Welcome to fedrix.com on January 8 2009.
This is an internet experiment running to monitor browsing habbits of individuals through wikipedia contents.

Wikipedia:Editor review

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
This page has a backlog that requires the attention of experienced editors.
Please remove this notice when the backlog is cleared.
WP:ER redirects here. You may be looking for Wikipedia:Expert retention or Wikipedia:Editing restrictions.

General information
   Main page
   Discussion
   Backlog
   Archives
   Templates
edit · changes
Shortcut:
WP:ER

Editor review is a way that users can have their contributions to Wikipedia evaluated by peers, who will provide tips and pointers on areas for improvement. If you are here because your goal is to become an administrator, you should direct yourself to Wikipedia:Admin coaching. Editor review seeks to review your contributions as an editor only, not as an administrator candidate.

Anybody can ask for an editor review, regardless of their tenure at Wikipedia.

When asking for a review, please consider reviewing another editor.
Purge page cache if reviews haven't updated.

[edit] Guidelines

Editors are asked to remain civil and assume good faith.

When reviewing, consider:

  • User conduct — informative edit summaries, constructive comments on talk page, any problems indicated on user talk page, etc.
  • Number and types of edits — is the editor doing a lot of the same type of minor edits (if so, why?); is reverting vandalism accompanied by the right level of warnings and by reports to WP:AIV as appropriate; is the editor contributing (constructively, not by rote) to XfDs, etc.

Users with an asterisk next to their name in the subheader have not been reviewed at all yet. Users may still need further reviews even if they do not have an asterisk.

Click here for the backlog of unreviewed requests.

[edit] Requesting reviews

If you would like to be reviewed, please follow the steps below:

  • Create a subpage using the box below, replacing "USERNAME" with your own username. NOTE: Please make sure there is no space after your username, as this makes it hard for reviewers to reach your request.


  1. If you have had a previous editor review, don't overwrite it. Instead, repost it (if it was recent and received little feedback), or create a new one appending a number after your username (usually, 2 if it is your second review, 3 if it is the third, etc).
  2. Do not save the new page yet! Replace "STATEMENT" in the edit box at the bottom of the page with a brief message about yourself and why you want to be reviewed. Please note, you must change "USERNAME" TO YOUR OWN USERNAME
  3. Save the page.
  4. Next, answer the questions. Please be specific in your answers.
  5. Add {{Wikipedia:Editor review/USERNAME}} to the top of the list on the Editor Review page.
  6. Add your editor review page to the archive.
  7. You will then be reviewed. Once you are happy with the feedback received, remove your section from this page.
  8. Optional: you can put the {{Editor review}} template or the {{Editor review sticker}} template on your user page to advertise the review page.

[edit] Archives

Sections with at least one review will be archived at Wikipedia:Editor review/Archives thirty days after they have been created.

Contents

[edit] Current requests

[edit] AtheWeatherman*

AtheWeatherman (talk · contribs) So, then, You may have seen me around. I would like to be reviewed myself because I would like to become an admin (who would of thought that!) abd I would like to know how I am doing and how I can improve! Regards Andy (talk) 22:09, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Reviews


Comments

Questions

  1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
    I am pleased with my vandal fighting and weather contributions as well as my new articles (see here for most of my major contribs. I am probably most pleased with my major expansion and development of Greenhead College which I am hoping to get to GA status.
  2. 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?
    Not really, most editors tend to collaborate with me. Obviously I have had my share of vandal attacks in which I simply revert and warn and possibly report to AIV. If any editor conflicts were to come up I would gather my sources and expansion material and present them on the articles talk page and on the user talk page and resolve from there.

Thanks for all your reviews. Andy (talk) 22:23, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Shapiros10*

Shapiros10 (talk · contribs) It's been a while since I've been reviewed by the community, and I'd like to see how I'm doing. Sam Blab 23:55, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Reviews

