Wikipedia:Admin coaching/Coaching methods
historical reference. . Either the page is no longer relevant or consensus on its purpose has become unclear. To revive discussion, seek broader input via a forum such as the village pump |
| Quicklinks (edit) |
|---|
|
This page is a place where admin coaches can find and share approaches, methods, exercises, resources, tips, and advice on coaching. You are welcome to use any techniques listed, add your own, or comment on the existing ones. This should be particularly helpful for new coaches who aren't sure what to do with their students, or for coaches who are looking for different ways of approaching the coaching process. As with all things on Wikipedia, this page will best grow with collaboration, so feel free to share even the smallest of hints with your fellow coaches!
Preliminaries
Before you take on a student, it may be a good idea to cover your conditions first...
Here's a sample invitation:
Hello. I noticed your request for a coach over at Admin coaching, and I'm available. If you do not currently have an admin coach, I would be glad to be your coach. I do have a few of conditions though, and they are that you...
- watch your coaching page closely, and reply to every post there in a timely fashion
- fill in all of your edit summaries (if you find yourself forgetting, there's a setting in "my preferences" that will remind you)
- complete all the assignments you are given to the best of your ability. If you have trouble with an assignment, by all means, let me know, so we can discuss possible solutions and alternatives.
- don't go for your RfA or accept an RfA nomination except from me - I will nominate you when I believe you are ready
Please let me know if you agree, and we can get started.
I look forward to your reply.
(signature)
The reasons for the RfA condition above are to reduce load on the RfA process, and to save the student from an unnecessarily agonizing experience. RfA can feel a lot like a firing squad (I'm guessing here). Failed RfA's often affect subsequent RfA attempts, and so it's best to avoid them if possible. The whole process is likely to go much smoother and be much more enjoyable for the nominee if he is ready for the mop and meets the community's qualifications for adminship before he accepts an RfA nomination. If he waits until he is sufficiently trained, in your opinion it will save him and you, undue embarrassment. It will also provide you with the opportunity to nominate or co-nominate your students. The Transhumanist 18:05, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Tutorial template
The tutorials template at the right is a resource your students may find helpful. You could place it on a student's talk page, or on the student's coaching page, or both. Simple copy and paste this code to the page you want it displayed on: {{tutorials}}.
Analyse your students' contributions
One approach is to look over your students' contributions and make recommendations on how they can improve.
Involving your students in the process improves the flow of creative ideas. You could have them analyse themselves, each other, and you. Teaching them about contribs and edit counters, etc., if they don't already know, is also a good idea.
The Transhumanist 18:05, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Some assignments you can give your students
Another approach is to base the tasks you give your students on their experience level and to focus on areas in which they need more exposure. Some examples of student assignments are:
- "Sign up at Wikipedia:Editor review"
- (If they have enough editing experience under their belt): "Proofread the pages on the Wikipedia:List of policies."
If you provide assignments to edit articles or instructions pages, you may need to watch your students very closely to coach them every step of the way. Your feedback is extremely relevant in these cases. And keep in mind that you are indirectly responsible for whatever happens to the pages you have them work on. 
The Transhumanist 18:05, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Asking the default RfA questions
While admin coaching isn't necessarily about helping your coachee pass an RfA, asking them the three default questions for RfAs are often a good technique for finding out more about your student, why they want to become an administrator, what it is that they do on Wikipedia, etc.. I've often used these questions near the beginning of the coaching, mostly so I can get to know the student a bit better. So you don't have to go searching for them, the default questions are:
- 1. What sysop chores do you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Wikipedia backlog and Category:Administrative backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.
- 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
- 3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
EWS23 (Leave me a message!) 01:20, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Speedy deletion exercise
The following is a test
Assume for this exercise that you are an administrator. View the page, but do not edit it. Then, return to your coaching page and comment on each entry in question. Write whether you would delete the page or not. If you would, cite the specific criteria at
P.S.- In real cases, you should ALWAYS check the page history before making a decision. Sometimes the page is a legitimate article that got vandalized, or page moved, etc. In these cases, the page history won't tell you anything, but remember that in real cases the page history is important.
The Four Phase System
The four phase system developed by Malinaccier is designed to maximize the benefits of admin coaching by discovering strengths and weaknesses more efficiently and effectively.
- Phase one deals with questions designed to let the coach know what the coachee's best contributions are, and what their general strengths and weaknesses are. This phase is also very important in developing a nomination statement.
- Phase two is all about policy. The admin coach will ask several series of questions dealing with policy, or will give lectures or advice based on administration. They will then critique the coachee's responses and provide help in areas where the coachee needs it as shown by the responses.
- Phase three has to do with Wikiphilosophy (inclusionism/deletionism, orthodoxy on Wikipedia, etc.). The coach will ask several questions about Wikiphilosophies and controversial areas of Wikipedia policy.
- Phase four is a phase in which coachees explore other areas of editing and areas that they may come across as an admin. The coach will provide minimal guidance in this phase, and should only answer questions rather than pose questions to the coachee.
Resources have been detailed here including questions for the phases, ideas, and processes of usage.
Virtual Classroom
The
Editor Review
A good way to find out what others think about the edits of a particular candidate is to have them undergo an Editor Review. This will bring others in to help evaluate the candidates strengths and weaknesses.
