→Carrots3141592: October 31, 2022: 0/10, not ready to make such a request for feedback Tag: Reverted |
Tag: Reverted |
||
Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
* ...rating and optional brief comment... |
* ...rating and optional brief comment... |
||
*(0/10) This is not what I would consider a serious request. I intend no insult in my bluntness. User:Carrots3141592, you need to demonstrate you can follow the bare requirements of reading the links in the box at the top of this page. You have not demonstrated you can do that, so you have disqualified yourself from the beginning. If you HAD read those links, you'd have quickly recognized you don't really meet any of the criteria we normally use to evaluate like number of edits, created pages, previous work in admin areas. I'd encourage you to read those pages and start working towards a better understanding of editing OUTSIDE of infoboxes so you can learn about administrators' work and responsibilities. Adminship is no merit badge; it's a part-time job with high expectations, no pay and little respect except that which you've earned. [[User:BusterD|BusterD]] ([[User talk:BusterD|talk]]) 06:05, 31 October 2022 (UTC) |
*(0/10) This is not what I would consider a serious request. I intend no insult in my bluntness. User:Carrots3141592, you need to demonstrate you can follow the bare requirements of reading the links in the box at the top of this page. You have not demonstrated you can do that, so you have disqualified yourself from the beginning. If you HAD read those links, you'd have quickly recognized you don't really meet any of the criteria we normally use to evaluate like number of edits, created pages, previous work in admin areas. I'd encourage you to read those pages and start working towards a better understanding of editing OUTSIDE of infoboxes so you can learn about administrators' work and responsibilities. Adminship is no merit badge; it's a part-time job with high expectations, no pay and little respect except that which you've earned. [[User:BusterD|BusterD]] ([[User talk:BusterD|talk]]) 06:05, 31 October 2022 (UTC) |
||
**(0/10) My standard response to polls of this kind: Administrators are expected to be able to read, understand, follow, and implement instructions. {{u|Carrots3141592}}, in coming here you have demonstrated that you either can't, won't or don't think it's necessary. You have disqualified yourself at least for the next three years, the time it will take you to check [[User:Kudpung/RfA criteria|these boxes]]. [[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 09:21, 31 October 2022 (UTC) |
|||
<!-- *** PLACE YOUR RATING ABOVE THIS LINE *** |
<!-- *** PLACE YOUR RATING ABOVE THIS LINE *** |
||
INSTRUCTIONS for reviewers: append to the list above your estimate of the candidate's likelihood of passing RfA and optional brief comment |
INSTRUCTIONS for reviewers: append to the list above your estimate of the candidate's likelihood of passing RfA and optional brief comment |
Revision as of 09:21, 31 October 2022
Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
This optional polling page is for experienced editors who intend to request administrative privileges (RfA) in the near future and wish to receive feedback on their chances of succeeding in their request.
This page is not intended to provide general reviews of editors. To seek feedback on what you can do to improve your contributions to Wikipedia, ask a friendly, experienced editor on the editor's talk page for help.
Disclaimer: Before proceeding, please read advice pages such as Advice for RfA candidates. The result of a poll may differ greatly from an actual RfA, so before proceeding, you should evaluate your contributions based on this advice as well as recent successful and failed requests. Look at past polls in the archives and consider the risk of having a similar list of shortcomings about yourself to which anyone can refer. You may want to consider asking an editor experienced at RfA, such as those listed at Wikipedia:Request an RfA nomination, their thoughts privately.
Instructions
Potential candidates
To request an evaluation of your chances of passing a request for adminship in the next 3 to 6 months, and wait for feedback. Please read Wikipedia:Not now before adding your name to this list.
Responders
Responders, please provide feedback on the potential candidate's likelihood of passing an RfA at this time. Please be understanding of those who volunteer without fully appreciating what is expected of an administrator, and always phrase your comments in an encouraging manner. You can optionally express the probability of passing as a score from 0 to 10; a helper script is available to let you give a one-click rating. For more detailed or strongly critical feedback, please consider contacting the editor directly.
Closure
Potential candidates may opt to close or withdraw their ORCP assessment request at any time. Polls are normally closed without any closing statement after seven days (and are archived seven days after being closed). They may be closed earlier if there is unanimous agreement that the candidate has no chance at being granted administrative privileges.
Sample entry
==Example== {{User-orcp|Example}} *5/10 - Edit count seems okay, but there will be opposers saying you need more AfD participation. [[User:Place holder|Place holder]] ([[User talk:Place holder|talk]]) 00:00, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
What are the chances of me getting an adminship?
Carrots3141592: October 31, 2022
Carrots3141592 (talk · contribs · logs · block log · page moves · count · edit summaries · non-automated edits · articles created · BLP edits · AfD votes · XfD votes · admin score (beta) · no prior RfA)
I’ve been on wikipedia for quite some time now, and I consider my edits and contributions to be somewhat “unique”. I’m mostly interested in creating/expanding on articles that involve Japanese politics and government related stuff.
- ...rating and optional brief comment...
- (0/10) This is not what I would consider a serious request. I intend no insult in my bluntness. User:Carrots3141592, you need to demonstrate you can follow the bare requirements of reading the links in the box at the top of this page. You have not demonstrated you can do that, so you have disqualified yourself from the beginning. If you HAD read those links, you'd have quickly recognized you don't really meet any of the criteria we normally use to evaluate like number of edits, created pages, previous work in admin areas. I'd encourage you to read those pages and start working towards a better understanding of editing OUTSIDE of infoboxes so you can learn about administrators' work and responsibilities. Adminship is no merit badge; it's a part-time job with high expectations, no pay and little respect except that which you've earned. BusterD (talk) 06:05, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
- (0/10) My standard response to polls of this kind: Administrators are expected to be able to read, understand, follow, and implement instructions. Carrots3141592, in coming here you have demonstrated that you either can't, won't or don't think it's necessary. You have disqualified yourself at least for the next three years, the time it will take you to check these boxes. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:21, 31 October 2022 (UTC)