  1. Hey Sam, I did say I'd pop over here. You are (IMO) one of the most unfailingly polite Wikipedians I have encountered, which is always a good thing. You seem to do a lot of work in tandem with other editors such as RyanCross, another good thing; it never hurts to build up strong ties with various users. I've worked with User:Choess on a variety of things, for example, and it is nice to have someone you can turn to with article issues in area X. I think a couple of improvements to take if you're treating this as a Request for Adminship Review (as many do, not saying you are): first, some XfD work. You might like to stick [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/{{CURRENTYEAR}} {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTDAY}}|AfD]] somewhere if you do; it links immediately to whatever the current day's AfD's are without having to go through all the sub-pages and sub-sub-pages to find the right day; a boon. Some bigger and more varied mainspace contributions might be in order as well; something featured is always nice, and not that difficult if you follow the pattern of editors who do them regularly (Gary King, for example, is a great template for editors seeking to do discography-related FLs). Hope this was of some help to you. Ironholds (talk) 07:12, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Thank you, Ironholds. This isn't really an adminship review ATM, but I will try to work more with XFD's and Featured Content. :) Sam Blab 12:28, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Comments

Questions

  1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
    I've done a bit of anti-vandal work and a lot of gnome-type edits. I've also created some stubs. the one I am most proud of is Nolan Reimold, which RyanCross and I improved to DYK status.
  2. 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?
    Yes, I won't hide that my past is as checkered as a checkerboard, but the most recent was 5 months ago. I'm on good terms with 2 of the 3 people I've conflicted with, and I'm just staying away from the 3rd. I think that a strategy that has served me well is just getting my butt off of the computer and going back to real life for a while.

[edit] ImperatorExercitus*

ImperatorExercitus (talk · contribs) I've been here for several months (around three), during which I've been relatively quiet, doing mainly anti-vandal work and minor copy-editing. I'd like to get a feel of how the Wikipedia community feels about my contributions and how I could improve my edits. I currently have 2879 3000 edits, though I have been inactive for the last couple of days as I was on vacation. Imperat§ r(Talk) 15:00, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Reviews


Comments

Questions

  1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
    I'm particularly pleased with my anti-vandalism work, my Articles for Speedy and normal deletions. Though I regularly use Lupin's tool and Twinkle, I occasionally employ Huggle. Whenever possible, I've also tried to help the newcomers, whether it be with "Welcome" or advice. In addition to two DYKs, I've created several articles dealing with different topics and a template.
  2. 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?
    Other than the occasional rouge IP address which send me insults/pointless statements for handing them (a) warning(s), I've have not engaged in a conflict with other contributing users.

[edit] ErikTheBikeMan*

ErikTheBikeMan (talk · contribs) I've been editing for awhile and since I've been created some articles lately that have been going on DYK, I'd like to know how I'm doing as a community member in general. Thanks. ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 02:36, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Reviews


Comments

Questions

  1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
    Probably the first article I ever got to DYK status, Sid Bernstein. I found it while patroling new pages and had recently looked through some of the DYK criteria, so I thought I might as well give it a try. The article was harder to write than I had expected, since I couldn't find any good online resources.ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 02:46, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  2. 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?
    The only possible "conflict" I may have been involved in was when, during the course of my assessement work with WikiProject Norse histroy and culture, I nominated an article for deletion because I was unable to find any online sources. This drew a huge response on the AfD from the project, as well as improvement of the article to the point that I was able to withdraw my nomination. This didn't cause much stress though. I largely deal in areas that aren't very controvertial (Norse history, GA reviews), and thus may not have to deal with anything in the future aside from someone angry about a failed GA review. ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 02:46, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] mynameinc*

mynameinc (talk · contribs) I got my 500th edit and I wanted to know how I was doing on Wikipedia and if I was not doing well, how to improve my editing habits in order to do well in the future. mynameinc 21:11, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Reviews


Comments

Questions

  1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
    I am particularly pleased with the articles I have created about East German Olympic swimmers, especially Wilfried Hartung, because I made the articles, even though they are stubs and start-class and could be improved. This, however, doesn't mean that I don't want other editors helping on the articles.
  2. 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?
    I don't feel that I have been in any conflicts with other editors, a few discussions. I feel that I was civil in the discussions. Regarding future discussions, I will try to (Try not. Do, or do not, there is no try.) remain civil.

