281:
not quantity. Think of plastic toys for instance. Before the trade was moved to China, things were made better and lasted longer. Yes there weren't as many around, but the quality was there. Now the trade has moved to China, the numbers have increased dramatically, but the items don't last 5 minutes. This is what I am trying to say. It is NOT the QUANTITY that matters but the QUALITY!! After all, what people want is an online encyclopedia which they can use unhindered by spammers, vandals, incorrect information or anything that would disrupt the usability. Without suitable people to look after the website, then the aim of
Knowledge is never going to be reached. The english Knowledge has 1,654 admins out of 9,629,495 registered users, which is miniscule. No way could that amount of people look after 9 million. I don't want to ramble on, but please remember, Quality, not Quantity.
215:. Promises to edit further are academic, as the community judges you by past experience not future work. I'm sorry to be blunt, and trust me I do understand how you feel - yes I really do - but the time is not now. Chill, enjoy making a reputation on Knowledge, edit some articles, whack some vandals and help out around the place. Adminiship really is nothing but some buttons on a website - however given the visibility of the website they don't come as easy as they should. E-mail me if I can help.
759:
31:
486:
665:
347:) and I are both well versed in RFA and probably more lenient than many - neither of us actually withdrew the RFA - that was done by a bureaucrat - but our advice is, dare I say it, sound. It's not really you convincing us about the quality of your edits - that's agreed, we see they are. It's about the wider community and the various different standards they hold. There have been endless conversations at
602:
Hello
Manadude2, I have granted rollback rights to your account in accordance with your request. Please be aware that rollback should be used to revert vandalism/spam/blatantly unconstructive edits, and that using it to revert anything else (by revert-warring or reverting edits you disagree with) can
240:
Manadude - I've closed your RFA, since I'm afraid there was little chance of its passing, as Pedro says. I think the edit count expectations are unnecessarily high too -- I've done what I can over the years to keep RFA standards from skyrocketing, but they've done it anyway. I'm sorry about this, but
731:
deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with
Knowledge's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page
387:
Of course one needs to view quality and quantity. You would need to add a huge amount of high quality, well-referenced content to offset the "low edit count." I took that into consideration. I'm not a big content builder-- more a
Wikignome. In looking at your edits, I see Wikignomic edits, new page
178:
Hey Pedro. I understand what the opposers are trying to get at, but the only issue is how many edits I have made. I would like to draw your attention to an WP article I read, from which I quote: "It is not the number of edits that really matters, but the quality." therefore saying that lack of edits
155:
Hi
Manadude. Your RFA is really not going to pass. I'm sorry, I know it's a bit miserable, and don't think you're work on Knowledge is not valued - it really is. I admire the way you've responded to suggestions made, that's clearly a good thing - but you're not going to fly through this time (but in
210:
I think there are probably some bits I can add value to here. As a (rather too often!) regular at RFA I'm generally "on the pulse" of community norms in this regard. What you've indicated above is exactly why you should knock this RFA on the head and continue editing as before. The community cannot
351:
about the rise in standard requirements to no end whatsoever so, regretfully, it's likely the best move is to conform to the arbitary edit count / experience requirements. I know this seems harsh as you are only here to help - a spurned offer of assistance seems rather cruel - but it is what it is
280:
To All of you: Again, you say "at lease 500 edits per month". As I quote: "It is not the number of edits that count, but the quality." I am absolutely fuming that the requirements to become an admin is to make at least X many edits. The user does need to make edits, but they need to be of quality,
190:
I think I have the potential to become and admin, and I think my edits would help a lot. I fully regret the edit block I was given at the start of my WP "career" but I can assure you that I have changed since then and become less naive and a bit more mature. It was stupid of me at the time. I hope
184:
As I have said already, I have been busy revising and studying for my upcoming exams which are very important, and editing
Knowledge is not one of my main concerns at the moment. When my exams finish, which is about the middle of June, then I can start getting involved in Knowledge more as I will
423:
If the scripts mentioned are installed correctly, clicking one of the update links should bring you to an edit screen which will automatically save itself. If this isn't the case, please let me know; some other editors have had some issues with those, although I'm not sure where the problem is
185:
then have 3 and a half months of doing nothing before I start my course at college. Don't get me wrong, I understand what you and your fellow opposers are saying, but please give a little thought into what I have to do, not something I do to keep me occupied, i.e editing
Knowledge.
