Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:36, 3 November 2006

Template:Admin school link

• ]

Request an editor review

Before requesting a review, please understand the following: Shortcut WP:ER Editor review is a process that allows users to have their behavior and contributions to Misplaced Pages evaluated by peers, who will provide constructive feedback on areas for improvement. Anybody may request a review, regardless of their tenure at Misplaced Pages. While an editor may remove comments about them that appear to be off-topic or simply personal attacks, it is important to remember that the editor review process may produce comments that the editor may not like or personally agree with, and the editor being reviewed should make every attempt to use this collaborative process to communicate with others. Editors should not refactor comments they dislike. These should either be simply removed or discussed. Administrators requesting a review of their administrative actions should see administrator review. This page frequently gets backlogged, so requests may wait up to several weeks for a response. If you have fewer than 300 edits (or your last request was within the last 3 months), your request may be removed without notice. Please consider reviewing another editor when you request a review.

If you would like to be reviewed, please follow the steps below: Create a subpage using the box below, replacing USERNAME with your username. Please make sure there is no space after your username, as this makes it hard for reviewers to reach your request. Do not save the page yet! Follow the instructions in the box above the request page. Please remember to fill in the requested fields. Optional, but highly recommended: You may put the {{Editor review}} template or the {{Editor review sticker}} template on your user page to advertise the review page. Optional: It is possible to add a userbox onto your User page (after the review is finished) by placing {{User Editor review}} at your user box section on your User page. Instructions on how to use templates may be found here. Optional: As only admins can see your deleted contributions, these admins have volunteered to perform editor reviews focussing on deleted contributions (this will probably be of most interest to newpage patrollers) Optional, but highly recommended: There is a large backlog at Editor Review, so take some time to review some of your fellow Wikipedians.

The editor review process was shut down in June 2014. Making a request is no longer possible.

Instructions for reviewers Reviewers and reviewees should adhere to Misplaced Pages'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. Also, the older backlogged requests have priority for reviews, because users who have had their requests sitting there for a while often feel like they've been ignored, and every user deserves at least a few positive words on their progress or some constructive criticism if they request it. Please remember to remove the asterisk when you leave a review for an editor. When you have finished reviewing, consider notifying the user with the {{ER done}} template. Please substitute this template. Archives Sections with at least one review will be archived at 2010, 2011, 2012 or 2013 archive thirty days after they have been created. If you are searching for an archive from before 2010, it will be in the 2006–2009 archive.

Click here for unreviewed requests

Reviews

Add new requests below this line

User:Tachikoma

Tachikoma (talk · contribs) I don't want to become an administrator, but I would like to know how others view my participation in Misplaced Pages: what do I do well, what could use improvement, suggestions for growth. Things like that. When reviewing me, I would prefer to be called by my real name, Kyoko. I am very curious to hear what you have to say. Kyoko 12:59, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• This is rather difficult, as you don't appear to be doing anything wrong, or even faintly dubious. Are you looking for areas to branch out into? Your last 500 contribs don't seem to show any AfD votes or nominations, something that is very important for WP and something that some people find enjoyable. Any RC patrol? People get addicted to that. Your userpage doesn't list any good articles or featured ones. FA is quite stressful (like having your teeth pulled by an incompetent dentist: very painful and it takes forever), but GA is relatively easy to get and much more fun. Reading WP:WIAGA might be a good start, as might , which is basically my cheat's guide to GA. Probably most of this is completely useless, but I hope that some of it vaguely helpful. Cheers, Moreschi 11:54, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
• Oh, and one more thing. IMO there's no need to beat yourself up for ticking off a user who thoroughly deserved it. No need to cause yourself pointless stress, surely? Cheers, Moreschi 11:57, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Let me put it this way: I've been a Misplaced Pages user since the end of January 2006, and by now, I've learned how to contribute to articles. I also know that there are areas of Misplaced Pages that I don't have much (or any) experience with. I was wondering what else is there on Misplaced Pages, if I ever get into an editing rut. Misplaced Pages is a huge project, and it can get confusing when you venture outside the realm of simply writing articles.

