advertentie seks

mainspace (article editing user talk space (user interaction and talk space (working constructively with other editors for example. There are editors with tens of thousands of edits who have been blocked multiple times, as evidenced by their block logs. It is not designed to judge whether a potential administrator holds the correct view on a controversial issuewhich is different from asking whether they will apply a current policy consistently. Sometimes a candidate receives opposition based on the balance of edits between the various namespaces. 4 KeepACoolHead 01:01, (UTC) User is X edit If a user can't change something, it is almost never helpful to bring it into a discussion. Criticisms should be constructive and polite. Unhelpful comments Helpful comments Example: Oppose - The candidate nominates obviously-notable articles, such as ABC for deletion.

MyWOT Overall reputation Unknown Trustworthiness Unknown Privacy Unknown Child safety Unknown Google Safe Browsing Website status Safe Status ok User reviews Reputation Unknown 0 positive 1 negative. However, I don't agree with 0005 when they say that the geile huisvrouwen zoeken sex candidate has too few edits in the user talk spacewhat has that got to do with being an administrator? It seems that traffic on this site is too low to be displayed, sorry. Edit Sometimes, a user has already expressed your exact thoughts on an RfA, and in these cases it's reasonable to state that you fully agree with them. On the other hand, some editors are the type who do not save every little change or two that they make to an article and only actually save their work on Wikipedia after completely finishing all of the work that they planned on doing. The question posed with every RfA is "Can this user be trusted with the administrator tools?" Making a decision whether to trust an unfamiliar candidate is often difficult. For example, many administrators with opinions which could be described as " inclusionist " or " deletionist " only make deletions in the most obvious and uncontroversial of cases, where reasonable editors are highly unlikely to disagree with their actions. Logicalandcoherent 01:01, (UTC) Example: Support in addition to the points raised by XYZ above, this user also has a demonstrated history of content contributions. Edit Users often gain useful experience as they rack up edits. Offended 01:01, (UTC example: Support. 7 StraightFace 01:01, (UTC) Example: Support user is from Wisconsin, and has been the core of the Wisconsin WikiProject, helping new users 8 and initiating discussions on policies. BoardInLondon 01:01, (UTC example: Support in addition to their great work on Wikipedia, the user has an exemplary record as an administrator on ThisProminentSite.

Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in adminship discussions



advertentie seks