Welcome to fedrix.com on July 4 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
WP:ER redirects here. You may be looking for Wikipedia:Expert retention or Wikipedia:Editing restrictions.
Shortcuts:
WP:ER
WP:ERV

General information
   Main page
   Discussion
   Backlog
   Archives: (2005–2008) • (2009)
   Templates
edit · changes

Wikipedia's Editor review process allows users' behavior and contributions to Wikipedia to be evaluated by peers, who will provide constructive feedback on areas for improvement. Anybody may be reviewed, regardless of their tenure at Wikipedia. Users requesting a review of their administrative actions should see Wikipedia:Administrator review.

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

[edit] Guidelines

Reviewers and reviewees should adhere to Wikipedia's behavioral policies at all times.

When reviewing, consider these points:

  • User conduct – informative edit summaries, constructive comments on talk page, attitude toward others, etc.
  • Number and types of edits – is the editor making positive contributions to the encyclopedia?

Users with an asterisk next to their name in the subheader have not been reviewed yet. Users may still need more 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, 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]. The preferred format is as follows: Wikipedia:Editor review/John Doe (2)
  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. You must change "USERNAME" TO YOUR OWN USERNAME
  3. Click "Request a review", which will take you to the edit form for your editor review.
  4. Follow the instructions above the editor form to complete your request.
  5. Optional: You may put the {{Editor review}} template or the {{Editor review sticker}} template on your user page to advertise the review page.
  6. Optional: It is possible to add a userbox onto your talk page (after the review is finished) by placing {{User Editor review}} at your user box section on your User page.

[edit] Archives

Sections with at least one review will be archived at Wikipedia:Editor review/Archive (2009) thirty days after they have been created. If you are searching for an archive from before 2009, it will be in the 2005–2008 archive. Depending on the year your request was created, it will be archived in the corresponding archive page.

Contents

[edit] Current requests

[edit] Falcon8765

Falcon8765 (talk • contribs • count) Just curious as to how I'm doing :) Falcon8765 (talk) 16:01, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Reviews

  • You're doing pretty well. For a contributions page almost entirely vandalism reversion, you've got some real gems. Have you looked into Huggle at all? Also, you may want to branch out a bit. Maybe new page patrol or new image patrol? Great work so far. Lәo(βǃʘʘɱ) 01:56, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    lots of vandalism reversion, some article cleanup stuff
  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?
    Nope, I'm pretty mellow; if I have an issue I'm sure I can work it out in a calm, reasoned manner.

[edit] SparksBoy

SparksBoy (talk • contribs • count) I am a very diligent vandal fighter, and like to do Gnomish Projects for the wikipedia. I do not create articles, but I have improved one or two. I am much more interested in keeping wikipedia clear from vandalism. I also use a few tools including WP:AWB,WP:HUGGLE , And just started WP:NPW. Eventually I would like to become an administrator on the wiki to enable me to fight vandalism more efficiently. I never thought I would be asking to recieve a mop and bucket. SparksBoy (talk) 00:06, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Reviews

  • As an editor who proclaims to not do much article writing, but fights vandals, you may have a tough time passing an RfA. Supports wanna see some variety. If it's vandal fighting alone that you contribute with, it'll be tough to pass RfA, especially with around 2000 edits. Now, to be less negative, lemme say this: 2000 edits in 4 months is pretty good, and I myself fight vandalism (though mostly new page patrol stuff), and you've got some good experience under your belt. Gnomes are awesome, so props for that. You might wanna look to help at WP:BACKLOG, which by it's very definition needs it. Also, supports don't want only automated edits, and around 80% automated, which is a problem for RfAs.`Oppose and ask for more experience would be my !vote. Besides all that negative stuff, you're doing a great job. As a vandal fighter, you're doing a wonderful job for one so new. Keep up the good work. Lәo(βǃʘʘɱ) 06:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the solid advice, I appreciate it... Maybe I will think about writing some kind of article in the future SparksBoy (talk) 23:26, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    My primary contribution to the wiki would have to be fighting vandalism. That's how I started. I was a user of freenode from another chat, and came across the wikipedia channel. I was talking to a few people and found out how bad the vandalism is here. So I decided to fight vandalism diligently. I have answered many questions that people have about fighting vandalism Creating more vandal fighters. I obtained WP:ROLLBACK Powers before I was WP:AUTOCONFIRMED, and have been doing it ever since.
  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 not been in an editing dispute per say however I have disagreed with how people have used WP:Huggle , but it has never caused me stress. I am good at walking away and not letting my emotions grab a hold of me. If I get in an editing conflict in the future I will stay calm (walk away if needed) and if it becomes out of control I will bring in an uninvolved person.