Now for your suggestions: From time to time, I do RC patrol, when I'm in the right frame of mind. I think I've participated in exactly one AfD. I don't list any good articles or featured articles on my userpage because I don't think I've made a very large number of contributions towards any. If I had to pick one, I guess I've contributed some in the article Cystic fibrosis, which is a featured article, but not really because of anything I've ever done. I've contributed quite a bit towards the Macintosh article. I would like to eventually build the articles that I mention below into good or even featured articles, but that will take some time. I think that The Count of Monte Cristo has the best chance of that. I'm currently more motivated to work on the lung transplantation article, which I think has good potential for promotion to GA or FA, if it continues to develop as quickly as it already has.

I would also like to know if I handled the various conflicts listed below as well as I could have. I do worry about not hurting other people's feelings (perhaps unduly so), which is a major factor why I don't want to become an admin. --Kyoko 15:14, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

I decided to add that while I could mention Good and Featured Articles that I have worked on, I'd feel a bit awkward in claiming credit for what was mostly someone else's work. If I remember correctly, I added a little information about the genetics and the molecular physiology of CF, and I rewrote a substantial part of the early history of the Macintosh in some long-ago revision. In both cases, it was mostly reworking content that was already there. --Kyoko 02:54, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

• No AfD (unlike me :] ), nice user page (unlike me, again), I don't see anything wrong... You are doing a very good job! Randfan 00:16, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! --Kyoko 22:03, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

• Aside from your so friendly and supportive participation in Esperanza, what I find most useful about your work in Misplaced Pages is your understanding of the need to make a bridge between lay and expert knowledge. It isn't always easy to see how this can be done, but I'm sure it is the right principle, as well as a unique selling point for Misplaced Pages. It should also be mentioned that your language skills enable you to make a bridge between the English and French language 'pedias. And I like the fact that you are always seeking to improve your skills. Perhaps (as you suggest yourself) your next step will be to stop worrying quite so much about hurting other people's feelings. Looking forward to reading lots of your future edits. Itsmejudith 00:22, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Judith. As you can tell from the statement on my userpage, I would like to translate more content between the two Wikipedias. It's something which I admit I haven't done much of: the only example I can think of offhand was a translation of a letter from the poet Arthur Rimbaud to his professor and mentor, Georges Izambard. I guess for understandable reasons, health and science topics have consumed most of my recent work, but continuing to translate between the two 'pedias is a good idea. --Kyoko 22:03, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

• Well, I can't really point out anything that needs to be done that hasn't already been said. Your edits, which I believe number slightly higher than mine, are certainly more evenly balanced than mine, but I don't think it would be entirely right to compare you to me and me to you. The bilingual business (?? I need a better word) is certainly one I commend. And I'm suggesting again the AfD to you, as much to myself as to you. I wish I could say more, but everything has already been said. —  $PЯINGεrαgђ  01:55, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I think my total number of edits is slightly lower than yours, but my number of mainspace edits is about four or five times yours, but as you point out, everybody is different. Some users opt to contribute mostly towards articles, some get involved with policy issues, some people occupy themselves with vandal-fighting, and some people prefer to be sociable. While everybody should be contributing in some manner towards the encyclopedia, Misplaced Pages is large enough to accommodate all these different types of users. --Kyoko 22:03, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

• Me again - I think you handled all the disputes superbly on a personal level, but my word I would have fought the corner a bit harder at Great Expectations. You are so obviously right - the article is hopelessly unbalanced. Just for future reference, it sometimes pays to be a little more assertive, particualarly when you are blatantly correct - though, of course, I appreciate that at the time you weren't feeling up to much. All meant in a spirit of constructive crititcism, obviously - I'm not trying to pick on you. Cheers, Moreschi 18:09, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. At the time I was feeling pretty fragile, so I wasn't prepared for the tone of Cecropia's response, and yes, I did take it personally. At the same time, I totally understand the feeling of being protective of one's one work (something I also encountered in the Kodachrome article), even though it violates the Misplaced Pages policy on article ownership. I didn't want to hurt Cecropia's feelings. I was hoping to find some acceptable consensus, but the two sides in that dispute seemed unwilling to concede anything. --Kyoko 18:34, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

