Jump to content

User:CaroleHenson/Admin-in-training

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Apprentice

This is a page to document the activities that I am performing to prepare to be an admin. Please feel free to add comments to this page or the talk page.

Input is very much appreciated!

CSD queue activities

[edit]

Lessons learned / questions

[edit]

1. Don't try to fix a page with significant copyvio issues (Kabul Model United Nations) - nearly all the content was copy-pasted from a Facebook page.

G12 message: "This criterion applies only in unequivocal cases, where there is no free-content material on the page worth saving and no later edits requiring attribution – for more complicated situations, see Wikipedia:Copyright violations. See CSD G12." + from G12: "Only if the history is unsalvageably corrupted should it be deleted in its entirety; earlier versions without infringement should be retained."
vs.
the general CSD message "if... you intend to fix it, please remove this notice."
@Ritchie333 and Lemongirl942: As I typed this up, I became a bit confused. In this case, there was an early version without copyright violations. Could it have been reverted back to this version?–CaroleHenson (talk) 18:52, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
It technically could, but since virtually all of the article is gone, most admins (quick wave to Diannaa) will delete the whole article, as a rewrite from scratch is required to get rid of the copyvio anyway. Also, if you revert to that above version, every single intermediate diff would need revision deleting per WP:RD1 to strike out the copyvio, so it probably makes it less work overall to just G12 the whole lot. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:56, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
Gotcha, thanks! I am happy with the way this one ended out, but that's helpful for future information!–CaroleHenson (talk) 19:06, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

2. Ritchie333, Thanks so much for your feedback on the CSD queue review. I moved them to the talk page so that I could archive them - that way, there is still the history, but the main list isn’t too long. I hope that’s ok with you.

It is seeming that there is not an issue with the CSD tags that I agree with, so it seems like it’s a waste of your time to have to look those over. If it’s ok with you, I am going to stop listing those - and focus instead on the ones where I remove the tag (disagree with the tag and worked on the article a bit, created a redirect, or swapped for a Prod or AfD tag, etc.). Does that work?
Is there anything else you think I should be doing? Or, doing differently?–CaroleHenson (talk) 10:05, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
That sounds like a reasonable approach. Maybe do another few days of in-depth logging next month. What I basically want is a large corpus of material that anyone can look at in about two seconds and conclude "wow, this editor knows their stuff when it comes to speedies". (And provided you're logging the "this is a speedy message" before it gets speedied, people can conclude you understand the policies). It would be helpful to get another admin or two to cast their eyes over the speedies we've already discussed; I don't claim to be perfect and always like to get a second / third eye on things. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:24, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
Ritchie333, Ok, if I understand correctly - just log the items that I question right now - but every now and again add some in-depth logging of the ones I agree with. If it's a useful exercise, I don't mind doing more... I just didn't want to create a lot of busy work for you.
When you say logging "this is a speedy message" before it gets speedied. - do you mean that before I apply a CSD tag, edit the article (like adding or removing a space) and add to the edit summary "This is a speedy message", save that. Then, use Twinkle to apply the CSD? So, that there are two edit summaries for each CSD tag?–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:10, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
No, I mean if are going to tag something as speedy, log it here first. Then if / when it turns into a redlink, people can easily see your CSD was the right call (or, more accurately, an admin agreed with it) Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:15, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
Oh, gotcha.–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:16, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

3. Hi Ritchie333, Regarding Moshe Zvi Segal (Rabbi) - This page only has {{Expand Hebrew|משה צבי סגל (רב)|date=March 2017}} (and a short page monitor comment). Would this be an appropriate page for CSD A3? Thanks!–CaroleHenson (talk) 20:23, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I've deleted it as such. A3 applies when there is no actual text outside templates (ie: an infobox but nothing else doesn't count, a maintenance tag but nothing else does) Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:16, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
Excellent, thanks! I wasn't sure.–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:52, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

4. AfDs that I withdrew - all of which were about non-US/UK people:

  • Dr. Dharambir Agnihotri - Local politician of India by definition - but has a large constituency, so "local" doesn't apply from WP:POLITICIAN
  • Peter Adolf Persson - Had a Swedish article and for Swedish artists being included in specific biographical books is a note of notability.
  • Eline McGeorge - Works in the permanent collection of three notable permanent collections - looks like "notable" equals the definition of having a WP article, versus the larger key museums.–CaroleHenson (talk) 13:11, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Laia Martínez i López - Spanish poet / Catalan language–CaroleHenson (talk) 00:37, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

5. If someone creates a duplicate article about a topic, even if it's a joke or hoax, it can just be redirected to the correct article. Content in the duplicate article does not need to be deleted unless it's seriously defamatory and grossly inoffensive. Came up re: Chandler Gilbert Community College.–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:24, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Tagging articles and AfD activities

[edit]

CSD / PRODs

[edit]
Candidates for speedy deletion Entries
Attack pages 0
Copyright violations 0
Hoaxes 0
Vandalism 0
User requested 0
Empty articles 0
Nonsense pages 0
Spam pages 1
Importance or significance not asserted 0
Possibly contested candidates 0
Other candidates 5

The following articles have been proposed for deletion for around 7 days:
( source / chronological order / expired )

Deletion backlog

This box:
Wikipedia files with unknown source – No backlog currently
Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status – No backlog currently
Wikipedia files missing permission – No backlog currently
Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale – No backlog currently
Disputed non-free Wikipedia files – No backlog currently
Orphaned non-free use Wikipedia files – No backlog currently
Replaceable non-free use Wikipedia files – No backlog currently

Wikipedia files with a different name on Wikimedia Commons – 1 item

Wikipedia files with the same name on Wikimedia Commons – 54 items

Non-free files with orphaned versions more than 7 days old needing human review – 11 items

Requested RD1 redactions – 5 items

Proposed deletion – No backlog currently

Deletion log

[edit]
[edit]
    Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User:CaroleHenson/Admin-in-training&oldid=790568849"