[edit] Iamawesome800

Iamawesome800 (talk · contribs) The reason I want to be reviewed is because, I basically just want to see what my peers think of my editing and how I could make them better, cause that's what I want to do, improve. Iamawesome800 22:58, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Reviews

  • Right then, you have a good edit count and recently, your edit summaries have been good. Good article edits altough more expansions may be good. Your main area of fixing is no less important though. I like the way you deal with conflicts, gathering your sources and all. There is a good balance of article, talk and other edits, which is great. I also see that you edit in an area, NFL, which is really good. I also likeI can't really critize you much at all especially for such a new editor, the only thing I think you could do is see if you could do a few more expansions but overall, you are doing great. Overall rating:9.5 out 10

PS: And you are pretty awesome.:) Andy (talk) 17:05, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Comments

Questions

  1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
    My best contributions according to me are to NFL related articles mostly the NFL free agency market.
  2. 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?
    Of course I've come into conflict in the past. For example, whether or not a player was signed and I think he was based on a source I found and the other editor says no that he wasn't. So then I will just recheck my source, look for other sources to find the answer and bring it to the other editor.

[edit] Cabe6403*

Cabe6403 (talk · contribs) Been on Wikipedia for quite a while now (over 3 years) and just looking for a little feedback to how I'm doing Cabe6403 (Talk•Sign!) 02:58, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Reviews


Comments

Questions

  1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
    Well, recently I've been working on Glengoyne Distillery taking it from this to what it is now. I'm really pleased with how that turned out. Also, I'm pretty proud of Discography of Command & Conquer, even though it's not finished yet since I've been to busy to really get down and do the remaining work. Also, You Me At Six, the article kept getting deleted and eventually blocked from recreating. After drafting a version in my userpage I appealed to some admins to get the page restored. They did based on my draft.
  2. 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?
    I don't believe I've been in any edit conflicts? I'm a pretty mellow, laid back person so I tend not to get too stressed with other peoples actions, they do what they feel is right (which is what wikipedia is really about) and if its not then usually consensus will bring everything back into line pretty shortly. If they are just being a pest then they'll get whats coming to them at some point. So really, there isn't much point of stressing!

[edit] NoVomit*

NoVomit (talk · contribs) I am a relatively new editor and wish to see if I am doing things correctly NoVomit (talk) 13:48, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Reviews


Comments

Questions

  1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
    The Seth Material Article. There was some controversy as to whether it should stay or not and I tried to get some clarification on the issues and added extra references as necessary and to help the article out with regards to spelling, formatting, etc.
  2. 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?
    The main conflict was over whether an article should be deleted and interpreting the Wikipedia guidelines. I brought the Article to AfD and tried to get a peer review done to resolve the conflicts.

[edit] Vltava 68*

Vltava 68 (talk · contribs) I would like to know what areas I could improve on in my work. Vltava 68 13:31, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Reviews One major way you can improve on is your edit summary usage. Although the edit count tool is down as of now, I can see that there are quite a few edits where you didn't put an edit summary. This review si quite short, so I'll leave the asterisk for now. Leujohn (talk) 05:16, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Comments

Questions

  1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
    I feel that I have contributed to the article "Poptropica" in getting rid of incorrect grammar and various other problems.
  2. 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?
    I found trying to prove the notability of a page I created some time ago (CCOHK) rather stressful, but that got sorted out simply by my objection, which worked. I'll deal with similar problems the same way; it's just that I thought such an orchestra would not have it's notability questioned.

[edit] SRE.K.A.L.24*

SRE.K.A.L.24 (talk · contribs) With over 6000 edits, I have been actively editing Wikipedia for over some months now. I contribute to Wikipedia by promoting featured lists. If I'm active enough, I'll will help with recent changes patrol. I would like to have a editor review just to know how I am doing, what am I doing wrong, and how can I improve my contributions. If you are going to review me, thanks in advance. Cheers and Happy editing. -- signed by SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards on 07:07, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Reviews


Comments

Questions

  1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
    I have contributed to over 30 featured lists , and have been reviewing many featured list candidates. I am particularly pleased with these contributions since I have never thought of actually being near the top of this list, and seeing the featured lists growing on WP:FL.
  2. 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?
    Of course as a featured list reviewer, you will often argue about how the article should be structured and how the sentence should be written, but I have never had any stress in or conflicts over editing. I have never disobeyed the three-revert rule, or have done anything to have made any major conflicts. If I did have any conflicts, I will try to deal with the situation by being civil, find out what the actual situation is, and will try to find a solution(s) to fix it.

