A Stop at Willoughby (talk | contribs) |
Phantomsteve (talk | contribs) →Your comment at WT:RfA: RfA advice |
||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
:Had a think over what you said and will rephrase various bits in my RfA to ensure I get more supports than oppose's so at least it can get a bit further than it did previously. Regarding the comment at [[WT:RfA]] I was planning to add some comments to my RfA when I found it had already been closed, so was why I made the comment in question. [[User:Paul2387|Paul2387]] ([[User talk:Paul2387#top|talk]]) 09:40, 14 December 2009 (UTC) |
:Had a think over what you said and will rephrase various bits in my RfA to ensure I get more supports than oppose's so at least it can get a bit further than it did previously. Regarding the comment at [[WT:RfA]] I was planning to add some comments to my RfA when I found it had already been closed, so was why I made the comment in question. [[User:Paul2387|Paul2387]] ([[User talk:Paul2387#top|talk]]) 09:40, 14 December 2009 (UTC) |
||
::Hey, I saw you submitted and withdrew a RfA today. Don't take the opposers' votes personally; there are fairly high standards for candidates at RfA and you just don't have enough experience to pass yet. I would suggest re-reading [[WP:NOTNOW]] and continuing to contribute positively to the encyclopedia, because you're off to a good start. Hold off on another RfA until you have enough experience to pass (see [[WP:SRFA|some successful RfAs]] to learn what voters generally like to see), keep working hard, and you'll be just fine. Best, [[User:A Stop at Willoughby|A Stop at Willoughby]] ([[User talk:A Stop at Willoughby|talk]]) 14:49, 14 December 2009 (UTC) |
::Hey, I saw you submitted and withdrew a RfA today. Don't take the opposers' votes personally; there are fairly high standards for candidates at RfA and you just don't have enough experience to pass yet. I would suggest re-reading [[WP:NOTNOW]] and continuing to contribute positively to the encyclopedia, because you're off to a good start. Hold off on another RfA until you have enough experience to pass (see [[WP:SRFA|some successful RfAs]] to learn what voters generally like to see), keep working hard, and you'll be just fine. Best, [[User:A Stop at Willoughby|A Stop at Willoughby]] ([[User talk:A Stop at Willoughby|talk]]) 14:49, 14 December 2009 (UTC) |
||
:::Hi, I'd like to add a couple of comments to ASaW's. Keenness and enthusiasm are always welcome on Wikipedia, but at the moment, you are not ready to go for adminship. Here are some of the reasons why some editors would oppose your RfA: |
|||
:::# Edits: Many editors would regard a total of 517 edits (including 36 deleted ones) as far too low for a candidate - most would be looking for at least 2000+ |
|||
:::# "Admin" type edits: Most editors would expect to see some evidence of [[WP:CSD|SD nominations]], [[WP:PROD|PRODs]], [[WP:AFD|AfDs]], [[WP:MFD|MfDs]], as well as contributions at [[WP:RFA|RfAs]], [[WP:ANI|ANI]], [[WP:AN|AN]], etc. |
|||
:::# Standard questions: Your answer to these did not show that you actually need the admin tools - as others mentioned, you can do what you want to do with [[WP:ROLLBACK|Rollback]]. |
|||
:::# Time between RfAs: Very few editors would think you were ready for a second RfA in less than a month - most candidates leave a few months between RfAs. There's no fixed limits on this though. |
|||
::: In general, I would advise you to leave it several months before thinking of going for your 3rd RfA. When you ''do'' consider it, read [[WP:PREP]], [[WP:ADMINGUIDE]], [[WP;GRFA]] and [[WP:ADMIN]] ''carefully''! Going through the gauntlet of an RfA can be very hard - I know of at least a couple of editors who have either permanently left Wikipedia, or left for a long while, following unsuccessful RfAs. Being an admin is [[WP:NOBIGDEAL|no big deal]]. |
|||
::: May I just close by saying - keep up the editing! We need enthusiastic editors - and you certainly seem to be that! -- '''''[[User:Phantomsteve|<font color="#307D7E">Phantom</font><font color="#55CAFA">Steve</font>]]'''''/[[User talk:Phantomsteve|<font color="#008000">talk</font>]]|[[Special:Contributions/Phantomsteve|<font color="#000080">contribs</font>]]\ 15:17, 14 December 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 15:17, 14 December 2009
Editor review archived
