User:The Obento Musubi/admin coaching

First RfA

Hi O-M,

I'm going to go through your edits in more detail tomorrow(?) because I like to see what I'm getting into. At first glance, I do see some areas where you could use some help. But before we go any further, the first thing I always ask my coachees is to answer the standard RfA questions as they would answer them today so here we go:

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

A: I intend to take part in blocking IP vandals, protecting pages that require protection, removing vandalism pages on Wikipedia, and participate in speedy deletion. In my experience with patrolling new pages, I've seen pretty disruptive IP vandals, and by working on ____, I will be able to block vandals with the help of fellow users.

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

A: I believe my best contributions to Wikipedia are {{Right now}}, The Carpenters, and my participations in the WikiProject Hawaii Newsletter. I also created Stoccareddo and got it featured in the Did you know? section on the main page. I gave The Carpenters' article a makeover by organizing all of the information and adding citations to the article. I also created The Carpenters discography, and is almost an FA-class article.

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?

A: Yes, I have been in conflicts with other users in the past, although it's become very infrequent lately. I responded in a negative manner to other users in the past, which probably made them lose trust in me. However, I have matured and try to conduct myself in a manner that is respectful to the other user and allows them to feel comfortable when speaking with me.

The Obento Musubi (TOM) you might want to check out my essay on How to pass an RfA. While I don't tell you what to say, I do have some advice on how to answer the questions there.Balloonman (talk) 07:04, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Some getting started points

I am one of the tougher coaches/RfA reviewers. I will not nominate you until I am convinced there is a good chance that you will pass. That does not mean that you will pass, it only means that I think you should! Going through coaching is not a short-cut and not a guarantee.

1. One of my basic principles of admin coaching is that you not run for adminship until our coaching/coachee relationship is over OR I state that you are ready to run. If you run before then, I will most likely oppose.
2. That if you don't want me to be one of your nominators, that you tell me now.
3. The best way to become an admin is to be an admin. Adminship isn't about the tools, it is about the attitude and involvement. Get involved (if you aren't) in adminlike areas. I particularly recommend XfD's, AN/I, AN, Helpdesk, Village Pump, policy talk pages, or any other place where admins participate.

Once I finish my review of your edits, I'll have a better idea of how long I anticipate the coaching to last. My initial thought was less than a month... but right now I'm thinking it'll be closer to two month. I'll give you a better sense when I finish reviewing your contributions.

Getting to know your history questions

1. What does your name mean? I'm guessing that it is Hawaiian, but it looks Japanese? Does it mean anything? Based upon your first RfA it looks as if you are female?

   Okay, let me clear up some confusion. I am a male, although many times, people seem to think I'm a female. My name is composed of two of my favorite Japanese foods, the bento, a Japanese lunchbox, and musubi, a slightly salted Japanese rice ball. Although I like Hawaiian food, my username is purely Japanese.a

2. Looks like you had started a coaching process before. What happened?

   I didn't appreciate the way Gnangarra treated me, because (s)he introduced him or herself to me by saying "Please take the time to read WP:SIG. also User:????? ??? is indefinitely blocked. If you want to be an admin you need to be able to communicate with people and enter discussions in a meaningful way the current signature doesnt exactly promote that." There was no "Hello, I'm going to be your admin coach" or "Hi, I'm Gnangarra". It was simply, "This user (who you have nothing to do with) is blocked, and your signature is bad." I didn't really get much out of it, and I was having a miserable morning that day, so that didn't help either.

   That was poor communications all around. As an admin he should have known that not all computers are configured to read non-romantic characters---and that when non-romantic character's are encountered they often appear as question marks. He could have probably worded his message better. You likewise could have responded differently as well. This case is one of the classic cases that I warned Mbisnaz about when he took over ADCO. He tried matching up candidates and coaches, but announcing on both of their pages that they were paired. I thought he should have only contacted the coach and asked the coach to review and contact the candidate.Balloonman (talk) 15:20, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

3. You've only had one RfA correct? That's all I could find, but it looks like you've considered it one or two other times correct?

   Yes, you are correct. I nominated myself in December, when I suddenly realized I needed lots of work to do. Since then, I think I've grown a lot, but I don't think I'm ready yet. I did consider once or twice with my friend Rgoodermote whether or not I should go through with another one.