[edit] Leonard^Bloom*

Leonard^Bloom (talk • contribs • count) I figured I might as well get one of these, since it's been quite some time since my last one. Since then I'm pretty sure I've improved upon what I should of improved upon, and have edited in places I haven't since edited before. Enlarged my scope, if you will. My answers to the following questions will be a be bit long-winded I think, mainly because I have an ego and a horn I love to toot. Besides the primary questions, I'm open to any and all questions that any potential reviewers may have, and am looking forward to being told how awesome I am. Ladies and gentlemen, I am at your will, Lәo(βǃʘʘɱ) 19:22, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Reviews


Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    My primary contributions? Primarily I ditz around, editing small things like this, this, this, and maybe a bit of this sorta thingy. I also tag stuff for CSD, like so. I spend intervals of time doing new page patrol, and CSD comes up a decent amount of times, but I also make minor, formatting or reference-based edits on the new articles, like this. I have been known to make mistakes while on patrol, either huggle or new page, because unfortunately I caught a case of the human (and it's fatal). My most pleasing edits...hm. Well, when I decide to get off my lazy butt and actually do some content writing, it usually comes out quite nicely. So, I suppose my best contributions would be in places where I actually wrote an article, like Big Stick Ideology (I practically wrote the damn thing, with some outside help [thanks again]), Frederic Porter Vinton (an early attempt at decent writing) and the current work in progress over at User:Recognizance/Sandbox (of which I haven't done much, but I like where it's going if it goes anywhere). I'm also very happy with my reference work; even just formatting the plain urls makes the page look at least 10x better. Oh, and Huggle. I love me some vandalism reversion.
  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?
    Quite recently there was a little hubub down at Deford, Michigan and Cass City High School. The dispute is over (the editor causing the problem was blocked, first for warring, then for a sock), but the articles have yet to heal, which something I'm going to one of these days put some time into. As far as actual stress goes, there was some, yes (and it was surprising; this was probably my first real editing dispute, and it legitmately cuased me real world stress, something I wasn't expecting), but it faded fast. All I needed was to back away from the articles in question, and fiddle around on huggle or new page patrol. I dealt with the problem by following User:Toddst1's example: I isolated the article's portions that were causing a problem, and tried as best I could to bring everyone 'round the campfire to discuss the matter. I think it worked out well enough. In the future? Well, I hope not to get into too many disputes. A calm head can work wonders however, and this is a mindset I hope to keep. Without, Wikipedia is no longer any fun, and we wouldn't want that, would we?

[edit] onopearls*

Onopearls (talk • contribs • count) I have been on Wikipedia for just over two years, and I have made just over 3400 edits. That being said, I know that I have not been the perfect Wikipedian, as I have lost my cool several times in the last few years. I would just like to know what I can do to improve my edits on Wikipedia, and what I can do to better serve our community as a whole. Onopearls (t/c) 04:47, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Reviews


Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    I am not particularly pleased with any of my edits. Although I am pleased that I was able to greatly expand the opening paragraph for Bolivia, as well as several sections within the article. before and after
  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 do not believe that I have recently been involved in any edit wars. That being said, I have been involved in several dispute on the Sathya Sai Baba page, including one recently over the use of "controversial" to describe him in the opening paragraph. user:J929 and user:Dilip rajeev do probably cause me the majority of the little stress I get from Wikipedia. I did prematurely accuse Dilip of sock puppetry, and I subsequently apologized for my harsh reaction. J929 and I had a rather lengthy argument on the SSB talk page, and I may have gotten a little heated. I have dealt with the stress by taking a short wikibreak, as I felt that I had began to assume bad faith. I returned to the Sathya Sai Baba article about a week later, and I believe that, since then, I have taken a much calmer approach to editing (excluding the discussion over controversial on the SSB talk page).

[edit] A new name 2008*

A new name 2008 (talk • contribs • count) I have been around since the middle of 2007. I started editing under a different username. I abandoned that name because it had personal information that I did not want advertised. Now I am just looking for feedback as to how I am doing and if anyone sees any problems that I need to fix. A new name 2008 (talk) 13:16, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Reviews


Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    Under the old username and at the start of this one, I did mostly vandalism patrolling with some content adding. Lately I have moved away from the vandalism some and started reviewing AFDs a couple of RFAs and new pages trying to save some that are questionable.
  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 was involved in an editing dispute on Junkers Ju 87, see Talk:Junkers_Ju_87/Archive_3:_July_2008_-_January_2009#Trivia for the discussion. It really didn't cause me stress and I think I handled it calmly. There really isn't anything to get stressed over on wikipedia, If for some reason I do start to get stressed, I will just walk away from it.

