The importance of the admin coach, Apparently they are really important Options

[Firsfron of Ronchester]

Balloonman (and others) have tried to re-orientate admin coaching, but it's still basically just a rebranded version of "here's what you have to do to pass RfA".

I've occasionally read of this objection to admin coaching, but in the past, when I asked those with objections to it for specific things that should be avoided, I never got a good idea of what things were being objected to.

[Malleus]

Balloonman (and others) have tried to re-orientate admin coaching, but it's still basically just a rebranded version of "here's what you have to do to pass RfA".

I've occasionally read of this objection to admin coaching, but in the past, when I asked those with objections to it for specific things that should be avoided, I never got a good idea of what things were being objected to.

That's simply not true. Many have made it quite clear what's being objected to. Advice such as "if you want to pass RfA go spend some time at XfD, work on a GA/FA if you can, reduce your use of automated tools, and make certain you don't get into any disputes for the previous three months", is clearly not designed to produce better administrators, simply more successful candidates.

[MBisanz]

Balloonman (and others) have tried to re-orientate admin coaching, but it's still basically just a rebranded version of "here's what you have to do to pass RfA".

I've occasionally read of this objection to admin coaching, but in the past, when I asked those with objections to it for specific things that should be avoided, I never got a good idea of what things were being objected to.

That's simply not true. Many have made it quite clear what's being objected to. Advice such as "if you want to pass RfA go spend some time at XfD, work on a GA/FA if you can, reduce your use of automated tools, and make certain you don't get into any disputes for the previous three months", is clearly not designed to produce better administrators, simply more successful candidates.

One thing I do when I mentor someone that I've suggested to all people looking into adminship is to think if they can handle the stress both on and off wiki. I usually point them at the Linuxbeak/HighIntheBC/Sussexman stuff and stress that even if they think they are anonymous, someone can probably find them if they try hard enough.

Another thing I go over with people that I think is missed by a large number of candidates is what Wikipedia is about. Things like the founding pillars, what NPOV means, etc. From my experiences, I imagine that some admins have either not read many of the core policies or didn't actually understand them when they read them.

[Guido den Broeder]

Another thing I go over with people that I think is missed by a large number of candidates is what Wikipedia is about. Things like the founding pillars, what NPOV means, etc. From my experiences, I imagine that some admins have either not read many of the core policies or didn't actually understand them when they read them.

My experiences are the same, except that I consider MBisanz one of them, and would replace 'some' with 'most'.

In general, if someone needs admin coaching, they haven't got it in them. The regulars in policy discussions would often make good admins, but will never be chosen.

This post has been edited by Guido den Broeder: Tue 7th April 2009, 11:30am

[Guido den Broeder]

See my presentation on the topic for WM-NYC AdminCoach.pdf. (yes the start date is wrong, I missed one of the page move logs when creating the presentation apparently).

I saw and read this:

Concept

Experienced admins teaching experienced users

Does not guarantee RFA passage

Is not for totally new users

Focuses on the coachee improving their edits

Well, there you go. This has absolutely nothing to do with good adminship, the most they can learn from this is how to better mask their mistakes.