• I'm going to comment as a Deletionist and using that as my filter. I cannot say this strongly enough -- if you want an example of how to write good articles, look over Kyoko's contributions. What I find is that everything excellently sourced, cleanly written, and most of all, not awkward to read. There's some tortured syntax in some articles to reach NPOV, but there's none of that in what Kyoko writes. You use edit summaries that actually summarize what you do, and out of 950+ edits in the mainspace, only two entries have no edit summary (wow!). You participate in most of the areas of Misplaced Pages and you are always civil, polite, and thoughtful. Not having a focus on some of the more arcane aspects, such as FA (which is basically a boss fight) is hardly a problem, since you could, if you wanted to, get Lung Transplantation to FA status. If I could find a problem it would be more particpation in AfD, if only because you seem to be levelheaded enough to prevent both over-eager Deletionists (me!) from slaying any article that moves while being solid enough to recommend when to keep articles. Also, perhaps you could try things like tinkering with templates, or doing work in the Help section of Misplaced Pages --- someone as helpful and polite as you would be great there. You are doing a great job. --Elaragirl |||||| 13:57, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
• Sorry this is soooo late, I know you've been asking me to do this for about 2 weeks now! Now, what to say? I think I'll use my dry scientific mind and put this in the form of a sort of bulleted list, if you don't mind... (stole this from Daniel.Bryant)

• Statistics

• Activity: Well-spread; I liked seeing that your edits are more or less centred around your areas of interest, but not entirely limited to them. Good work.
• Mainspace: About a third of your total, but numbers aren't everything. Your work on lung transplantation has been exemplary.
• Misplaced Pages: I'm going to discount coffee lounge edits, but you've done great work at the Ref Desk. I would love to see someone as knowledgeable, level-headed, polite and cogent as yourself there more often, though... :)
• User talk: Good number. You're always polite and civil, even during recent difficulties. As for the incident on your talk page - I think you handled it with just the right amount of firmness, so don't worry about it, at all.

• Behaviour

• Civility: As I've already stated - always polite and courteous.
• Courtesy and kindness: I've seen you helping new users, which wins big points in my book.
• Participation in 'process': A little low. While AfDs etc can be rather noxious, I'd recommend giving WP:FAC and WP:PR a go. You seem capable of giving fair, unbiased reviews to articles, so I think your input would be appreciated. Also, if you ever plan on raising Lung transplantation to FA-status, it's good to hang around these areas to see what people's standards can be like.

• Final thoughts

• OK, so you're not going to make an RfA anytime soon :p But you're the sort of user we need more of - article writers, builders, helpers rather than fighters. Obviously this is an entirely biased review, since you're one of my favourite people around here , but seriously, you're doing great work just doing what you're doing, and your work is appreciated a lot. riana_dzasta 14:59, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Very Good, per riana...Keep up the good work, remember there are 100's of admins but only 1 Tachikoma/Kyoku. Have a nice day.__Seadog 05:11, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

• Highly Valuable Editor Kyoko, despite the fact I'm pretty much leaving Misplaced Pages, I noted you've got a current editor review. So I felt the need to contribute. Your user page says you're not intending to become an Administrator, which I have to say is unfortunate, because your edits are of a very high quality, you participate in other non-core community activities and make others feel welcome, and you seem very familiar (judging solely by the quality of your edits) with Neutrality and other Misplaced Pages policies. That being said, I fully understand what you want to be doing on Misplaced Pages, ie. contributing to the information base rather than the drudge behind it, and it's appreciated. Most people seem to forget the core part of Misplaced Pages is the information, not process, arbitration etc. :) Pursey 19:05, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   I am most proud of my creation of a lung transplantation article, a topic that has become very important to me due to events in my personal life. I've also written articles on other aspects of pulmonology, including lung allocation score and ventilation/perfusion scan. I have also created or expanded articles relating to pulmonary hypertension, including the main article and some drugs that are used in its treatment, such as treprostinil and bosentan. I'm also proud of my contributions towards the novels The Count of Monte Cristo and Norwegian Wood. Lastly, my most well-known contribution, as well as the most praised, is an essay in my userspace (now moved outside Misplaced Pages due to admin concerns), about my recent suicide attempt. While not properly encyclopedic, I guess it is nonetheless a contribution to the Misplaced Pages community at large.