[edit] MacMed*

MacMed (talk • contribs • count) I've been here for about a month and a half, which I realize is a very short amount of time, but I am curious to see what the general community thinks about my edits. What I think would be interesting to see is this: based entirely off of my edits, and ignoring my wiki-age, please tell me whether you would Support or Oppose me in an RfA and why. I am not planning on running, but I think that would be an interesting way to review me. Thanks for taking the time out of your day, MacMedtalkstalk 16:35, 26 June 2009 (UTC) MacMedtalkstalk 16:35, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Reviews

  • Please avoid getting media deleted - particularly if it's an illustration in an already text-heavy article, this is causing me a small headache to fix everything up now. Krupo (talk) 05:31, 2 July 2009 (UTC)


Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    I don't do a lot of article creation, I am much more behind the scenes. My only article contribution so far is Laser Ghost a low-importance, start-class article under WP:VG. I patrol New Pages on occasion, tagging articles as neccesary. I also have rollback status, and use Huggle to fight vandalism. I have contributed to a few discussions at WP:SPI, and I have also done some work at WP:MEDCAB.
  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 not really been in any real disputes as of yet, though I have only been here a month and a half. One issue, which arose quite recently, was between me and User:Cliffsteinman. I have made a WP:NPW request, and therefore I have temporarily watchlisted the page. I noticed an IP made a change to Cliffsteinman's request, and I revert/warned the IP. He wrote a nasty message to me, and I made a somewhat unpleasant reply shortly after. I don't plan on making a habit of enemies, and I don't think I will. In future, I would simply allow an attack like that slide, or if it was particularly offensive, make a note of WP:AN, after reverting the personal attack.
  3. Are there things that make you sick in Wikipedia?

[edit] SchnitzelMannGreek

SchnitzelMannGreek (talk • contribs • count) I am a user on here that works to counter vandals. I have rollbacker but tend to use Lupin's Anti-Vandal Tool. Other than vandal fighting...I have worked on Wikiproject Assyria and have done the usual creating articles and adding. That was mostly at first though I do vandal fighting more now with occasional adding. I want to know how am I doing so far. Thanks:) SchnitzelMannGreek. 13:06, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Reviews

  • Looks pretty good so far. You've got a good blend in your contributions, with a decent amount of article edits and a high amount of vandalism-reverting. You're on a great track. It's great that you're editing articles you're interested in, and you're pretty good at fighting vandalism from what I can see too. Keep up the excellent work, and keep asking questions when you need help. Inferno, Lord of Penguins 18:29, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    counter vandals. I have rollbacker but tend to use Lupin's Anti-Vandal Tool. Other than vandal fighting...I have worked on Wikiproject Assyria and have done the usual creating articles and adding. These are generally pleased cause its keeping the site clean and adding to topics. Soon I will start an article about the Syriac Orthodox Liturgy to accompany the rest.
  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 that I know of

[edit] Charles Edward*

Charles Edward (talk • contribs • count) I am always looking to improve! I have been editing on the wiki under this account since 2006, and without an account for about a year prior to that. I have made 17,000+ contribs, mostlty the old fashioned way. I have use twinkle for vandalism, and hotcat for categorizing. I do not really have any great ambition other than to continue contributing in the areas I already do so in. I am just curious to see what others think of my contributions, and any areas that others think I could improve in. :) —Charles Edward (Talk | Contribs) 17:27, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Reviews


Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    I have contributed most extensivly to Indiana History articles, and I consider History of Indiana to be my greatest project. However Battle of Tippecanoe and William Henry Harrison are probably the best quality articles I have been a major contributer to.
  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 never been in any editting wars, or what I would think of as a significant content dispute. (The only one that would be very notable was one on Refund Anticipation Loan which occured before my present understanding of policy). That taught me a lesson about how to go about future situations to avoid drama and stick to the topic. As I see situations escalating I take it to the talk page and state my opinion and try to see what can be done to resolve preceived problems.