   That's what I thought. It took me some effort, but I did find your deleted nom, so I was able to see what you were thinking at one point about a second run.Balloonman (talk) 15:20, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

4. ARGH... I hate to say this, but your interaction with your previous coach might hurt you. It's hard to tell exactly what happened, because of how you converse. But there are several places where it looks like you were a little curt.Balloonman (talk) 07:04, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

   What happened was I didn't appreciate how Gnangarra was treating me. Like I said earlier, (s)he was very blunt in a negative way to me that didn't help me at all. My personality is very "if you do something to me, expect I do something to you". I'm trying to stop doing that, because it's becoming a problem, but for the most part, if you're kind to me or show a speck of kindness, I try to respect you.

   I hope we don't have that problem ;-) You will have to be prepared to discuss that incident when you go up for RfA. Incivility is one of the things that can absolutely kill an RfA. This was the only case that I've found so far... if that remains true, then I don't think we need to worry about it. If there are other cases, then this may be an area we need to work on. On the positive side, I did notice where you were praised on several occassions for your demeanor.Balloonman (talk) 15:20, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

My Review of your Edits

One of the things that I do is write out my raw impressions of my coachees. I investigate their edit histories and write both the good and the bad, that way it works on creating a roadmap for the coaching AND it provides a reminder for my creating a nomination down the road. With that being said, let's begin:

1. I saw a discussion wherein you removed an XfD tag from an article you worked on. This is a strict no-no---as an isolated incident, it probably won't kill your RfA, but don't do it again!
2. I would suggest starting to carry on conversations on the page where the discussion began. It is a major pain in the butt to try and follow conversations between you and other people.
3. Looks like you've had some issues with images. We need to get that taken care of---which means that I'm going to have to learn more about images ;-) That being said, looks like you've uploaded a number of pictures---which is a definite positive.
4. Your userpage that went through MfD, was over a year ago. Bad judgment, but long enough ago that it shouldn't matter now.
5. You have been trusted with Rollback and have two Admins who are already interested in nominating you for RfA. My advice is to have no more than 3 co-noms. Once you get past 3 noms, you start to look like you are trying to overcome a problem.

   Lolz... wait... is computer language allowed on Wikipedia? XO – Obento Musubi (C • G • S) 07:56, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

6. I had to smile when I saw this... take a look at the pages history.

I'll do some more reviewing tomorrow... I've gone through your talk pages with a fine tooth comb... it was painful. As an FYI, most of our communication should occur here.Balloonman (talk) 07:04, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Heh... I remember that! Thanks for taking a look at it. It means a lot. :) – Obento Musubi (C • G • S) 07:56, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

A quick comment, when you add comments in a numbered area, the proper way to indent is to use the # followed by : or "#:" That way you keep the numbering compare these two versionsBalloonman (talk) 15:23, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Continued:

1. Glad you participate in XfDs... and when you do so you do so with more than just "per nom" or "Delete/Keep." You are very much a deletionist. Not only do you tag things for deletion, but I have yet to see a keep vote! This can really hurt you in an RfA.

   I thought of keeping an article a couple of times, but I didn't know enough about it to decide if it was notable enough or not. – Obento Musubi (C • G • S) 22:07, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

2. Good use of minor button... most people don't think to check that.

   Thanks. :) – Obento Musubi (C • G • S) 22:07, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

3. An unusually large percentage of your last 500 edits seem to be in your user space. Try to start using Preview before saving.

   I try sometimes, but then I see something I want to change and I change it, then I don't like it. I tend to be very indecisive, which is something I should try to not do. – Obento Musubi (C • G • S) 22:07, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

4. Because of the amount of user space and talk space edits and secret pages, when I look at your last 1000 edits, a lot of it feels "my space" like. (and yes, I found your secret page.)

   :D – Obento Musubi (C • G • S) 22:07, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok, a closer review of your last 1000 edits has me concerned. Right now if you were to run for admin, I would oppose. It is my impression that you treat wikipedia as a social network. I say this because about half of your edits are to User/User Talk pages (3,883 of 8,898!) I'm still willing to be your coach, but I have to warn you, that I don't see your being ready for admin for several months. IMO, before running for admin, you need to:

1. Pay less attention to your user space.
2. Edit more in the mainspace.
3. Start acting like an admin---IMHO the best way to gain the tools is to act like an admin. This is where I come in. What I didn't see out of you was edits that showed policy/guideline knowledge.

