (and accepted). I have dealt with any potential problems, by discussing, and if this didn't work in the end I would simply walk away and work on another article, no issue is ever serious enough for there not to be more important things on Wikipedia to concern myself with. John Hayes^talk 02:22, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit history

Okay, first thing I do here is check out your edit history, and then I'll get onto your answers above shortly. My summary...

You've been editing for around a year.
Your edit count is low overall, and shows you currently edit only three or four times a day (for the past few months at least) - this could count against you.
Edit summaries, not bad, have you turned on the Force edit summaries option in the preferences?
A quarter of your mainspace edits are on a single topic, Big Brother. It may be wise to consider spreading across other topics you're interested in.
A lot of editors !voting at RFA will look for evidence of quality encyclopaedia building. My first RFA failed, partly due to this, so I wrote five featured articles. You should consider trying to build an article to at least WP:GA status.
Your Wikipedia space edit count is low. This would reflect in others that you have little epxerience at WP:AFD etc which would lead people to believe your understanding of Wikipedia policy is limited. Some !voters look for around a minimum of 500 Wikipedia namespace edits.

How do you feel about these comments? The Rambling Man (talk) 11:57, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seems all fair enough, no I don't have any preferences set for edit summaries, I just always remember. I guess I will need to edit more, and more in the Wikipedia space. John Hayes^talk 00:46, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So for example if I was to consider Martin Škrtel for GA status, what would the main issues be? No picture, and reference any facts which aren't? John Hayes^talk 00:49, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would set the preference to guarantee you add an edit summary. It's annoying for a day or so then you just get on and do it. As for editing in the Wikipedia namespace, absolutely. I'd hang out around the WP:AFD area, getting into newly nominated articles. It really will help your grasp of Wikipedia policy and will show others that you're an editor in good standing with a good round grip of what this place is about.

As for the GA you've mentioned, my ideas:

For GA no image is required, but a free image either from your own pictures, from Commons or from Flickr (with the correct licence) will always help.
Expand the article and then perhaps consider a peer review at WP:FOOTBALL.

It's a longshot on GA at the moment, perhaps, if you have the resources available, you could really go for it on this article. If not then perhaps consider another article which is currently larger with more easily available sources (web ones) which you can use. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:39, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, as I understood it, even short articles can be considered for GA, as long as they cover the subject comprehensively. I don't think there is much more I can add to that article to lengthen it. I'll look at some other articles which I have contributed a lot to. John Hayes^talk 19:51, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, in principle you're absolutely right, but a footballer who's got some time left, it'd be difficult to suggest his article may not make FA at some point. I'd look for something similar but bigger, and perhaps something where the subject is stable (e.g. a retired player)... The Rambling Man (talk) 19:54, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I could look at some articls I've worked a lot on in the past and aren't likely to change much, Grand Theft Auto: Vice City Stories or Big Brother 2007 (UK) but there is probably a lot to do on both. I'll have a look anyway. Otherwise something like Steve McManaman, though I've never edited it before might be an idea. John Hayes^talk 19:58, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If it helps, the first article I ever had promoted to WP:FA was Adam Gilchrist. I'm not Australian, I am a fan of cricket but knew virtually nothing about him until I started working on his article, so I'd say going for Macca isn't a bad idea at all. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:00, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]