[edit] Triplestop

Triplestop (talk • contribs • count) Hello everyone, I would like to become an admin someday and I just wanted everyone's input on how I am doing so far. Triplestop (talk) 23:01, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Reviews

  • Apologies if my questions below seemed a bit pointy. Looking through your contributions, there doesn't seem to be anything particularly wrong going on, and it's certainly helpful to have people doing new pages patrolling. The sort of nagging doubt I have is that you have very quickly found your ways to the red tape areas of wikipedia. If you are keen on becoming an admin, I'm pretty sure there will be a few issues: one is that you haven't been here all that long (some people seem to work on 6 months minimum, others a year); secondly, you do not appear to have made any edits to articles that are not tagging or reverting of vandalism. This is all useful work, but there is generally a feeling that admins should be involved in editing as well as doing the mopping. It helps to have experience of the difficulties faced while editing, as admins often have to deal in areas of edit conflict; lastly, by the way you have leapt into the areas you are working on, it feels like to me you are not a user with only 3 weeks on board. If you were to go for adminship I would have doubts over whether you had edited under a different username, hence the question below.
My advice, for what it's worth, is to try and expand your involvement more into the editing side. When patrolling new pages, how about seeing if there are articles you can improve, by cleaning up text or adding sources etc. Quantpole (talk) 21:46, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
    • Thank you for your review, I will certainly try to expand my editing. Triplestop (talk) 01:09, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    Speedy deletion and other cleanup areas.
  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.
  3. Have you ever edited under a different username? Quantpole (talk) 16:05, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
  4. Is there any particular reason you want to be an admin? Quantpole (talk) 16:05, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
    No reason in particular. I just want to help out. Triplestop (talk) 17:49, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] McDoobAU93

McDoobAU93 (talk • contribs • count) I've been a part of Wikipedia since October 2006. I've learned a lot while reading and editing, and I truly enjoy making the project a more informative and reliable source for information. I also try and welcome new users, hoping they get as much out of Wikipedia as I do. McDoobAU93 (talk) 21:13, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Reviews

  • You appear to have a healthy amount of content work to go with your vandalism patrolling. I think it's good that you have chosen articles on topics that you are interested in and have consistently worked to maintain them. Also, after a read-through of your talkpage, you seem to do a good job with dealing with conflicts and answering questions calmly and thoroughly. Keep up the good work! I'll see you around. --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 07:15, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    I've made over 2200 edits to Wikipedia so far. Maybe not the most prolific editor, but I do try and make a difference. Unfortunately, I spend more time than I like fixing vandalism and test edits, but I try and treat each appropriately (i.e., I don't bite). I work in a lot of theme park and amusement ride articles, removing rumors and speculation (something commonly added) while adding facts, and sources to back them up. I also am trying to de-list articles, so to speak; I mean, converting lists of information into prose, which is more encyclopedic. One of my more recent accomplishments was converting the numerous lists in Disney's Hollywood Studios to a better form. I've started work on Disney's Animal Kingdom to accomplish the same goal.
  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?
    When working with other people, conflict happens. When asked a question about my edits, I try and answer with my point of view and listen to theirs. In almost every case, we reach some consensus, which makes the article that much better. I have to admit I've gotten involved in a couple of edit wars, but during them, I've learned how to better handle the situation, and when to get Wikipedia itself involved, through the admins and various noticeboards.

[edit] Yellow Evan

Yellow Evan (talk • contribs • count) I have been editing her since August 2008 and have made 3000 edits, though I have been blocked four times, though I have not been blocked in 6 months. I have 8 GA's though, I was not nominator on all of these, though I have edited all of these articles. Now I want to feedback about my progrees recently. Leave Message ,Yellow Evan home , User:Yellow Evan/Sandbox 16:46, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Reviews

You've definitely improved your writing ability and now you generally discuss something before you make a significant edit. None of your intensions (from what I've seen) have been bad, all are in good faith. Concerning what you've hear on IRC with FAs, you shouldn't focus on a large project that involves getting several articles to FA status, it's best to stay focused on one article until it's done (I'm being a hypocrite in this case) before worrying about featured stuff. As I've gathered from some of our conversations, your current plan is to get the 1996 Pacific hurricane season to Good Topic; a good topic is a (pardon the pun) good way to start out with larger projects but, as I said, it's better to focus on one at a time. Keep up the good work with Boris and if you need help with writing any part of the articles just ask me or any other members of the project. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 15:15, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
For the most part, just keep on writing. Don't worry so much about getting everything featured, or even to good status. You're young, but you're enthusiastic, which can be good if you keep on practicing your writing skills. Try your best to make sure every edit has not a single typo, and that all comments you make are thought-out and properly expressed. Don't be afraid to go against the grain of other editors and form your opinion, but at the same time, don't do anything stupid ;) Just keep it up, really, and in time you'll have nothing to worry about. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:35, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    While a partly contributed to 8 GA's most of my "true" articles have been merged, but a plan to unmerge and expand one, however. The one that I have left that I had written with little help was Hurricane Boris (1996) which currently stands at C class
  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 am involved in this huge conflict that some of the (non-WP:TC editors may have heard) Tropical Cyclone editors have been in conflicts over notability. Most notably, Hurricanehink (who used to be my role model) has been arguing with me and Julaincolton about if all tropical cyclones are notable and if the NHC is it's own source and now about timeline articles. Also, occasionally Jason Reess says bad words to me. I then contacted an admin