I should also warn you that I am one of the tougher coaches and won't nom you until and unless I think you are ready. If you still want me to coach you, we can start with the policy questions below.Balloonman (talk) 05:53, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Homework Assignments

Assignment 1: Policies and Guidelines

One of the big concerns I saw in your edit history was concern about policy/guideline knowledge. As an admin nobody expects you to know all of the rules, but they do expect you to be able to research the policies and guidelines--show me that you can do the research and navigate them. These questions deliberately do not include links and some are deliberately vague and open to interpretation. If the question is vague, demonstrate your expertise of the subject by covering the different options. In your own words, citing the applicable policies/guidelines/essays/etc (and link to the applicable policy/guideline/essay), please answer the following:

1 Why are the criteria for speedy deletion so strict?

The reason why the criteria for speedy deletion are so strict is because the criteria are meant to be so that reasonable editors agree that the page meets the criteria for speedy deletion. However, should the deletion be more arguable and less consensused, it should be PRODed or sent to WP:XFD instead.

I can tell you know where this is covered in the rules... Balloonman (talk) 04:38, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

2 What alternatives to speedy deletion are there?

There are two, PROD (proposed deletion) and XFD (deletion discussions).

There is actually a third (probably preferred option), and I have yet to have a coachee get it... you can improve the article yourself.Balloonman (talk) 04:38, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

3 What is a "level three warning" and why is it significant?

A level three warning is significant because it signals a cease and desist, and is the first warning that assumes bad faith in the vandal.

It's also meaningful because a lot of Admin's won't block until/unless there is a level 3 warning or higher. It is also likely that if you do block somebody without a level 3 that the block will be over turned by another admin.Balloonman (talk) 04:38, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

4 Under what circumstances can an established editor be blocked?

5 How long can an IP address be blocked?

6 How many times can an editor make the same edit before violating 3RR? Can an editor be blocked before they reach that number?

7 How can you tell if an editor (whether an account or an anon IP) is a sockpuppet?

8 What is "rollback"?

9 What is the difference between protection and semi-protection?

10 An article has been vandalized several times. Under what circumstances can it be protected or semi-protected?

11 Under what circumstances would you invoke IAR? Can you provide a scenario where IAR might apply?

12 A page has been deleted several times, and keeps being recreated. What options do you have?

13 Explain how one goes about changing one's name

14 What types of names can be blocked?

15 You come across a page with material you consider to be highly libelous material on the page. Others don't believe it is, what should you do?

16 Somebody makes a legal threat, what do you do?

17 What are your personal criteria for a potential admin?

18 You are involved in a content dispute with another editor that is starting to get nasty. The other editor then vandalizes your talk page. What do you do?

Assignment 2: Adminlike work

This is more of an ongoing homework assignment than a one and done. I want to see you get involved in adminly activities. This is a two parter. First, I want to see you continue to be active with XfD's---but I want you to start voting KEEP on some. Familiarize yourself with the different notability guidelines and start taking stands on issues that you think should be kept. You don't have to spend a lot of time here, but just a few edits per day will add up over the long haul. Second, I want you to find an area where you can get experience dealing with policies/procedures in an adminlike role. The three most obvious areas for this are the various AN pages, Village Pump, and the Helpdesk, but those aren't the only places. Different discussions such as Wikiettiquette, Name Changes, 3o, RfC, any of the policy pages, etc are all good places to get exposure. I want you to make a solid footprint in one (or more) of these areas. Again, this doesn't require a huge commitment. You can do this by participating in a few of the current discussions on a regular basis and participating on the talk page of the subject. Get involved, let others see you at your best. Discussing policies on an ongoing basis is a great way to show trust and competency.Balloonman (talk) 04:38, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Assignment 3: Editor Review

Another simple homework assignment. Set yourself up for an Editor Review. This is a good place to get feedback from a variety of editors as to what you are doing right/wrong. It is often viewed as a precursor to an RfA. It won't take much time to set up.Balloonman (talk) 07:14, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

I already did, but nobody said anything. Here. – Obento Musubi (C • G • S) 08:14, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Cool... yeah, unfortunately, people are sometimes slow about editor review... there just doesn't seem to be enough reviewers.Balloonman (talk) 07:44, 14 May 2008 (UTC)