User talk:Dennis Brown/RfA/LuK3
Areas to work on
editWelcome to your mentor page. This will give you some tips for working on problem areas in your own time. Should only include articles from today forward, not anything done before the RfA. We can add sections as we go. Don't think of this as tasks as much as giving you some direction. The next several months will likely mean cutting vandal work in half while we round your experience and education. Even if you go back to mainly vandal fighting as an admin, you still need experience in these areas, as others said in the RfA.
moot |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
AFD Consensus
editRead WP:CONSENSUS for starters. I would suggest you pick two AfDs that are going to expire in a day or two, list the link here, and "close" it unofficially. Lets see where you are at regarding closing discussions. This will be done many times, but one or two at a time.
Set 1 |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Ok, keep in mind, when you are closing, you can't vote or provide your own opinion. Thus the closes must be that, your reading of the discussion, not your opinion of the material. For the first I would have just close as "Redirect and merge any useful content" since there were plenty of votes in that area. No reason to expand or even HAVE an opinion on the merits. As a closer, you should have no opinion on the merits, only on the strengths of the arguments given. On the second one, I would close the exact same way for the same reasons. Again, as a closer, you can't inject your opinion on the quality of the sources. Your job is to weight the arguments, and simply interpret the will of the community by virtue of those arguments. You can not add any extra arguments that were not presented in the AFD, or that is a "supervote". You can't use any info in the decision that wasn't used in the AfD itself. Most of the time, this means a very short rationale, or even just "Merge and redirect". If you are asked for an explanation, and you provide information that wasn't included in the AFD, it will be overturned. Judging consensus is tricky. Try 2 or 3 of these per week, or more if you feel like it. Give your answers exactly as you present them in the closing of the AfD with no extra info. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 02:01, 10 December 2012 (UTC) |
Set 2 |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cook Islands–Czech Republic relations - would close as keep. The article has a sufficient number of secondary sources to keep the article. When the article was nominated at AfD, there was only one source, which was from Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic. It has been expanded upon with more secondary sources. -- LuK3 (Talk) 16:58, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Indiana Jones artifacts - this one is a little tricky. I would close this as no consensus. (I would include this in the closing, just providing the rationale for you) The article has enough reliable sources, however the article fails WP:PLOT. Each artifact should have a concise summary in an encyclopedic matter. -- LuK3 (Talk) 16:58, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
WP:RfC
editNot yet.
WP:AN, WP:ANI
editNot yet. I don't think tons of experience is needed here. Every admin needs to be familiar with ANI, but the vast majority of admin don't patrol it daily. AN should be checked daily for general updates even if you never participate, starting now. All general info announcements for admin are posted there.
WP:DRN
editTime to read up on our WP:Dispute resolution system. Prepare to start working one case per week at either WP:3O or WP:DRN. This will get you experience in mediation, so we can see your strengths, and work on any weaknesses. List each case link below, so I can find it easily.
CSD
editRead WP:Criteria for speedy deletion, in full, at least once every two weeks. You need to be intimately familiar with every criteria, by memory. We will cover not just the words, but the reason for it, and the nuances and exceptions.
Now list 7-10 CSDs here, wikilinked, and tell me what action you would take on them if you were the admin, including the CSD criteria you would use for each. Sometimes multiple criteria are used. After a day or two, a redlink with the same rationale is good, a blue link or red link delete for another reason indicates an area you may need to work on, and we can discuss. I suggest doing this a few times per month, for many different article types, similar to my CSD mentoring. Next week's section will just start below this week's.
Set 1 |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Overall pretty good. I suggest doing these once every 7 to 10 days, with 8 to 10 CSDs. Best to pick them randomly. The goal isn't to always be right, it is to learn, which means you might be stumped every now and again. All admin are, so it isn't a bad thing to say "I don't know". I may ask another opinion on one if I'm not sure as well. Once you have read these, we might hat off each section to just keep the page easy to read. -db |
Set 2 |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
- 1. Category Unknown (band) - tagged for A7 (band). I cannot find any sources that indicate the band is notable, and they are not signed to any label. -- LuK3 (Talk) 02:40, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
- 2. K.G. Markose - tagged for A7. Would delete as such, no credible claim of importance or notability. Article is highly biased, however that does not warrant speedy deletion. -- LuK3 (Talk) 00:47, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
- 3. Grabby Awards tagged for G11. Would not delete it under that criterion, I think the {{news release}} suffices. -- LuK3 (Talk) 00:47, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Articles
edit- Create at least one article a month with more than few paragraphs. List them here.
- 1. December 2012 North American blizzard (current winter storm, will continue).
- 2. Dima Yakovlev Law (DYK)
- 3. New York Safe Act
- List articles you add several sources (and hopefully content) to. Couple times a week minimum.
- 1. Thomas Mann (actor)
- 2. Monowitz concentration camp
- 3. 2010 Indiana earthquake
- These are helpful, but shooting for more in-depth content, more development. Not huge amounts, but adding a couple of paragraphs to when possible.
- List articles you take from being a stub or very small article, to least double in size.
- 1.
- 2.
- 3.