[edit] ComputerGuy*

ComputerGuy (talk • contribs • count) I'm starting to do biannual check-ups on my editing, so I'd like to see how much I've improved over the last 6-7 months since my last review in December. –CG 20:17, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Reviews


Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    I am a contrubutor to WP:USRD (mainly Washington roads) and I have gathered a total of 5 GAs over my year online. They are [in order]: SR 531 (WA), I-82, SR 527 (WA), SR 409 (WA) and SR 31 (WA). I am pleased at these articles because they show some of my best work. Some non-featured articles, like List of state highways in Pend Oreille County, Washington are also some of my best work.
  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 numerous times, but when I tend to not "go with the norm" I switch over and apologize. If there is a major vandaliser or a user who is ruining my edits, I usually warn him/her and back out unless further harassment comes, then I call for help via IRC.

[edit] Silver seren*

Silver seren (talk • contribs • count) I've been around for a while, but I feel like I could be doing more. I want to know how i've done so far and what I should focus on in the future. SilverserenC 15:48, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Reviews


Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    At one point in time, my contributions lingered around reverting vandalism and such, but lately I have turned to actually making and expanding articles. I still have a large science-based focus, but I have begun to grow beyond that and into other areas that generally need help and, of a large portion, on articles about Russia. The one article that I am greatly pleased with would be War of Laws because of its length, the fact that I got it submitted to DYK, and the general fact that it is a good, well-rounded article.
  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, there have been multiple instances that I have been stressed with people or situations, though not so much lately. Back then, about half a year ago and back further, I found myself having issues with people's actions and beliefs and even things that I just noticed and I wasn't a part of. The worst time that I overreacted and basically lashed out was during the Saffron Terror AFD, in which I was trying to force my own way and not even quoting policy to back myself up. I feel that I am much more mature now, since this past year has mellowed me out a lot. For the future, I hope to be level-headed and able to calmly back up my assertions in any argumentative discussion I get into. Of course, it would be much better if I don't even get into such, but if I hang around AFD, it might be unavoidable in some cases. Either way, I hope to be able to handle stressful encounters better in the future and become a better person overall.

[edit] ZabMilenko*

ZabMilenko (talk • contribs • count) By requesting a review, I hope to find out which areas I can improve in relation to the WikiPedia policies. Within the next month or two I intend on pursuing a WP:RFA and if there are any glaring problems with WP:COI or WP:CIVIL I would certainly want to work on them. ZabMilenko 01:20, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Reviews


Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    • I am a practicing WikiSloth so my contributions are all over WikiPedia and intermittently spread over the last four years or so. I cannot cite a particular contribution which "pleases" me but I am kind of happy with how Medford, Oregon is turning out. There are lots of other things that I have to credit to the WikiProject Oregon folks just as much as I.
  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 had quite an awakening with an undo by Glycoform (talk · contribs). At first I assumed he was assuming bad faith but then I realized a mistake I had made. Taking the time to see the other argument is something I am working on. It is hard to say what the future holds but I would prefer to be the type of person who checks the facts thoroughly before responding.
  3. Why do you need to delete articles? (question by BenderRobot (talk · contribs))
    • Thank you for the question! (I am assuming it has nothing to do with this afd). Even though it may sound canned, I believe articles need to be deleted when they violate policy in a way that is unrepairable (including the history). I have learned that articles for deletion is not the end so I am less concerned about deletionism than I used to be. However, since fresh content is provided often by fresh faces, I think in iffy cases deletion should be put off for a few days at least, so the newbies don't get bitten.

[edit] Sk8er5000

Sk8er5000 (talk • contribs • count) I am after a editor review to see in which areas of Wikipedia I can improve. I am interested in eventually getting MacBook to FA status, becoming a SPI clerk and becoming a admininstrator. Thanks -- Sk8er5000 (talk) 03:41, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Reviews

