Wikipedia talk:Adminship is not for new users

Comments

Comments welcome, and don't be shy about editing this draft directly. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 23:23, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

self-noms

...and in a few months maybe people will be coming to you asking "Would you like to be a Wikipedia administrator?"

Intentional or not, that sounds like an attempt to dissuade the reader from future self-nominations. Kingturtle (talk) 13:29, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Rewritten. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 21:52, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

timeframe

...then in 6-12 months you will probably have little opposition should you decide that you really want to be an administrator.

Six to twelve months sounds a bit short, especially for those of us who have a day job and don't edit Wikipedia full-time. What do you think? Bwrs (talk) 00:34, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I think it should be less specific: some prolific editors may gain a huge amount of experience in 6 months or so, but for others this wouldn't be a realistic timescale for achieving adminship. Also, "little opposition"? Potential admins are rejected for all kinds of reasons, even though they may be good editors in general, and even for those who are granted the mop, there is often considerable debate and controversy. I think the above quoted statement may give the impression that becoming an administrator is much easier than it really is. Contains Mild Peril (talk) 19:01, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Question

How would you feel about changing the interwiki link on "stubborn" from the Wictionary definition of "stubborn" to WP:IDHT? Saebvn (talk) 23:01, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

metioning

I think this should mention that adminship is not for IPS at all --ChristianandJericho (talk) 14:46, 8 September 2011 (UTC)