[edit] PoinDexta1*

PoinDexta1 (talk · contribs) Hello all. I don't think I'll say I am new because I am not really, hehe. I am quite active in WP:CSD and vandalism reversion whilst starting to get involved in AfD. I also am an account creator and also a rollbacker. I would like to request an editor review as I am currently getting more largely involved with Wikipedia and mainspace edits. PoinDexta1 | Talk to Me | 06:22, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Reviews


Comments

Questions

  1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
    I can't say I have made any large contributions to the mainspace, however I feel I play a significant role in WP:CSD and new page patrolling.
  2. 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?
    I have been in one minor edit conflict with an IP user. It was regarding IP user page ownership and deletion of such notices. This editor engaged in deleting vandalism warnings from the IP talk page. I pointed out that IP's have no right of ownership to the talk page and have said administrators have confirmed this. This however, was not sinking in, and ended up eventually no reply from the editor concerened.

[edit] OliverTwisted

OliverTwisted (talk · contribs) Hi. I'm new to Wikipedia, and have been exploring, patrolling, editing and reverting. I've also just begun getting active in AfD discussions and vandalism reporting. It seems as if it would be more productive to get feedback on my editing history sooner, rather than later, after any potential bad habits are firmly instilled. My goal is to be as helpful as possible with combating vandalism, improving grammar and punctuation compliance, and expanding forgotten articles which have been abandoned. I have had no unresolved disputes with any editors, despite a typical newbie mistake on my first posting. I'd love to hear feedback from experienced editors on ways I can improve my contributions. Cheers! OliverTwisted (Talk) 03:20, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Reviews

  • Hi. You are doing very well. Just remember that try to have a s less mistakes as possible. Good luck! Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 05:24, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Right then, your edit count is good and I like the use of the important edit summary. Your edits seem good and are very important for the site. Glad to see you are improving all the time taking on other peoples comments. I had a few rocky first edits so thats nothing to worry about. Regarding the variation of edits, I like that you are getting into XFD and other areas. My advice is get stuck into other areas like RFA and the Reference desk. Also more article writing and expansion would be good. But saying all this, you seem to be a great editor and 9 out of 10 seems good to me! Well done and keep up the good edits! Andy (talk) 19:53, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Comments

Questions

  1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
    I hope I've made some significant improvement in new page patrolling. I had a rocky start, and was fortunate enough to have several editors take the time to give me some tips on improvement. I'm also fairly proud of rescuing several articles which were tagged, I believe, inappropriately for speedy deletion.
  2. 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?
    My first edit to Wikipedia did not meet community guidelines. The editor who discovered the problems followed my edits for several days and challenged all of them. I requested arbitration on The Art of War (disambiguation). After winning arbitration, I was accused of being a sock puppeteer. The charge was dismissed, and I have since had several civil and helpful conversations with the editor leveling the charge. It was a potent learning experience, and I don't believe I have repeated any of my newbie mistakes in the months since. Otherwise, I believe I have maintained constructive relationships with all editors I have had discussions with, and strive very hard to end all conversations with agreement, and on a positive note wherever possible. I have a tendency to be flippant, and will try to minimize the appearance of such comments in the future.

[edit] OlEnglish*

OlEnglish (talk · contribs) I've been around for about half a year now and I'd like to know how I'm doing. As for my editing style I would classify myself as a WikiGnome. OlEnglish (talk) 17:57, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Reviews


Comments

Questions

  1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
    All of them because it all goes towards increasing the overall quality of Wikipedia.
  2. 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?
    Not at all.

[edit] Master&Expert

Master&Expert (talk · contribs) Hey, all. I'm Master&Expert. I've been here for about 6 months, and apparantly have a bit over 1000 edits. I've become steadily more active since mid-October. During that time, I've brought an article to DYK and did some recent changes patrolling and new page patrolling. I suppose I could go on in-depth regarding some of my work here on Wikipedia, but it's pretty much explained on my userpage. The long and short of it is that I've tried to do my best to benefit Wikipedia, and hope I succeeded in some capacity.

I am a rollbacker on Wikipedia. I have been a rollbacker since mid-October, when Thingg decided that I could be trusted to use it properly. I must say, I was quite surprised in his granting to me the access. Hopefully I've used it to a satisfactory degree.

As stated above, I have contributed to one DYK on Wikipedia. I'm not sure whether or not that would constitute particularly effective content contributions, but nevertheless it's still a somewhat flattering notion that something I myself worked on made it to the Main Page. Though I'm sure that some editors are veterans of being featured on the Main Page, so I almost feel my contributions are insignificant compared to theirs. Aside from this, I've also collaborated, along with Aude, on The Middle East. We had hoped to bring the article to GA standard, but I lost interest and I suspect she had more important things to do.