379:
Hell, I've participated in RFA since 2006. Based on my observations as a participant, I feel I have worthwhile insight into the sort of advice to offer so that a user stands a reasonable chance of passing a subsequent RFA. One may accept or reject it. One does not need to please
388:
patrolling, and vandalism reverts. When one considers quality over quantity, one looks at bigger edits and more research time than
Wikignoming. Wikignoming is great, but you need to do lots of it to win the trust of the community. If you did not follow the link to
102:
Well, Manadude, as I imagine you've seen, your new Sports
Barnstar didn't make it. Not many people came in on the discussion, and none of them supported us. I appreciate your efforts, and if I had the ability, I'd try again to make a new one. I think that the
577:
rule. And, so I can further poke a finger in your eye, I doubt you were entirely altruistic in your spelling edit, because I think you want to get your edits up so you can be an admin. What else can I expect from an
Englishman who is against
326:
The admin / user ratio is more like 30,000 moderately active users and 970 active admins so the ratio is not a terror - and remember that a lot of admin tools are very specialised; anyone can revert vandalism or assist in sock-puppet
679:, because the article appears to be about a club, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the
733:
556:. So, next time, before you decide to pedantically "correct" the spelling on someone's user page, why don't you, I don't know, look up the term in some sort of online encyclopedia, Knowledge perhaps?
582:?!?! If you can't tell by now, I am being a tad sarcastic. I'm not mad, I was just a bit peeved somebody would correct a correctly spelled word on my user page. Keep up the otherwise good work!
313:
Hi Manadude. Your are totally correct - edits are all about quality and nothing about quantity. This has been a long standing principle of RFA - however there are some points that surround it;
323:
Whilst in an optmial world 500 edits might be enough to assuage any doubts on policy knowledge it's very unlikely to be honest - the place is too big and has to many rules and guidelines
107:
of the Barnstar you created is far better than the one we have now, but I guess the images themselves just didn't work for most people. Thanks for trying, and we'll see you around.
573:
Aren't you failing to assume good faith by assuming I don't know about assuming good faith? Let us just say that "it is considered bad form to edit someone's user page" is an
389:
259:
603:
lead to it being removed from your account...sometimes without any warning, depending on the admin who becomes aware of any misuse. For practice, you may wish to see
723:
653:
398:
338:
268:
533:
567:
473:
262:. In addition, an editor generally needs an activity level of at least 500 edits per month to stay sharp and keep in practice. Good luck and hope this helps.
717:
672:
658:
749:
393:
334:
263:
503:
692:
619:
591:
648:
275:
405:
308:
144:
493:
513:
I know it can be annoying to read, but do not fix spelling errors other people make on talkpages. Doing so violates Talkpage guidelines.
368:
231:
205:
249:
627:
Hello Manadude2, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I contested the speedy deletion of
611:
737:
654:
468:
437:
604:
320:
Not everyone thinks this way - some people will knee-jerk oppose to anyone with less than 3,000 edits or so irrespective.
129:
474:
344:
418:
528:
172:
122:
688:
597:
817:
549:
442:
89:
809:
804:
792:
787:
696:
411:
81:
76:
64:
59:
766:
38:
156:
the future I'm sure you will). I'd suggest you withdraw unless you have a need for further feedback.
587:
563:
424:
stemming from. Sorry it took so long to get back to you, I haven't been around for the past month.
384:
to have a successful RFA. One must convince the community that they can be trusted with the tools.
97:
702:
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding
352:
I'm afraid. Again - keep working, enjoy the place and wait awhile before askinf for the bit.
241:
I hope you'll stay with us, edit some more, and come back to RFA in a while. Happy editing ā
201:
140:
684:
443:
258:
Hello, Manadude. Don't be discouraged by this. My thoughts concerning RFA can be found at
8:
639:
before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know.