3. 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 my very first conflict was over the article Kodachrome, whose tone I felt to be too gushing or too POV at the time. After an initial dispute with the primary contributor to the article, the anonymous user and I reached a compromise that acknowledged the technical capabilities of the film without sounding like ad copy. There was also a dispute on the talk page of the novel Great Expectations regarding what constitutes a good story summary. Because I haven't recently read the book, and I made little or no contributions to the article itself, I ultimately withdrew myself from the dispute. I have also conflicted with users in the past over their abuse of my talk page, namely altering it without my permission, so that they could delete comments that they later regretted. While I would have preferred to avoid those conflicts altogether, I believe I behaved in a civil and patient manner, and I expect to do the same with future conflicts. When I find Misplaced Pages too stressing, I either do simple edits like making wikilinks, or I take a short wikibreak.

User:Atlantis Hawk

Atlantis Hawk (talk · contribs) Well I've been a part of Misplaced Pages for a fair while now, I guess I haven't been making as many edits as a few others but I still believe in the best for Misplaced Pages and I believe being admin could only help. Atlantis Hawk 06:02, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Hi. You currently have virtually no chances of becoming an administrator, you need a lot more experience and you need to exponentially increase your flow of contributions. I would not risk an RfA until you have at least +3000 edits, of which +1000 on the mainspace and a few hundreds on the WP space. You need to get involved in administrative-oriented tasks, such as countervandalism or XfD. And a good knowledge of the policies. And no conflicts. Your edit summary usage is too low, please always add an edit summary to your edits. You have a long way to go but I wish you good luck. Regards.--Húsönd 23:40, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
• Hi there, while I wouldn't have put it quite that way, it's true that you are extremely unlikely to become an administrator at this point in time. Húsönd covered pretty much everything, but let me add that the more you contribute to articles, people will learn your strengths and weaknesses and come to recognise you. As I've said several times today, having the trust of the community is an integral part of being an administrator, and the only way to gain that trust is through increased participation in Misplaced Pages, with a consistent record of good judgement and civility, even during times of conflict. Or rather, especially during times of conflict. I wish you well. --Kyoko 00:45, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually, now that I read my review again, I do seem to sound a little bit harsh. Sorry Atlantis, it was not my intention to sound like that, the review was meant to read as with a friendly, advisory tone. But, well, when you're reading something there's no way to know if the person who wrote it had a smile on their face or a Hitler-like expression. :-) I hope that you didn't find me harsh. Regards.--Húsönd 00:39, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

• Hello there, Atlantis Hawk. It seems I am late for the party :-)

