These are some stock RFA questions that I may use. There is not necessarily a right or wrong answer. The purpose is to see that you understand, believe in, and can apply the policies and guidelines.
BLP edit
- n. You are evaluating an articles for deletion discussion for a BLP. It is known that the subject of the article desires for the article to be deleted. How much does that weigh into your decision?
NFCC edit
- n. When thinking about our fair use policy, how do you evaluate whether an image complies with criteria #1 and #8? Consider these three scenarios for use of non-free content under a claim of fair use. If asked to close FFD discussions, how would you resolve them?
- A photo from the school's website of a college professor who openly detests Wikipedia and does not allow cell phones in his classroom because he doesn't want someone taking and releasing under the GFDL a photo of him.
- The photo from this website of the Moscow Water Dog, a breed developed in the 50s, which became extinct in the 1980s. The IFD discussion has three !votes for keep saying some form of "it is historically important to know what the dog looks like", two !votes for delete saying some form of "the image is too ugly to be useful", and one !vote for delete arguing that under Russian law, works of the Russian government published before 1954 are public domain, so we have a reasonable explanation of finding a public domain image. (Assume for the purposes of this question that this statement of law is correct and that the dog was first developed in 1950.)
- File:1992 Rapture.jpg in the article rapture.
- A photograph of Miles Stadium (which was torn down in 1965) published in the Washington Post?
- A photograph of a popular French politician who died last week used both in an article about him and about a company that he founded?
- A photo of the largest watermelon ever (which earned that title according to Guinness World Records in 1986) in the article watermelon?
Ethics edit
- n. As you most likely know, administrators are not permitted to block users with whom they are "involved". What does "involved" mean to you? Consider this scenario: You block a user for 3RR. He immediately contests the block on the grounds that you are an "involved" editor, pointing to a debate from some time ago in which the two of you held opposite views. (You had forgotten about the debate and did not make the connection until he pointed it out.) What would you do? --B (talk) 19:55, 21 July 2011 (UTC)