583:
559:
542:
489:
478:
464:
453:
301:
644:
521:
500:
348:
246:
115:
680:
775:
745:
721:(just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on
695:. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the
47:
17:
211:
be expected to second guess how good you will be in the future - they need evidence
508:
150:
553:
707:
628:
621:
579:
492:
has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
361:
224:
165:
774:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
676:
675:
requesting that it be speedily deleted from Knowledge. This has been done under
46:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
608:
460:
295:
197:
136:
640:
636:
516:
497:
425:
242:
108:
741:
179:
is a downside is pretty poor. I think my edits have been of good standard.
633:
Claim to have received a notable award indicates importance/significance.
485:
355:
218:
159:
664:
541:
First, it is considered bad form to edit someone's user page (see
727:
explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for
687:, as well as our subject-specific notability guidelines for
685:
see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable
494:
the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page
392:, you might or might not find reading it beneficial.
135:
Oh well, it was worth a try, thanks anyway unschool.
683:, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please
449:It was only a proposed deletion, you can remove
459:tags on these even if you created the article.
677:section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion
718:the page that has been nominated for deletion
552:. The band uses two E's, it is not the word
740:the page or have a copy emailed to you.
545:). So don't spell check my user page.
14:
772:Do not edit the contents of this page.
44:Do not edit the contents of this page.
534:"Correcting" spelling on my user page
753:
25:
605:Knowledge:New admin school/Rollback
23:
732:does get deleted, you can contact
663:
24:
831:
419:User talk:Hersfold/StatusTemplate
757:
484:
29:
631:- a page you tagged - because:
399:
394:
269:
264:
522:
517:
123:
116:
109:
13:
1:
750:20:12, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
649:20:55, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
612:18:00, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
592:18:33, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
568:01:22, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
145:21:26, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
130:18:04, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
681:criteria for speedy deletion
637:criteria for speedy deletion
550:Creedence Clearwater Revival
529:22:59, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
504:23:03, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
7:
620:Speedy deletion contested:
191:you give this some thought.
10:
836:
548:Second, the band is named
213:when you ask for the tools
671:A tag has been placed on
469:21:10, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
438:17:05, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
406:15:19, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
390:User:Dlohcierekim/On RfA
369:20:04, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
309:18:50, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
276:14:11, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
260:User:Dlohcierekim/On RfA
250:01:12, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
232:21:33, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
206:21:23, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
173:21:02, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
475:Nomination for deletion
736:to request that they
668:
770:of past discussions.
667:
598:Your rollback request
42:of past discussions.
444:Kodak Easyshare C813
734:one of these admins
543:Knowledge:User page
490:Template:Uw-redlink
479:Template:Uw-redlink
412:Re: Status Template
673:Bamford Youth Club
669:
659:Bamford Youth Club
635:Please review the
823:
822:
782:
781:
776:current talk page
367:
307:
230:
171:
95:
94:
54:
53:
48:current talk page
18:User talk:Osarius
827:
801:
784:
783:
761:
760:
754:
713:
712:
706:
526:
524:
519:
488:
458:
452:
403:
396:
366:
364:
353:
306:
304:
293:
273:
266:
229:
227:
216:
170:
168:
157:
127:
120:
113:
73:
56:
55:
33:
32:
26:
835:
834:
830:
829:
828:
826:
825:
824:
797:
758:
710:
704:
703:
662:
655:Speedy deletion
629:Jochem P. Hanse
625:
622:Jochem P. Hanse
600:
580:English spacing
536:
515:
511:
482:
456:
450:
447:
414:
362:
354:
302:
294:
225:
217:
166:
158:
153:
100:
98:Sports Barnstar
69:
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
833:
821:
820:
815:
812:
807:
802:
795:
790:
780:
779:
762:
697:Article Wizard
661:
657:nomination of
652:
624:
618:
616:
599:
596:
595:
594:
584:TuckerResearch
560:TuckerResearch
535:
532:
510:
507:
481:
472:
446:
441:
433:
430:
413:
410:
409:
408:
385:
376:
375:
374:
373:
372:
371:
329:
328:
324:
321:
317:
316:
315:
314:
287:
286:
285:
284:
283:
282:
253:
252:
237:
236:
235:
234:
193:
192:
187:
186:
181:
180:
152:
149:
148:
147:
99:
96:
93:
92:
87:
84:
79:
74:
67:
62:
52:
51:
34:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
832:
819:
816:
813:
811:
808:
806:
803:
800:
796:
794:
791:
789:
786:
785:
777:
773:
769:
768:
763:
756:
755:
752:
751:
747:
743:
739:
735:
730:
726:
725:
724:the talk page
720:
719:
709:
700:
698:
694:
693:organizations
690:
686:
682:
678:
674:
666:
660:
656:
651:
650:
646:
642:
638:
634:
630:
623:
617:
614:
613:
610:
607:. Good luck.
