Naista pannaan alaston kuvagalleriaThe 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. If a user's contributions to Wikipedia are constructive, many off-wiki issues are unimportant: Unhelpful comments, example: Oppose user was rude to me on IRC. Helping with copyright problems with images is different than identifying problems with new articles, and both are different than helping mediate disputes among editors, yet all three are things that demonstrate valuable skills that are important to an administrator. (See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Example ) XYZ Example: Support This candidate is very encouraging to newcomers, and frequently leaves WikiLove messages for them when they add sources and follow the rules about WP:npov. Unhelpful comments Example: Oppose Silence 01:01, (UTC) Example: Support Pile-on 01:01, (UTC) Conversely, providing a brief rationale allows you to explain your reasoning, carries more weight in the bureaucrat's consideration of the candidacy, and may even convince others to change their views on the candidate. Particular contributions, such as involvement with a WikiProject, participation in various processes such as FAC, AFD and RFA, or discussion on talk pages, can not only give the user experience which will prove useful as an administrator, but. Add a missing address. Unhelpful comments Helpful comments Self-nominations edit See also: Wikipedia:Why self-nominated RfA candidates could be more competent Many excellent users are ready to take on administrator tasks, yet for whatever reason have not been nominated by another editor. A candidate may have a strong opinion on a topic but can be trusted not to abuse admin tools to further their philosophy. If possible, consider the points raised in response to your objection, and reply politely as to whether or not you stand by your initial rationale. BuddingNovice Example: Support - I support this candidate because of their work in fighting vandals.
Chat-seksi kuumalla tyt ll - Ilmainen osoitteessa:.
Palvelu hieronta rimming lähellä helsinki
In short, namespaces and skills are not the same, so failure to have many edits in a single namespace proves very little, if anything. Miss Helpful 01:01, (UTC) Must have 10,000 edits, three featured articles. User:Teahouse hosting is fun! On some devices, you can also add the address of a house or apartment. If they use them even once to good effect, then their adminship has served a purpose. Unhelpful comments Example: Oppose - User X supports, and I don't trust them, so this candidate must be bad. On other occasions, you might find yourself in broad agreement with various points made, and in these instances, it's very useful if you state exactly which points you agree with (and any with which you disagree). 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.
Find people who want to fuck family porn
|Vittumainen liian kova erektio||176|
|Karvainen pillu video ilmainen porno filmi||221|
|Telefinland prepaid xxxsex||There are at least three problems with this type of opposition: First, counts in a namespace can come from a variety of things: a high amount of Talk edits may be an indication of experience interacting with users, or simply semi-automated tagging for WikiProjects. But opposing a candidate simply because they do not contribute in the same way that a participant does, or in the way that an "ideal" candidate would, is counterproductive: it can deprive Wikipedia of a good administrator, forcing existing administrators. You can publicly add places, like a business or landmark, to the map. .|
|Seksi video www seksitreffit fi||It is particularly helpful if comments are precise, give examples and/or diffs, and explain why the examples presented give rise to the conclusion that the user cannot be trusted with ilmaiset pornovideo maria service the administrator tools. Unhelpful comments Example: Oppose user disagreed with me in an AFD debate. GuiltyUntilProvenInnocent 01:01, (UTC) Example: Support This user always adds an edit summary and has never misspelled anything. While it's great if administrators are active and use the tools they have, a contributor who uses the administrators' tools once a month still benefits the community.|