Lately I've really been getting into new page patrol. I think my primary motivation for this was this essay, written by User:Balloonman. I'm not sure if I've done an overall good job, but I figure, since speedy deleters are necessary, I should try it out and learn the criteria to assist in maintenance work.

The reason I'm here today is to bring my contributions to examination, and to receive some amount of feedback on how I can improve the job I'm doing. I want to do my best to make Wikipedia a better place, and to continue to assist Wikipedia to grow and develop as a project. Any bit of advice on how I can do this is appreciated.

Regards, Master&Expert (Talk) 08:39, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Reviews

I'm not exactly the Baloonman of essays, but I will do my best. :). To start, you edit count is good and you are very active overall (I have seen you around the wiki) and your edits, though small, are still vital to the functioning of the site. Your DYK was a great achievement to be proud of. Good variation of edits but I would say a few more mainspace edits would be useful. I am very impressed by the proportion of project page edits though. Your edit summaries are very good and informative. Good answers to questions below too ( wow this good list keeps on goind :D)I like your participation in Rfa, as I am around there a lot. Very good overall and 9 out of 10 and this is my final mark. Keep doing what you are and you'll do great. Good luck and happy editing! Happy Christmas from Andy (talk) 20:25, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

  • Hey Andy, sorry I haven't gotten around to checking this page for awhile. Thank you for the review - very much appreciated. Master&Expert (Talk) 04:32, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Comments

Questions

  1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
    Hmm... I'm going to have to go with my DYK. I was quite surprised and honoured when a piece of my work was featured on the main page. Especially considering I thought it was weak compared to everything else going up there.
  2. 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?
    I can't say I've been in any conflicts, however I've disagreed with editors. In these circumstances, I like to address the disagreement on a talk page, listen to what they have to say, explain myself, and come to an agreement. Civilized discussion is better for Wikipedia than blind edit-warring, in my opinion.

[edit] Dylan620*

Dylan620 (talk · contribs) I've had an account here since September 2007, but only recently (around the first days of September 2008) did I become active. Unfortunately, although I am rapidly building in user and Wikipedia space edits, my mainspace edits are admittedly pathetic; I failed to reach the eligibility to vote in the ArbCom eections this year. Even so, there is one article that I am particularly pleased with (see below). Dylan620 Contribs Sign! 03:01, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Reviews

  • Hi Dylan, good to see that you're trying to improve upon your editing skills. So far, you've been doing very well in contributing. I don't have the time right now to do a full review, but for now, here's one comment. If there are any issues to speak of, it may be your lack of article contributions. For example, of your most recent 50 contributions, not one of them is in the mainspace. Sometimes it can be easy to get caught up talking with users or participating in project-space discussions, but remember what Wikipedia is—an encyclopedia. Cheers, –Juliancolton Happy Holidays 01:08, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Thank you, Julian. I guess I've gotten a little carried away in WikiGnoming, lurking, et cetera. --Dylan620 Contribs Sign! 01:15, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
  • You appear to be a good Wikipedian, and I have no issues with you, per se. The only thing is, as Julian stated above, is your low mainspace count. I suggest picking a project you know a lot about, and focusing on it. This and this recent edits were very good, just don't overuse the user and user talk spaces. Otherwise, keep up the good work! (And thanks for signing my questbook!) ✼ American Eagle (talk) 20:02, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Comments

Questions

  1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
    I am most proud of my early efforts to improve Rocko's Modern Life to GA status, as well as my creation of the Timeline of the 2001 Atlantic hurricane season (yes, I take an interest in tropical cyclones). I am also pleased with my efforts in adopting Spudicus (talk · contribs) before I learned that he was yet another sock puppet of Ianxp (talk · contribs · deleted · count · logs · block log · lu · rfar · rfc · rfcu · ssp · search an, ani, cn, an3).
  2. 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?
    I'll have to answer this in the morning. --Dylan620 Contribs Sign! 03:08, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
    Alright, I can answer this now. I became very angry when Yobmod (talk · contribs) called my best piece of work ugly here. I then roared "fuck this" in public at the FLC; a moment that still embarrasses me to this very day. Also, RMHED (talk · contribs) frustrated me with this. I fear that I may be exemplifying incivility in this cases; this is an issue I am trying to fix. --Dylan620 Contribs Sign! 11:06, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Nomader*