Policy Questions
Balloonman designed the following policy and guideline essay questions. They can be found at Policy Essay Questions
As an admin nobody expects you to know all of the rules, but they do expect you to be able to research the policies and guidelines--show me that you can do the research and navigate them. These questions deliberately do not include links and some are deliberately vague and open to interpretation. If the question is vague, demonstrate your expertise of the subject by covering the different options. In your own words, citing the applicable policies/guidelines/essays/etc (and link to the applicable policy/guideline/essay), please answer the following:
1 Why are the criteria for speedy deletion so strict?
2 What alternatives to speedy deletion are there?
3 What is a "level three warning" and why is it significant?
4 Under what circumstances can an established editor be blocked?
5 How long can an IP address be blocked?
6 How many times can an editor make the same edit before violating 3RR? Can an editor be blocked before they reach that number?
7 How can you tell if an editor (whether an account or an anon IP) is a sockpuppet?
8 What is "rollback"?
9 What is the difference between protection and semi-protection?
10 An article has been vandalized several times. Under what circumstances can it be protected or semi-protected?
11 Under what circumstances would you invoke IAR? Can you provide a scenario where IAR might apply?
12 A page has been deleted several times, and keeps being recreated. What options do you have?
13 Explain how one goes about changing one's name
14 What types of names can be blocked?
15 You come across a page with material you consider to be highly libelous material on the page. Others don't believe it is, what should you do?
16 Somebody makes a legal threat, what do you do?
17 What are your personal criteria for a potential admin?
18 You are involved in a content dispute with another editor that is starting to get nasty. The other editor then vandalizes your talk page. What do you do?
AfD/DRV Exercises
The following is a test
Assume for this exercise that you are an administrator. View the page, but do not edit it. Then, return to your coaching page and comment on each entry in question. You can also click on the article link itself to read the article as it stood at the time of the AfD/DRV. Write whether you would delete the page or not based upon the discussion alone. If you would, explain why you would. If you would not delete it, state why. Remember to pay attention to the date/time the article was listed for AfD and assume that you are editing shortly after the most recent comment.
Do not use Wikipedia to see if the page still exists or if it was deleted. For best results, once you've made a decision about a page, don't go back and change your answer based upon subsequent exercises. But if a subsequent review has you questioning/changing your position, discuss mention it under the latest question.
DRV
3rr/Username exercises
Nishkid64's other blocking situations (username violations and 3RR). For 3RR reports, just indicate what action you would take (if any). If you choose to block for username violations, differentiate between soft blocks and hard username blocks (account creation disabled).
Example 1 XXX made three reverts, was warned for 3RR and then made another revert.
Example 2 YYY made three reverts, was warned for 3RR and then made a partial revert.
Example 3 ZZZ made four reverts, was reported to AN/3RR and then self-reverted.
Example 4 3 consecutive reverts, then two more separate reverts. User was reported to AN/3RR.
Example 5 User makes 2 reverts in 2 days on one article, 6 on another article over 3 days, 4 on another over 2 days and 3 on another over 24 hours.
Example 6 User has been edit warring on a single article. He has made approximately 15 reverts in a two week period.
Example 7 Content dispute between 5-6 editors. A lot of edit warring, but no one's violated 3RR. What would you do?
Example 8 Username: www.BusinessEnterprises.org
Example 9 Username: RealTek, Inc.
Example 10 Username: Bitch78
Example 11 Username: Iwannafkuup
Example 12 Username: Asswipeface
Example 13 Username: S;jsdfgjkhfsadfaef
Example 14 Username: CroatoanBot
Example 15 Username: AndysAutolandCompany
AIV Exercises
Here are some practice AIV reports that Nishkid64 created. You must tell me if a block is appropriate and what duration the block should last for. Good luck!
Example 1 xxx (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) vandalized pages at 19:51, 19:55, 19:57 and 19:59. The user was then reported to AIV.
Last three warnings:
- 20:00 UTC 12 March (uw-4)
- 19:58 UTC 12 March (uw-3)
- 19:56 UTC 12 March (uw-1)
Example 2 xxx (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) vandalized pages at 19:51, 19:55, 19:57 and 19:59. The user was then reported to AIV.
Last three warnings:
- 20:00 UTC 12 March (uw-4)
- 19:58 UTC 12 March (uw-2)
- 19:56 UTC 12 March (uw-1)
Example 3 xxx (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) IP vandalized pages at 23:11 on 12 March. The user was then reported to AIV.
Last three warnings:
- 20:00 UTC 11 March (uw-4im)
- 19:58 UTC 8 March (uw-3)
- 19:56 UTC 7 March (uw-1)
Example 4 xxx (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) School IP vandalized at least 10 times on March 12, directly after a 3-month block. The last vandalism edit occurred after a final warning. The user was then reported to AIV.
Last three warnings: 20:00 UTC 12 March (uw-4) 19:58 UTC 12 March (uw-3) 19:56 UTC 12 March (uw-1)
Example 5 XX (talk · contribs) Registered user vandal created an account and has made 6 vandalism edits, 1 of which came after a final warning. The user was then reported to AIV.
Example 6 xxx (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Shared IP last received a vandalism warning (uw-4) at 19:00 UTC on March 11. Someone from the IP has made 4 vandalism edits at around 12:00 UTC on March 12, but has not received no final warnings (uw-2 was the highest). The user was then reported to AIV.