  • First of all, I notice you have started using edit summaries since you entered this review. That is very good, you are listening to people here! 75% for major edits and 92% for minor ones is still on the low side (both should be at 95% or above, usually), but I guess it is much better than the one you had in the past.
  • You have been working pretty hard in November, however note that it is not enough to contribute one month in order to have a successful nomination. One of the requisites for being an administrator is experience, which is usually obtained by both time in Misplaced Pages and edit contributions. I suggest you to contribute for three or four months at least in order to be eligible as one.
  • Reviewing some of your contributions, I see this summary a bit misleading, because AFDs are not votations, but discussions, and you don't vote, you give an opinion. Also, in such discussion, Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Enrico Pallazzo, you chose to delete instead of redirect (maybe following the lead of the ones who had given their opinion before you). Remember that redirects are cheap, so if an article can be contained by another, it is better to merge and redirect or just redirect. A new user may create the article again, and if that can be prevented with a redirect, much better.
  • I also notice you have started two wikiprojects (one of which merged with an existing one), and joined several others. That should give you even more interaction with other users.
  • I have problems with Image:Kahuna Icon.jpg, because you are saying This picture is actually copyrighted, but I have permission to use it. You may have permission, but you are not demonstrating it in the page. Either take the picture yourself, get written permission from the owner of the image to release it under GFDL, or request an administrator to delete it. Same goes for Image:Kookaburra Beast.jpg. As for Image:Koh kood map.gif, you need to specify if you had created the image, or picked it from somewhere else. Regarding Template:User WP Sex, you may consider asking WikiProject Sexuality to use it as their own, if a template is used only by one user, it may be better to move the template into your own namespace. Finally, regarding Image:NW tway map.jpg, where in the site states it is a public document? Try to be more specific when giving sources (in example, providing a link to the image and to the page from where you picked it).

  You are off to a great start! As stated above, I would recommend not trying to nominate yourself for a couple of months more, at least until you are more familiar with the different manual of style recommendations. Since you seem to know a lot about Australia, I recommend you to pick an article and try to make it a good article. This will prove others in your future nomination that you know how to edit. Also, consider that AFDs are not votations where a side "wins". Finally, try to be a bit more specific when uploading images. The ones I mentioned could be sent to Misplaced Pages:Possibly unfree images, as their source and claim of permission are not clear in the image summaries. Remember, it is better to have an article without images than images with non-clear free statements. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 18:46, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   Answer

3. 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?

   Answer

Questions 1. There is a contribution that I am particulary pleased with and it's one of my fairly recent ones. They're the edits I made to the Morristown West High School page, which were more a cleanup than anything. I stumbled across this page when skimming through the articles for deletion pages when I realised this page did not deserve to be deleted. It's the subject of a possible copyright infringement now and I don't know exactly why.

2. Well I haven't had any major and I mean very major conflicts but there is a dispute between Phanatical and me over what should be in the Girraween High School page. The dispute is relatively minor, but I don't think Phanatical understands that a lot has changed since he left, well before me. So now it's more a concern with the awful truth versus watered-down propaganda. I don't dislike Phanatical but I think he should give a little way to other editors. The dealing with this problem still hasn't quite subsided but it's a working progress. Should this happen again however (with anyone), it will be more a debate over talk pages until a common idea is reached. Whether that be good or bad, it won't really be that harmful.

User:ScienceApologist

ScienceApologist (talk · contribs) I am reposting this editor review for more input. ScienceApologist 12:55, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

Review by Jcam

Hello, ScienceApologist. I am Jcam and here is my review:

• Wow. You certainly have enough edits. It's not likely anyone could oppose a nomination on the grounds of lack of quantity of edits. Nor could anyone say you have a lack of quality edits, since you have not one, but two articles you brought to FA status. I feel somewhat inadequate in reviewing you as I have a mere 1000 edits.
• I do have a lot of experience voting in Rfa's so I know what they are like. And sometimes people can be against you for reasons they don't really state in the Rfa. In your case, I could see a lot of voters going against you because of your strongly held opinions and beliefs. And being controversial, although you may be right, never helps an Rfa. I think there are two things which most Rfa voters look at: (1) the editor aspects (2) the interpersonal aspects. You pass the first test with flying colors. The second test- well, it appears you need more work. Here's some suggestions:
  • Decide if being an administrator is all that important to you. The "mop" is the symbol because it can often be a dirty, thankless job. As an editor sans the mop, you have a lot more leeway in the things you do. With the mop, you become almost a "target" subject to personal attacks, ones you must keep your cool about since you, to many people, represent the project. So just a thought...
  • I've seen the areas which you have been editing in... they are controversial ones. Get away from them for a little bit. Make it your goal to just simply browse wikipedia for an entire session which you normally would spend doing heavy editing. Sure, log in, and fix any small problems you may see (spelling, punctuation, grammar, etc), but you're main goal is to find areas of Misplaced Pages, topics which you haven't ventured into. Perhaps you may find some other area of interest far away from science/psuedo-science topics which interest you. And then do your contributing there for a while, quietly and efficiently.
  • As an administrator, you will be called upon to be unbiased. Because of your history of edits, you may have to go the extra mile to prove you can be NPOV (which, granted, from your standpoint, you are because you stick to what scientific observation tells you). Start patrolling articles you normally would not touch. Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Mormonism, these are all articles which are heavily vandalised. Add them to your watch list and revert people who mess with these articles. It would be a good way to show the community that even though you have opinions, you would protect those articles as diligently as any of the ones you have contributed to.
  • Stick to the 1RR. Don't get into arguments with people over edits. Simply have a discussion on the talk page and have faith that eventually things will sort themselves out. Getting into revert wars and getting all bent out of shape does not get things sorted out any quicker.