Nomader (talk · contribs) I've been an editor at Wikipedia since March 1, 2006, yet, I only have around 1,000 edits (even less in the mainspace) because I've only become active recently. I primarily edit articles relating to video games, and I sometimes participate in WP:RfA and WP:AfD. I'm a member of WikiProject Video games (among other projects), and I feel that projects are where I mostly interact with the community. Anyways, I'm hoping that I can put the criticisms given to me here to positive use in the future. -- Nomader (Talk) 01:48, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Reviews


Comments

Questions

  1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
    I'm proud of my work at GT Advance Championship Racing and List of Kirby media, which are currently GA and FL respectively. I worked up both articles in spurts of activity in March and November of this year, and I feel that with a few more of those, I could maybe rack up a nice collection. I've created a number of other articles that can be seen in my userspace.
  2. 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?
    Never major ones. Here and there I've had a few minor disagreements with other editors, but I try to keep an open mind to all arguments. I feel that sometimes I can be a bit blunt, but that's something I hope this review can address.

[edit] DCollins52

Dcollins52 (talk · contribs) I know I am a bit early but still I want to be able to know what to do for RFA in a few months. Dcollins52Tell me what you think 18:02, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Reviews

  • Well, here goes. You have quite a far way until you get adminship. However, after some work, I think that you will be a great admin and I would be happy to nominate you. Here are some aspects you need to work on:
  • I would recommend joining a WikiProject. When you are in a Wikiproject, you develop your communication skills, which is a necessity for admins. I would recommend WP:MILHIST. There are contests that you can participate in, and there are a very large amount of very welcoming members.
  • Next, you need to learn about developing an article. I'll give you a brief rundown. First, find an article that hasn't been created yet (or you can choose a one-sentence article to expand). Next, find reliable sources so you can cite your work. I would be willing to help you out with this if needed. Then, write the article, and request to get it assessed. Get a peer review for it if you have an urge to take it to WP:FA.
  • I would like to see activity in the following sections: WP:AFD, WP:AIV, WP:CSD, WP:GA (once you start to learn more about policy you will be able to assess articles).

I will always be willing to help you out. Cheers, ṜedMarkViolinistDrop me a line 18:50, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I can't really say muchwhich Redmarkviolinist hasn't, but my advice would be to concentrate on increasing your mainspace edit count, and work in mainspace-related but adminy areas, like WP:AFD and maybe WP:AN. Densock|Dendodgein public 12:40, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Comments

  • There's nothing to review here. I don't mean to discourage, but you seem to be here for social recognition. You've made seven mainspace edits so far, and are already talking about an RfA and an editor review? Tan | 39 18:58, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Questions

  1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
    Of my contribs to wiki I think I am particulary pleased with most of them, becuase they were my first edits. For example on Oregon Trail I corrected grammar and many minor typos etc. That was my first article edit, so I feel really good about it.
  2. 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?
    No, I havent really, if I did it was minor enough that I dont remember it.

[edit] Inferno, Lord of Penguins

Inferno, Lord of Penguins (talk · contribs) I primarily revert vandalism, though I occasionaly do edits outside of vandalism reversion. I would like to be reviewed on the accuracy of my reverts, and the quality of my other edits, so that I may improve. Thanks! Inferno, Lord of Penguins 03:11, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Reviews

As a huggler myself, I have to agree on the fun part of reverting. 10 out of 10 for the username btw! Right then , seriously, your edit count seems good and the reverting seems sensible and thought out. Edit summaries are good but maybe more consistent for this (I,m not great at this so don't worry!). I like the way you analyse your edits as per Q2, thats great! Regarding this I know it may be difficult but try to always assume good faith and calm down in difficult situations. Your edits generally are important as without them the wiki would become a massive mess. My main advice is to get involved in wikiprojects and article editing in an area you enjoy, my areas are weather and science. To conclude, 8 out of 10 seems good to me. Good luck and happy editing.Andy (talk) 18:19, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Awesome user name. And you had 1,124 edits in a month?!? I know I'm less tenured than you (and most of the people on Wikipedia, for that matter), but I don't see any bad edits or reverts, just skimming through your contributions. mynameinc-Review me 22:33, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Comments

Questions

  1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
    I am proudest of my vandalism reversion, as it gives me a feeling of satisfaction, and it is just fun!
  2. 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?
    Just a hour or two ago I intervened in a ongoing edit war. I talked to both users on their talk pages, however in the end I had to file a 3RR report, and unfortunately one of them was blocked for 24 hours. I think I was not specific enough in telling them why reverting their edits was permissible via 3RR, and in the future I will be more specific, so that users editing in good faith will not be blocked under avoidable circumstances. I do not get stressed or angered under these situations and I try and explain what is going wrong, though at times I will have to file reports.