  • If you want to be an admin at some point in the future, you may want to get some experience dealing with images. One way would be to work on Media requiring renaming. Even though the images can't actually be moved like articles can, they can still be reuploaded with better names.--Rockfang (talk) 03:40, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    My primary contributions to Wikipedia have been to the article MacBook, which I have had a peer review done on, and in the anti-vandal area, where I did a large amount of work using Huggle, and also keeping the article Best & Less free of conflits of interest. I am pleased with those edits as I have worked quite hard on them, and are just generally proud with them.
  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 yet to experence any major stress on Wiki. I intend to deal with this in future by negoating with the other person, and getting a 3rd opinion from a uninvolved editor.
  3. Some time ago, you wrote an opinion at a RfC, notably stating Telling other users to "nick off" is quite clearly not [what] I, for one, would expect [..]. Therefore, we have a issue with a editor [..] telling us to "nick off", when we have asked a simple question;. One of your endorsers thinks you should add the link where he said "nick off" to your statement. You haven't responded to this request yet. Can you provide such a link? If not, why not?
    Whoops. I put the inverted commas to say he was saying words to the effect of that, I apoligize to all editors confused by this. I will take steps to rectify this now. Sorry :(
  4. Do you think the timestamp is an important part of the signature or just something that is added by a default signature?
    Yes. The timestamp tells people what time the post was made. It helps keep order in AN threads. It can help people flag down active editors.
  5. Do you think the timestamp should include the date only or also minutes or even seconds? Should it be accurate?

[edit] Smallman12q*

Smallman12q (talk • contribs • count) I would like to know what the general community thinks of me. Smallman12q (talk) 00:05, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Reviews


Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    My primary contributions is my work at DYK and the hundred articles I created. Generally, I have been contributing in various parts of wikipedia (exploring in a way), but I am becoming more focused on article development and contributions in encyclopedia area iteslf. I also have about 5000 edits in six months, so I am fairly active by wikipedia standards.
  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 only editing dispute so far has been with chemtrails. I responded by creating a relevant discussion thread on the talk page and sought to see why it was that I was in the "wrong." I believe that disputes can be solved with a simple discussion and with a bit of common sense.

[edit] mynameinc*

mynameinc (talk • contribs • count) I recently surpassed 2000 edits, and I wanted to know if I was still doing everything right. I have had minor disputes with editors, but that is all in the past. mynameincOttoman project 12:16, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Reviews


Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    My primary contributions are my created articles and reverted vandalism. I am particularly pleased with New York City ethnic enclaves, B-Class, Good Article nominee, brought from Stub.
  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 have been in conflicts over editing, and I may get aggressive and inflamed, but I try to stay calm.

[edit] Mlaffs

Mlaffs (talk • contribs • count) I've been a user of this site for a number of years, and a registered editor since November of 2007. I was directed here by someone who I was asking to look at my contributions for a potential RfA, and have to admit that this was one of the nooks and crannies that I'd never seen before. So, I'm here primarily for that, but also because feedback is never a bad thing — well, constructive feedback isn't, anyway. BTW, please take my edit count with a grain of salt. It's high-ish, but it's a nature of the type of things I've been doing and I don't have any illusions that it's in any way a reflection of the value of those contributions. 'Taint nothin' but a number. Mlaffs (talk) 19:40, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Reviews