I hope this was helpful. Any questions, feel free to contact me. Jcam 03:09, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Review by Dar-Ape

• Well, Jcam has stated some of my thoughts as well. Working well with other editors is an integral part of improving articles as well as being an administrator. You should certainly always strive to act friendly and helpful, but no one is perfect. If you do run into another not-so-nice dispute, I would suggest that after smoothing things over with an editor(s) involved, you may want to consider doing some "good karma" actions-- try helping out users on the Help Desk, the Science Reference Desk, or any other positively oriented actions such as these. It is sometimes easy to forget that while many users uphold the highest ideals in thought, their actions often seem bad simply because of newness or unintentional mistakes; yet as an administrator, you must be a model of good faith, helpfulness, and patience. Of course, though, helping in these venues is only a suggestion, and all choice ultimately belongs to you. Cheers, Dar-Ape 00:23, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Review by ReyBrujo

• Hello there, ScienceApologist. Here is my review, I hope it is useful for you.

  • I see you always use summaries and they are pretty descriptive ones. Keep it up!
  • Good working making improving those articles to featured status. That is probably one thing I would not be able to achieve in a long time to come, thus I really admire people who is able to do it.
  • Most of the opposing votes for your prior nomination was because of a very short statement. I hope next time you will try to give more information about why you want the tools. As I say, someone needs to demonstrate that a need for the tools exists, and short statements are usually not welcomed. Just to point out, you just used 12 words for this review statement.
  • Talking about becoming an administrator, I would like to hear why you need the administrator tools. You don't appear to do enough vandalism revert to require a rollback function, nor have reports to the Misplaced Pages:Administrator intervention against vandalism page. There are no requests to Misplaced Pages:Requests for page protection, and just 50 edits in Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion and 2 in Misplaced Pages:Categories for deletion back in June. You have participation in requests for comments and arbitration, however you do not need to become an administrator to join the Committee. I usually say that I believe there are two kind of administrators, those who are article-oriented and those who are user-oriented. Article-oriented ones answer calls at Requests for page protection, close different XFD discussions, are in charge of the different categories for deletion (speedy deletions, orphaned images, etc), etc. User-oriented administrators prefer to answer calls to Administrator intervention against vandalism, reverting and warning users, track down users who may be using sockpuppets, and answering the different administrator noticeboards.