606:
593:
589:
585:
581:
576:
572:
571:
570:
569:
565:
561:
557:
555:
551:
546:
544:
539:
531:
530:
527:
525:
520:
506:
505:
502:
499:
496:. Thank you.
495:
491:
487:
480:
476:
471:
470:
466:
462:
455:
445:
440:
439:
436:
435:
434:
431:
428:
422:
420:
407:
404:
402:
397:
391:
386:
383:
378:
377:
370:
365:
359:
358:
350:
346:
343:
340:
336:
333:
332:
331:
330:
327:investigation
325:
322:
319:
318:
312:
311:
310:
305:
299:
298:
292:Your Friend,
291:
290:
289:
288:
279:
278:
277:
274:
272:
267:
261:
257:
256:
255:
254:
251:
248:
244:
239:
238:
233:
228:
222:
221:
214:
209:
208:
207:
203:
199:
196:Your friend,
195:
194:
189:
188:
183:
182:
177:
176:
175:
174:
169:
163:
162:
146:
142:
138:
134:
133:
132:
131:
128:
126:
121:
119:
114:
112:
106:
91:
88:
85:
83:
80:
78:
75:
72:
68:
66:
63:
61:
58:
57:
49:
45:
41:
40:
35:
28:
27:
19:
798:
771:
765:
728:
722:
715:
701:
670:
632:
626:
615:
601:
574:
558:
547:
540:
537:
514:
512:
483:
448:
427:
426:
416:
415:
401:
381:
356:
341:
335:Dlohcierekim
296:
271:
219:
212:
160:
154:
124:
117:
110:
104:
101:
70:
43:
37:
764:This is an
716:the top of
36:This is an
818:ArchiveĀ 10
538:Dear sir,
454:dated prod
90:ArchiveĀ 10
810:ArchiveĀ 5
805:ArchiveĀ 4
799:ArchiveĀ 3
793:ArchiveĀ 2
788:ArchiveĀ 1
609:Acalamari
575:unwritten
461:snigbrook
297:Manadude2
198:manadude2
137:manadude2
82:ArchiveĀ 5
77:ArchiveĀ 4
71:ArchiveĀ 3
65:ArchiveĀ 2
60:ArchiveĀ 1
691:and for
641:Tim Song
554:credence
509:Spelling
498:Garion96
400:cierekim
345:contribs
270:cierekim
151:Your Rfa
767:archive
742:ukexpat
105:concept
39:archive
738:userfy
729:speedy
708:hangon
689:people
501:(talk)
349:WT:RFA
523:Spyke
417:From
363:Chat
357:Pedro
303:Talk
226:Chat
220:Pedro
167:Chat
161:Pedro
16:<
746:talk
645:talk
588:talk
564:talk
465:talk
432:fold
429:Hers
395:Dloh
339:talk
265:Dloh
247:talk
202:talk
141:talk
714:to
699:.
477:of
243:Dan
125:ool
118:sch
814:ā
748:)
711:}}
705:{{
647:)
590:)
566:)
518:TJ
467:)
457:}}
451:{{
382:me
360::
300::
245:|
223::
204:)
164::
143:)
111:Un
86:ā
778:.
744:(
643:(
586:(
562:(
463:(
421::
342:Ā·
337:(
200:(
139:(
50:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.