Since it has been well over 30 days since you requested to be reviewed, I've gone ahead and archived your request as part of my effort to cleanup Editor Review. You may view your review here. Thanks & happy editing. If you have any questions, please message me on my talk page. =D Netalarmtalk 05:07, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
Your comment at WT:RfA
When you wrote this, were you objecting to Triplestop's closure of your RfA? If someone other than the candidate or a bureaucrat closes a RfA, the candidate is free to re-open the RfA, no questions asked. In other words, if you didn't want Triplestop to close your RfA, it can be re-opened for you. Remember that your RfA was closed for a reason, and your relative inexperience could make it very hard for your RfA to be successful. Bearing the all this in mind, would you like your RfA to be re-opened? A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 03:09, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
- Had a think over what you said and will rephrase various bits in my RfA to ensure I get more supports than oppose's so at least it can get a bit further than it did previously. Regarding the comment at WT:RfA I was planning to add some comments to my RfA when I found it had already been closed, so was why I made the comment in question. Paul2387 (talk) 09:40, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
- Hey, I saw you submitted and withdrew a RfA today. Don't take the opposers' votes personally; there are fairly high standards for candidates at RfA and you just don't have enough experience to pass yet. I would suggest re-reading WP:NOTNOW and continuing to contribute positively to the encyclopedia, because you're off to a good start. Hold off on another RfA until you have enough experience to pass (see some successful RfAs to learn what voters generally like to see), keep working hard, and you'll be just fine. Best, A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 14:49, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
- Hi, I'd like to add a couple of comments to ASaW's. Keenness and enthusiasm are always welcome on Wikipedia, but at the moment, you are not ready to go for adminship. Here are some of the reasons why some editors would oppose your RfA:
- Edits: Many editors would regard a total of 517 edits (including 36 deleted ones) as far too low for a candidate - most would be looking for at least 2000+
- "Admin" type edits: Most editors would expect to see some evidence of SD nominations, PRODs, AfDs, MfDs, as well as contributions at RfAs, ANI, AN, etc.
- Standard questions: Your answer to these did not show that you actually need the admin tools - as others mentioned, you can do what you want to do with Rollback.
- Time between RfAs: Very few editors would think you were ready for a second RfA in less than a month - most candidates leave a few months between RfAs. There's no fixed limits on this though.
- In general, I would advise you to leave it several months before thinking of going for your 3rd RfA. When you do consider it, read WP:PREP, WP:ADMINGUIDE, WP;GRFA and WP:ADMIN carefully! Going through the gauntlet of an RfA can be very hard - I know of at least a couple of editors who have either permanently left Wikipedia, or left for a long while, following unsuccessful RfAs. Being an admin is no big deal.
- May I just close by saying - keep up the editing! We need enthusiastic editors - and you certainly seem to be that! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 15:17, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
- Hi, I'd like to add a couple of comments to ASaW's. Keenness and enthusiasm are always welcome on Wikipedia, but at the moment, you are not ready to go for adminship. Here are some of the reasons why some editors would oppose your RfA:
- Hey, I saw you submitted and withdrew a RfA today. Don't take the opposers' votes personally; there are fairly high standards for candidates at RfA and you just don't have enough experience to pass yet. I would suggest re-reading WP:NOTNOW and continuing to contribute positively to the encyclopedia, because you're off to a good start. Hold off on another RfA until you have enough experience to pass (see some successful RfAs to learn what voters generally like to see), keep working hard, and you'll be just fine. Best, A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 14:49, 14 December 2009 (UTC)