[edit] The $R$

The $R$ (talk · contribs) I'm requesting this review because I ant to take a look at my progress in editing in the mainspace, how constructive I've been, and if I haven't made too many edits in the userspace. \mathfrak{s}\mathfrak{a}\mathfrak{v}\mathfrak{i}\mathfrak{o}\mathfrak{r} \mathfrak{s}\mathfrak{e}\mathfrak{l}\mathfrak{f}\mathfrak{.}\mathfrak{7}\mathfrak{7}\mathfrak{7} 03:11, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Reviews
Review Here we go... You are a good editor. You had problems with your sig....;), You had problems with your account with users, your accounts, and that youtube thing. I see that you are staying low, BUT you are not improving your mainspace edits. Most of your edits are in the article talk page, Your userpage, and sometimes in the article. Maybe you are afraid of causing drama again, but that is no reason to not improve the article. You can be a great editor, but you're not trying to improve anything. You are asking me to tell you how to improve? You should know, man. You should know. SimonKSK 21:38, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

The reasons why I don't improve an article mistake when I see one is
    1. I see the mistake, log in, then I find out someone already did it.
    2. I'm about to edit when I notice in the contributions that someone did the same edit, but it got reverted.
    3. I'm in a number of edit conflicts with other users (no edit wars though ^_^)
By the way, do I also get a say in this? I'm kinda new to this because Hybrid or iMatt usually alert me on my edits. \mathfrak{s}\mathfrak{a}\mathfrak{v}\mathfrak{i}\mathfrak{o}\mathfrak{r} \mathfrak{s}\mathfrak{e}\mathfrak{l}\mathfrak{f}\mathfrak{.}\mathfrak{7}\mathfrak{7}\mathfrak{7} 04:48, 19 December 2008 (UTC)


Comments

Questions

  1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
    I am most pleased with my early edits and any edits that have reverted vandalism and revised a totally disorganized section of an article. I'm also pleased with numerous other edits, but I am most proud of edits that have been shown quite constructive. Although, I'm unsure of the name of the articles I've edited as I haven't looked at my contributions lately.
  2. 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?
    No user lately has caused me stress. The only users who've ever caused me stress are iMatthew, Alison, SexySeaClownfish, and the Hybrid due to accusations that I lied about my account being hacked and the amount of my userspace edits. But, I've gotten over it since then.
    I noticed when we were working on that article of your a couple weeks ago that it seemed like you had matured as an editor, not changing the sig every day and the whole account thing. But my question is: What is your long term goal of being here on Wikipedia. And were do you see ur self on here 2 years from now? SteelersFan-94 23:32, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Well, first off, I prefer calling it "pulling a Jericho." Second of all, I was thinking of going for becoming an admin here on WP. And, I see myself hopefully achieving admin status and become twice the editor I am today (the matured editor, not the "anger-management issue" editor from June). \mathfrak{s}\mathfrak{a}\mathfrak{v}\mathfrak{i}\mathfrak{o}\mathfrak{r} \mathfrak{s}\mathfrak{e}\mathfrak{l}\mathfrak{f}\mathfrak{.}\mathfrak{7}\mathfrak{7}\mathfrak{7} 04:39, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Good answer. You could very well do it. And I was on a wiki break then lol. Don't worry to much about being an admin though, it's not that big of deal, I'm one a couple of Wiki's but It's not worth changing over. Good luck man!! SteelersFan-94 05:43, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
Not from what I've heard. According to Hybrid, adminship is VERY stressful. But, I can handle it. I hope. and, thanks :-) \mathfrak{s}\mathfrak{a}\mathfrak{v}\mathfrak{i}\mathfrak{o}\mathfrak{r} \mathfrak{s}\mathfrak{e}\mathfrak{l}\mathfrak{f}\mathfrak{.}\mathfrak{7}\mathfrak{7}\mathfrak{7} 06:08, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Climie.ca*