  • I'm going to start off by saying that you have done a ton of gnome work. I'm impressed with the time you must have put in to such tedious tasks, and what you have done looks pretty good. The only area I find you could improve in is content contribution such as good articles, did you knows, in the news, and featured content. While this is not essential for adminship, many users look for these contributions in potential administrators. Other than this, there's really not much to criticize. Actually, reviewing your edits I have come to think that you would make an excellent administrator now. I'll send you a query over on your talk page. Malinaccier (talk) 21:52, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    My contributions to Wikipedia are easily summed up as gnome-like. I tend to look for a task or project and then work the heck out of it. The project I'm most proud of took place through last summer, where I cleaned up incoming links to almost every single disambiguation page that included radio or television call signs. Probably 7-8K edits in total with only about a hundred that I wasn't able to solve. My most recent big project was doing a run through the FCC's radio station database to develop a list of our gaps in coverage (building and maintaining that list accounts for what looks like an inordinately large number of edits in Userspace — it's a sub-page). That work led to dozens of page moves to get articles named correctly, and adding project tags to numerous talk pages that hadn't yet been identified. It was the page move piece of that work that got me thinking about an RfA in the first place.
  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 think I can honestly say that the vast majority of my interactions with other editors have been positive, or at least no worse than neutral. That being said, I have been involved with the ongoing date delinking arbitration case. I'm not an involved party, but I'm certainly an interested one. I have absolutely no opinion about date autoformatting, nor am I particularly wedded to most date links themselves. However, I did take part in some AN/ANI threads about the process piece of this — the manner in which the mass delinking effort was effected — and so I've been involved with the Arbcom case from that perspective. All that being said, there's little here that's stressful. I do big thinking involving big risks all day long at work. This is where I come to do bite-sized, repetitive tasks to wind down at night or while I'm watching a ball game on the weekends, so I'm simply not prepared to let stress mess with that. Deep breaths, and all that.
  3. What work would you be doing with the administrative tools? (Malinaccier (talk) 19:57, 22 June 2009 (UTC))
    Well, I can certainly tell you what I would not be doing with them. I would not be closing deletion debates, nor would I be heavily involved in issuing blocks. I'm not planning to step into areas where I haven't built a lot of experience already as an editor. In the short-term, I think I'd likely be using the tools for the sort of gnomish tasks that got me thinking about them in the first place. For example, radio stations change call signs a lot, which result in page moves, new disambiguations, undoing disambiguations, and the like. Deletions are often necessary as part of that process, and so I'd probably be on the lookout for G6 speedy deletion requests, particularly where they're in support of a subject area with which I'm familiar. I've also found myself getting a bit interested in categorization lately, and so I might dip a toe into C2 speedy requests as well or category renames resulting from CfD. Beyond that, I suspect my tool use would develop the same way my editing patterns have — I run into something that seems interesting, learn about it, ask questions, and then dig in. I'll probably also be watching for more mundane areas where there are regularly backlogs, to see if there's a load that I can lift from other admins who can (and might want to) add value on the complex stuff. I'm certainly not going to be the most active admin out of the box. Ultimately, I guess I look at it like I look at living in my condo building — it's not that I think my life is incomplete unless I own a wrench and a screwdriver, but there are times when it's easier to do things myself rather than calling the super or hiring a handyman, and I may even find that I start to like home improvement and want to do it more regularly. Of course, that's just a handy analogy — IRL, I always call the super or hire a handyman. Mlaffs (talk) 21:01, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Discussion

  • Edit count posted on talk page. - Dank (push to talk) 01:48, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Giants27

Giants27 (talk • contribs • count) I have been here since September 2008 and had a editor review a few months ago under my old username and now that I've been here longer and have started to get involved in DYK and trying to create all the redlinks listed here. I am also targeting a late summer RfA and would like to know what I've got to work on between now and then. Thanks! Giants27 T/C 14:37, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Reviews

  • Hi there! I've seen you around quite a lot out here, especially at WP:RfA. Your contributions are impressive, and the DYKs are a plus. Your article contributions are a HUGE bonus and will give you a boost in your RfA. You might wish to gain more experience at WP:AfD and the rest of the admin-ish areas though. (Note- I'd support your RfA) AvN 17:16, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
    • Thanks for the kind words, I've been starting to get more involved in AfDs and trying to do more than my sporadic voting.--Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 17:53, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
  • I've seen your work on DYK, and you've always struck me as competent and hard-working. You're actually on my list of people to ask for reviews of 2009 Orange Bowl when I get that ready for FAC. JKBrooks85 (talk) 08:37, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
    • I'd definetely be willing to help check it out.--Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 17:53, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    It has to be my creation of well over 150 (200?) biographies about Canadian Football League players.
  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?
    Definetely usually since I edit the NFL and CFL roster templates it's whether or not a player was signed and I usually just double check stuff and bring it to the other editor.

[edit] DoriSmith

DoriSmith (talk · contribs) I periodically think about going for Adminship, and it seems like getting reviewed is a good step to take before that particular leap. What do y'all think? Dori (Talk • Contribs) 01:45, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Reviews

