User:Timmeh/rfasandbox

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?

A: At first, I intend to partake in the activities and the administrative areas that are most familiar to me. These include closing WP:AFDs and protecting pages per WP:RPP. I have participated in dozens of AfD discussions, doing non-admin closures on several others, and successfully requested page protection numerous times. Category:Orphaned non-free use Wikipedia files also seems to have a fairly large backlog, and that seems to be another easy area in which to start my admin work. A bit later on, after I get more used to the tools, I will also begin, slowly and cautiously, to deal with reported vandals, edit wars, sock puppet investigations, and other issues brought up on the administrators' noticeboard. I do have some experience in those areas, but not as much as I would like; therefore, I will begin working in those areas when I become more comfortable with their processes and policies. I admit I do need more experience with WP:CSD; I had some incorrect taggings a few months ago. Accordingly, I will not perform any administrative tasks in that area until I am confident I know the CSD policy like the back of my hand.

2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?

A: I think that all my contributions have benefited the encyclopedia in some way, but there are those that I am fond of and which have come to define the best part of my tenure here on Wikipedia. Those include, first and foremost, my GAs. I have significantly contributed to four good articles, one of which is now part of a good topic, with which I helped out. Right now, I have 21st Century Breakdown listed at WP:GAN, and once it becomes a good article, I hope to eventually make it my first featured article. I have also significantly contributed to United States presidential election, 2008, but I have yet to bring the very lengthy article to GA quality. Most of my other edits to articles are solely copyediting, so that they comply with WP:MOS, and reverting vandalism. One last contribution I am fond of is my help, albeit small, to shrink the backlog at WP:GAN, where I have reviewed 11 articles, 10 of which are now good articles.

3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?

A: I have been in several editing...I suppose you could call them disputes. Each time, civil discussion took place, and the dispute was resolved according to consensus. I have always tried to find peaceful methods (not resulting in administrative intervention) of resolving disagreements here, and I will continue to do so if the community decides to grant me the admin tools. I am now in good standing with all of those with whom I have disagreed, provided they are still in good standing with the community. My edit history shows that any conflicts I have had since my first RfA have shown my ability to stay civil and to peacefully attempt to resolve conflicts.

4. Do you believe that Wikipedians have rights? If so, what will you do to uphold them?

A: This question has often been a tough one for me. However, I believe Wikipedians do have rights, including the right to privacy, due process, and the right to be free from personal attacks and other incivility. These rights are very difficult to rescind, except in extreme cases. Regarding what some claim as a right to edit, I tend to think of this as more of a privilege, as it is much more easily revoked than the other "rights". If someone is causing disruption to the encyclopedia, they have broken the terms of their automatic agreement, as I like to call it, with the Wikipedia community. Therefore, their privilege of editing Wikipedia can be rightly revoked, either for a short time or indefinitely. To uphold these rights and privilege, I would of course warn and then block any editors who continually infringe on them. Deleting articles, such as attack pages, would also be an option in appropriate cases.

5. Is there any set of circumstances in which you would block a user without them having received a full set of warnings? Please be as thorough as possible in answering.

A: There are several that I am aware of. These include accounts that are obviously being shared, maybe with a password visible in an edit summary, user page, etc. Any open or anonymous proxies can also be blocked on sight. A blatant username violation can be immediately blocked as well. Also, if a banned user has returned under a new username or IP and exhibits strikingly similar behavior to the puppetmaster, especially if that behavior is highly disruptive, an immediate block may be warranted. I think that just about covers the circumstances of an immediate block without warnings. Most types of vandalism, though, should be responded to with a set of warnings first. I have found through experience that most vandals cease their vandalizing before being blocked, usually after the second or third warning, and even if an account looks like an obvious vandalism-only account, I prefer to give them at least one or two warnings.

6. Have you ever been paid to edit or maintain an article on Wikipedia? Is paid editing on Wikipedia an acceptable practice?

A: I haven't. I believe it is acceptable, but the editor should be very careful to keep their editing neutral, as it could be creating a conflict of interest. Of course, it is not acceptable if someone is being paid to edit an article in any way that violates any policies or causes disruption.