Climie.ca (talk · contribs) I've been on Wikipedia since March 2007, contributing primarily in the field of Canadian Military History. I'm a current member of the coordination team for the Military History Wikiproject, and a member of the FA-Team. Since I have been a contributor for what is closing in on nearly two years, I feel it now necessary to find out how my contributions are perceived by the greater community on Wikipedia.. Cam (Chat) 21:05, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Reviews


Comments

Questions

  1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
    My contributions to the Military History Project (in particular WWII) including three FAs, two As, three GAs, and numerous smaller articles - as they represent the portion of the 'Pedia from which my contributions actually affect the outside perception of Wikipedia. As well, my work on the coordination staff of what has likely been one of the best-run projects on Wikipedia (MilHist) in the past. As for why, appointment to the coordination staff (I feel) showed that the wider community is willing to trust me with positions of authority (at least that's the way I took it).
  2. 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?
    Fortunately, no. I've had minor scraps with anonymous-IP addresses, particularly over MBK004's and mine plans to continue TomStar81's Iowa-Class FT-Drive after his wikiretirement. That said, I feel that the only two minor issues that have occurred have been dealt with in a mature and calm manner.

[edit] TopGearFreak

TopGearFreak (talk · contribs) I have been on Wikipedia for close to two months and would like to know how valuable my contributions are, and if I have made any major mistakes. I used to myspace, I'll admit it, but I've changed. I am part of Wikiproject Wikify and use Huggle to revert vandalism. TopGearFreak 17:20, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Reviews

  • Userpage: It's pretty good 7 STARS
  • Vandalism: Keep up the good work, make sure to give the vandals warnings 6 stars
  • Article: Great!! 7 stars

--Spittlespat 21:47, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Comments from La Pianista (talk · contribs)
I find it very hard to believe you're just twelve years old. Your edits display a remarkable level of maturity - your near 100%-edit summary usage (and they are helpful and detailed) is equally commendable. Such high WP:CLUE levels for your age are very rare. Furthermore, although you have had your share of conflicts, the manner in which you have dealt with them is especially understanding - you easily grasp both sides of the issue and are ready to apologize if you recognize your wrong. Your reports to AIV are also helpful.

Your main tasks, however, (typo-fixing, reverting vandalism) are quite repetitive - I think the use of tools would make it easier. Perhaps, for fixing the typos, you could install WP:AWB and for the vandalism, use WP:HUG. In my opinion, Huggle is much more efficient than Twinkle or Lupin's tool, though much easier to make mistakes. It takes a while to get used to a such a powerful tool.

Also, I would recommend you try some article building. I understand you're relatively new, and so, it's best for new users to try a little of everything. Basically, you've been a WP:GNOME, and, though there's absolutely nothing wrong with that (I am one myself), you could try some other work, like at WP:DYK, or WP:AFD. Either way, see what else you can do and find what you feel most comfortable with.

As is, though, I feel confident enough to say that you will be a fruitful admin candidate in the near future. :) —La Pianista (T•C•S) 23:44, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Pianista, I've just installed Huggle, and I find it much more efficent than Lupin. I do comment a WP:AFD once in a while, but now that I know that they're not noticable I'll go there more frequently. I'll also investigate WP:DYK. Thanks, TopGearFreak 14:45, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

One more thing, TGF - when commenting at AFD or any other discussion, try to avoid "per nom" or "per above" arguments, which basically add nothing to discussion (unless you cannot reword it better). It's more appropriate to reword your thoughts, or at least add "per nom, because ____" —La Pianista (T•C•S) 17:37, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Comments from Andy (talk)

I have to say, that, I have seen you a lot around, especially MOTD and for an editor who came only 2 months ago, you are great! My advice would be keep on doing what you are, see if you can get an FA (I can't!) and get stuck in! Regarding your age, I think it is fantastic, as La Pianista pointed out, with your knowledge and maturity in dealing with issues. I would give you 9.5 out of 10 overall. Andy (talk)

Comments from the_ed17/Allanon

Wow. Did you say that you were twelve? I don't believe you. :P Anyway...on to the reviewing. I didn't see too many mistakes, though remember that all professional (MLB) baseball players are notable. :) Don't feel like you have to Huggle or get a FA, by the way - if you love the smaller contributions, keep gnoming and wikifying away! Someone's got to do those. :)
I liked your edit summary