I admire your work. I noticed you are a rollbacker like myself. I would consider working in the anti-vandalism field more often, maybe join the Counter-Vandalism Unit (if you haven't already) as this looks good on your RfA and will really motivate users to support your campaign. I see no reason why you shouldn't have the mop within a few months. Please let me know when you plan to RfA, I'll definitely support you. Keep up the good work. T-95 (talk) 20:09, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Dori -
I tthink you're doing terrific work in AFC, you're one of our most experienced editors, and you have the temperament to be an administrator. However, I think you need to do a couple of things before you consider RfA, particularly if you want to self-nom.
* First, I think you should do some more recent changes patrolling, specifically for vandalism and spam. I like the CSD tagging you're doing now, but it's also critical that an admin understand what is and what is not vandalism. I saw you've reverted vandalism at times, but you didn't warn the culprits - you must warn them, not only for the warning's sake but for the timeline of any future block. For this admin, it is frustrating to the nth degree to find a persistent vandal who has 10 vandalism edits without a single warning, meaning that I've got to start that warning process from scratch when it should have been started 9 edits earlier. You should become familiar with Grand Central Station WP:AIV and learn when to report there and when not to report.
* Lately there has been a great deal of emphasis at RfA, AN, and ANI about rollback and its use. I see you use it regularly, but be certain you're using it only for reverting vandalism. Rollback doesn't leave an edit summary, and that's the chief reason it must be used sparingly. Make sure your edit summaries are descriptive. I often run out of characters in my edit summaries, but I ramble. :-)
* Do you have a GA or FA that you nursed to approval? Have you nominated some of the AFC creations at WP:DYK? If so, make sure you point to them (proudly!) on your user page. If not, that's an area for improvement. Mediation such as you've outlined below is a terrific skill for an admin and will help you at RfA.
* Since I can see your deleted contributions, I know you have some experience with files/images, but non-admins will likely quiz you thoroughly since your upload log is empty and you have zero, nada, zilch, no undeleted contributions to the File namespace. To counter this, demonstrate that you have a firm grip of WP:F, WP:NFC, WP:NFCC, and their cousins and nieces. It's not necessary to have uploaded X number of images, but you do need to show you have a grasp of the image policies. Participation at WP:PUI could be helpful here.
IMHO, lack of experience with vandals will be the chief concern to RfA !voters. However, you have a good deal of rounded experience in lots of areas and you should have little difficulty filling that small hole in your Wiki-resume. If you like, I'd be happy to coach you, and of course, let me know when you would like to pull the RfA trigger. Let me know if you have questions. :-) - KrakatoaKatie 03:35, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Comments

Questions

  1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
    My top contribution (imo) has been to Donald Bren. Before I got involved, there were edit wars about whether it should contain certain negative—but sourced—information. I was able to find better sourcing for the claims, which made the pro-inclusion editors happy, and left the anti-inclusion people satisfied that at least it wasn't solely sourced to tabloids.
  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?
    After my success with Donald Bren, I tried to do similar mediation at David Ferguson (impresario). Sadly, that's where I ran into one SPA editor who, given a choice between consensus and ownership, always chose the latter. After some stress, I realized that in general, it's not always possible to make everyone happy, and that in particular, I'm not happy dealing with certain levels of drama. I decided to walk away and focus on wikignoming, which is what I really enjoy doing.

[edit] Realist2

Realist2 (talk · contribs) Hi folks, I just wanted some feedback on how I'm doing. — R2 15:10, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Reviews

  • Realist, as of late you are doing fine on Wikipedia. I noticed your contributions and saw that you edit many articles regularly. I, however, recommend that you edit other areas of Wikipedia, not just articles, such as WP:XFD or even here at WP:ER. In the future, when in a conflict, remain civil and (like you stated) seek help from other editors, or sometimes its best to just walk away from a conflict. Best, --₮RUCӨ 19:59, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
  • The blocks from a year ago a little disappointing, but they are from a year ago. By contrast, you have lots of nice stuff on your userpage with regards to adopting and thereby helping out inexperienced editors as well as with GA/FA class articles. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 00:45, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
  • How the hell are you not an admin yet? –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 04:43, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
    • I withdrew on about 80% support, off Wiki stuff, long story. I'm quite happy now, I really don't need the tolls that much. — R2 13:41, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
      • Julian is right though, you should get the mop sooner or later anyway. No need is not a good reason not to, you might be able to do some good with it and every bit counts ;-) SoWhy 23:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
  • I agree. Realist is a very trust-worthy editor and I fully support/endorse him. MaJic (talk) 16:51, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Comments

Questions

1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?

Getting Michael Jackson to FA was pleasing, but highly stressful. It's where I got all my policy knowledge, writing and rewriting it as I discovered more and more.

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?

Get into loads of conflicts, it comes with the territory. Usually I just seek the input of other sane editors, things then get fixed.

Any other comments?

I want this to stay open a little longer, so adding a new section to stop it archiving. — R2 04:00, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

I think you're a great editor. I'm more than willing to look past your past blocks, but I know that Wikipedians have a way of holding things against others. You have been one of the most prolific editors I have encountered and I applaud you for your work. Please keep it up. Orane (talk) 00:34, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm also pleased at how great an editor you've become: you're polite, helpful, reasonable, a hard-worker, and are a huge contributor of content. You are good in dealing with BLP issues and disputes (especially on Lady Gaga), and from my observations of your behavior and work these last few months, I believe that your past problems are gone: you are truly one of our best editors. Please continue the excellent work you do, and please consider running for adminship again at some stage: I think you'll be a fine administrator. Acalamari 16:48, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Editor_review"
Personal tools
Visit joltnews for the latest headlines
Visit bloit.com for company information
Geed Media does computer consulting on long island.
This page viewed times. See Logs