Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Optional RfA candidate poll

"WP:RFAP" redirects here. For requesting the autopatrolled right, see WP:Requests for permissions/Autopatrolled.

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, add your name below 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. ~~~~

Suntooooth: July 12, 2024

Suntooooth (talk · contribs · logs · block log · page moves · count · edit summaries · non-automated edits · articles created · BLP edits · AfD votes · XfD votes · admin score (beta) · CSD log · PROD log · no prior RfA)

I'm aware my edit count would likely need to be higher to be taken seriously at RfA, and that can factor into responses, but I'd also like feedback on other areas - not just edit count. The main areas I'd help out in as an admin would be WP:PERM, CSDs, and possibly managing DYK queues. Thanks very much in advance! Suntooooth, it/he (talk/contribs) 22:29, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

• As per the instructions, this poll is intended to evaluate one's current record of activity. For feedback on what you can do to work towards a request for administrative privileges, it would be better to find a friendly, experienced editor for their advice. Looking at some of the frequent nominators at the request for adminship page is one place to start. isaacl (talk) 22:37, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

  I appreciate the response, but I'm aware of all that - I would like to know what my chances are at this moment, I just don't want all of the responses to be "get a higher edit count" when I'm aware of that already. Suntooooth, it/he (talk/contribs) 22:53, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

  Yes, but the poll is also for those intending to make a request shortly. If you're aware that there are shortcomings that would prevent a successful request, then you're requesting that multiple people evaluate your chances when you know the answer already. isaacl (talk) 00:05, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

  I would intend to make a request in the next few months if the responses I got were favourable. I'm sorry if my wording wasn't great in my original message - I was pretty tired last night, and probably should've left it until today. Regardless, thank you for your responses - I genuinely appreciate it. Suntooooth, it/he (talk/contribs) 13:21, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

• With regards to promoting to queue at DYK, you would potentially get a good amount of support from DYK regulars as more admins would be valuable to have. However, you don't seem to have much experience with DYK. I can see that you've contributed to two discussions and appear to have nine nominations. Ideally, you start building prep sets and once you've done that for a while, you know what's important to look out for when it comes to promoting to queue. With your current level of experience, I think you'd struggle to attract much support. Schwede66 23:38, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
• Hi Suntooooth I think you're off to a good start, but need a little more experience before you could be ready for adminship. Don't worry about that, I've been around for a while and I still don't think I'm quite ready for the pressures of it either. You have a good start on content, with a small handful of GAs, though all three seem to be a bit short which is something that !voters might pay attention to. You have a lot of participation in mainspace, which is great, though some more edits to Wikipedia space would be nice. You've participated in a handful of AfDs though your match percentage is about 62%, which is relatively low as most people hope for a match rate around 75-80% or higher. Your CSD log is also relatively short, and people will pay attention to that since you said you would be working with CSDs. Some some more time patrolling might help rectify that. I might recommend maybe branching out to New pages patrol, which is a place where many of our up-and-coming admins start out to expand their knowledge about deletion policy and notability. RfA can be a brutal and demoralizing process, but with the right experience, attitude, and temperament you'll do fine in maybe a year or two. The Night Watch (talk) 15:45, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

  Thanks for the thorough response! I would really like to get involved with NPP, but my new page reviewer request over at WP:PERM has gone unanswered for a little while now, so I haven't been able to start yet. I'll take all this into account! :] Suntooooth, it/he (talk/contribs) 15:48, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

• (1/10) It isn't just the edit count. One thing I look for is the mix of automated vs. non-automated edits. More than 50% of your edits are automated. To me, that's a major red flag. Conducting 260 edits in one hour to change out tachininae-stub (example) doesn't mean you have 260 edits worth of experience from that. You've been active for about a year, but more than 1/3rd of all your editing has happened just in the last two weeks. You've made 13 AfD nominations of which four were direct keeps and among those four only one person ever agreed with your nomination. I think a careful review of WP:BEFORE before you nominate anything else is in order. If you tried to do RfA right now, you'd fail on that just by itself. I agree with TNW above; your CSD and PROD logs are both quite short, and would likely generate opposition as well. You note here in an RfA !vote that the candidate has only three articles above start class. You have four, although two are GAs. Some self reflection might be in order :) Taking everything I've seen so far into account, I'd estimate you're two years away from a solid run at RfA. I don't mean to depress you. You're just at the beginning, with time in front of you. --Hammersoft (talk) 17:18, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

  Yeah, that's a good statement You're just at the beginning, with time in front of you. We all start small at some point. I wish we could all be a bit more encouraging like that :). The Night Watch (talk) 17:27, 13 July 2024 (UTC)