User:Unionhawk/Admin coaching

Welcome to Admin Coaching! King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:35, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD[edit]

I noticed that you've participated in many AfD's recently. A few comments:

Non-admin closures - pretty good; at RfA, they will like the fact that you have experience in closing AfDs.
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/National icon: As you see, in order to satisfy WP:NPOV, an controversial article must present all notable sides in an objective, well-sourced manner. But what counts as a national icon is highly disputable. A reference may establish that something exists, and that some people consider it to be a national icon, but there isn't an NPOV reference that we know of. If there's a list of "official" icons somewhere, still that's the opinion of whoever created the list. Countries do not have an "official" designation of national icons; even if some do, others don't, preventing the creation of a comprehensive, balanced list. Summary: Wikipedia policies are intended to work in conjunction with each other, not against each other.
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Feminist Mormon Housewives: Yeah, people can be harsh (or "snarky," as he calls it) sometimes. Be careful about what you say, especially in important venues like AfD.
Do not mark your !votes as minor. I used to do that back in 2005 (?), but since then I've realized what a minor edit constitutes. Read the page WP:MINOR.

Cheers,
King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:48, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All right. Sorry for not replying...

I figured that NAC would look good on a RfA. It's easy to do too, except non-admins obviously can't close as Delete.
All right. Whatever. Makes sense.
Bring it to AfD was probably not smart, but I think I did the right thing by recognizing my error in judgement and withdrawing the AfD. I'll be surprised if that doesn't come up at a RfA somewhere.
So you mean to tell me there's a cheatsheet for the traditional Major/Minor edits question that shows up on almost every RfA?--Unionhawk ^Talk 16:46, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As you now have some experience with AfD's, you should practice closing some more controversial cases. I've created User:Unionhawk/Admin coaching/AfD, where you can try your AfD-closing skills. Just read the directions, and remember major Wikipedia guidelines and policies when making your decision. (Note: Please do not edit the actual AfD discussions. Write your responses on User:Unionhawk/Admin coaching/AfD.) -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:03, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All right. that'll give me something to do for a while.--Unionhawk ^Talk ^E-mail 23:12, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

July 2009[edit]

Please respond below. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:20, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Just got back from Sea Base. I will get my laptop back as soon as I find my ID card.--Unionhawk ^Talk ^E-mail 22:13, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Own Study[edit]

Since I definately want to study up on my CSD (which I have never been comfortable with), I'm going to try my hand at various things like User:Balloonman/Speedy Deletion Excercises. I guess I'll make a subpage for it here...—Preceding unsigned comment added by Unionhawk (talk • contribs) 21:43, 26 August 2009

Age[edit]

I guess I might as well say right now that I am, as of March 2009, 15 years old. I mention this due to Dendodge's current RfA. There's no way to get around that question popping up in my RfA, per Murphy's Law (and the fact that I have openly stated that I am in high school), so, how do you suggest I overcome this?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Unionhawk (talk • contribs) 18:56, 1 September 2009

Younger editors than you have made admin, and even crat. You would definitely get some age based opposes, and others who will look closely for evidence of maturity or otherwise. Wait 5 years and you could theoretically get 100% support, run in the next year or so and you can't hope for higher than 95% even if age is the only reason that anyone opposes, but the pass mark is usually around 75%.... Ϣere SpielChequers 21:58, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. And Dendodge's RfA above failed (er, he withdrew it) due to concerns of CSD, as opposed to age.--Unionhawk ^Talk ^E-mail ^Review 17:28, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

September 2009[edit]

Um... are you still even watching this page? Please reply below.--Unionhawk ^Talk ^E-mail 17:19, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I was too busy. Now, if you were 17 years old, I would recommend that you wait until your 18th birthday, simply to appease those age sticklers. But you probably don't want to wait 3 years to become an admin. There isn't a huge difference in maturity between a 15- and a 17-year-old, so you might as well go for it. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:54, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More RfA questions! See User:Unionhawk/Admin coaching/RfA Questions. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:13, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]