omia seksikuvia kiimapillu

If a candidate can benefit the project by using their admin tools for just 10 minutes a week, that's 10 minutes more of useful admin work that Wikipedia gets that it otherwise would not. Third, editors contribute to Wikipedia in many different ways. ReadTheDiscussion 01:01, (UTC) Example: Support looking at all the discussion, and through the editor's contributions, I see no reason to oppose and particularly agree with ExampleJ, ExampleK and ExampleL in their evaluation of the candidate. However, some users do not agree with this and hold a self-nomination to a higher standard than a non-self-nomination. Add information about your business, to update your business information on Google Maps: If you own a business, use. 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. Agreeable 01:01, (UTC) Example: Support agree. If a trustworthy person does not use the tools at all, there is absolutely no harm done. 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. It's appropriate to oppose a candidate who has done nothing in an area that may be considered basic: editing, working with other editors, or understanding something about Wikipedia policies and the Wikipedia community. A high number of User Talk postings may be dealing with problematic editors (a challenging matter to do well) or posting vandalism warnings to mostly anonymous IP talk pages (not so challenging, though still needed). Facfan 01:01, (UTC) Helpful comments Example: Oppose user states that they want to focus on deletion, but they have only commented in two AFDs, and they didn't seem to understand the process.

Naista pannaan alaston kuvagalleria

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. 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.

omia seksikuvia kiimapillu

is different from asking whether they will apply a current policy consistently. If you are tempted to leave a comment along these lines, consider whether you can take the time to check out their edits. 3 StickToThePolicies 01:01, (UTC) Example: Support user has been very active in the debate on our usage of fair use images; even though I do not agree with their position, their reasoned approach shows that they can keep a cool head in a heated discussion. However, I don't agree with 0005 when they say that the candidate has too few edits in the user talk spacewhat has that got to do with being an administrator? There are few, if any, processes, besides editing and interacting with other editors, that a potential admin absolutely must know. There are also editors with many thousands of edits who have racked these numbers up by using semi-automated tools such as Huggle to revert vandalism and issue warnings, something that (while valuable) requires neither editing skills nor much interaction with. There are editors with tens of thousands of edits who have been blocked multiple times, as evidenced by their block logs. 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. For all practical purposes, everyone editing Wikipedia is a volunteer; it's inappropriate to demand a certain level of contribution from anyone. 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. When you edit or add a place to a map, we may take some time to review the info before updates are made. .

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.

omia seksikuvia kiimapillu

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.