  You are an excellent editor, and you would make a good administrator, but you need to demonstrate a real need for the tools. While it is possible your RFA would be successful, personally I don't see a reason to support you unless you need the tools. Some more interaction with other users, especially while fighting vandalism, could be helpful for those checking you. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 16:31, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Did you not look at my contributions? I have asked for page protection on numerous occasions! I have also nominated dozens of articles for deletion (back when it was VfD and not AfD). Have you looked carefully through my contributions? Without the admin tools, I find that it means that I don't have the time to go through the ridiculous typing required to do simple tasks, so I tend to avoid pages where I don't have the tools. This is a Catch-22 situation. I'm not going to spend time on AfD when I don't have the mop and bucket. I'm not going to get the mop and bucket unless I spend more time on AfD. That's some really poor reasoning, if you ask me. --ScienceApologist 21:48, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

When reviewing, I look at the last 5,000 edits. From what I see, you edited at Misplaced Pages:Requests for page protection three times ( and ). As I said, I have only looked at your last 5,000 edits, which cover since the second week of May 2006 until now, almost 6 months of editing. Consider this: in 6 months, you have three edits at page protection request and 50 edits at articles for deletion. There is no need for participating in AFDs if you don't like them and/or won't be closing AFDs. However, I did not see any reason for you to require these tools. Why don't you answer my question and tell me why you need the tools? What would you do with them? If you think my 5,000 edit perspective, covering 6 months, is misleading, think that most times people will check your last contributions, not those done a year ago. -- ReyBrujo 22:34, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Review by User:Opabinia regalis

I'm not really a big fan of editor reviews. But I thought I should say something here, since I intended to support your last RfA and then it was delisted by the time I got home from work. (And I'd likely support you again.) It goes without saying that you're one of our best physics editors, and take a hard line against crankish nonsense. Which is great, but it's gotten you into a lot of entanglements (how many ArbCom cases now?) - at minimum I'd suggest waiting till the pseudoscience one settles out (I can't imagine Asmodeus' has any traction, but I don't know the whole context). More general comments:

• You're on a website where people argue for months over a minor redesign of the sidebar. People like to discuss everything, a lot. For better or worse, people read brief and pithy but see curt and dismissive.
• You don't suffer fools gladly (or at all). That's good; we need more admins who won't put up with foolishness. But you tend to be rather acerbic in an environment where people will bend over backwards not to offend even the most persistently obnoxious user. Most people don't know their ass from their elbow about advanced topics in physics (myself included), so when they go to review your contributions, they see you calling a fellow disputant ignorant/incompetent/a crank, and have no way of evaluating the arguments to decide whether or not it's true. It's easy enough to say 'oppose, civility issues' and move on.
• You'll most likely be asked about NPOV and 'SPOV', whatever that means. Have an answer. Make it more than a sentence long.
• 'Be efficient' will be read by at least a few people as 'clobber people who are in my way'. Come up with some specifics, ideally with examples from less than 6 months ago. Start by filling up CAT:CSD if you want to help empty it as an admin. I tagged speedies when I didn't have the time/inspiration to do any serious article writing.
• Not really related to adminship, but good science minds are always great for reviewing other science articles, even if they aren't directly related to your area of expertise. Consider spending more time on peer review or FAC; it would be really useful.

Opabinia regalis 03:18, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   Answer Big Bang and redshift are featured articles.

3. 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?

   Answer In an arbitration over pseudoscience as we speak. Also involved with arbitrations regarding User:Reddi, User:Ed Poor, and other promoters of pseudoscience/fringe science. I am of the opinion that WP:NPOV#Undue wieght, WP:NPOV#Psuedoscience, and WP:FRINGE are clear that minority/pseudoscience/fringe science opinions are to be marginalized in mainstream articles while they are to be explained in their own articles with appropriate criticism from the mainstream community, skeptical organizations, or verifiable and relevant ideas that have scientific consensus.

Optional question from Dar-Ape (talk ·  contribs)

1. What Administrator tasks are you interested in working on? Dar-Ape 03:37, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

   Please see my previous failed RfAs for this info. --ScienceApologist 12:36, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

User:CattleGirl

CattleGirl (talk · contribs) I've been editing Misplaced Pages for a few months, working mainly with vandal 'fighting' and other things- I contributed to a major sockpuppet case a while ago, and rather than nominating articles for deletion I've been re-writing them. I'd like this editor review to point me in the right direction and hopefully prepare me for a future RFA. CattleGirl 09:21, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• G'day. You're doing quite well. I've seen you positively contributing to RC patrol where you revert vandalism effectively. Warning users with a WP:VAND tag is always helpful. If you ever want to go for RFA, however, you will need to be able to demonstrate examples of positive article development: adding reliable sources to articles (i.e. from "Category:Articles with unsourced statements"); trying to get editors to provide an equal balance of sources in "Category:NPOV disputes"; or simply just article development how you see fit. Further, getting heavily involved in AFD, FA, RFC, CP or PUI discussions (just to name a few) helps to demonstrate to other users that you have a sound knowledge of all the policies of Misplaced Pages. You're in the early stages of your career here. Keep your head down and your spirits up gradually getting more involved in the positive article creating community and the policy and administrative functions and you will be seen as a responsible editor who will be a good admin. Cheers and happy editing! Jpe|ob 10:20, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll try to get involved in building articles more... and also those comments and links to some 'blue pages' were great. Some of those discussions I hadn't seen before, but after reviewing the policies, etc, of them I'll be sure to be contributing- thanks again for the review! CattleGirl 09:41, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

• Hello there, CattleGirl, how are you doing? Here is my review, I hope you find it useful.

  • First of all, I suggest you removing Image:PanicAtTheDisco promo 2006.jpg from your user page. According to our Fair use criteria, point 9, fair use images should only be used in the article namespace. People is quite sensitive about misusing fair use images, and the faster you correct it, the better.
  • You are using edit summaries pretty well, they are informative and useful, great!
  • I see quite a lot of vandalism fighting, have you considered (if not yet) joining the recent changes patrol? Warnings you had posted appear justified and correctly applied.
  • Oh, someone who prefers to rewrite articles instead of sending them for deletion? That is pretty good! Hopefully you don't spend time while working in articles that do not assert our required notability. I don't see many users doing this (I do not do that, for sure!), so my compliments for your effort in expanding Misplaced Pages.
  • What I would point out is that you have relatively few edits in the article talk namespace. Discussing with other users in talk article talk pages is important because it indicates you are willing to listen and share your ideas with them in order to improve articles. Maybe you should try to help the WikiProject Star Wars in creating a good or maybe even a featured article? In these collaborations, users do tend to talk quite a lot in order to coordinate efforts, and learn to work in teams instead of individually (which I think you do as you like saving articles that editors usually don't find useful).

  Adminship isn't that far for someone contributing like you, however you need to do a couple of things. Besides participating in recent changes patrol, you may want to check whether the pages that are being vandalized should be protected or not, reporting them to requests for page protection when necessary. Also, if you don't like participating in Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion, you should then try to give a hand at Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion, Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion and Misplaced Pages:Templates for deletion, as usually only a very small amount of users do give their opinion there. Also, I recommend to spend some time at the noticeboard, where users and administrators try to solve some problems, with may give you hints as to how to act in determined situations. Finally, don't forget to warn users if what they did to an article is not useful. Remember that we have four levels of test warnings, and that you can repeat them as much as you consider necessary. In example, if a user adds "egg" to an article that does not need it, it may be a simple test, which you can warn with a {{test}} or not depending whether you think it was a one-time vandalism, or someone who is testing and should be redirected to Misplaced Pages:Sandbox. If after your warning the user adds "egg" again to another article, there is no need to escalate to a {{test2}}, just give him a test1 even if he has it. The important thing is that the user is redirected to the sandbox when he is doing good faithed edits, and that people who are on vandalism spree know editors are tracking them out. The way you handle these situations will, in the future, be examined by those reviewing candidates at Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship. Oh, and while you gain experience to present yourself in such request, don't forget to continue editing. Administrators are also editors who are expected to know how to write articles. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 23:37, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, that was very helpful! I've been wanting to bring a few articles up to good and featured status lately, and the Wikiproject Star Wars should be a good place to start (plus saving the Panic! pages from another afd process, that would be good too!), so thanks for bringing that up. Since you added the comment about warning users, I've been trying to do that for every revert that I do, so thanks again! CattleGirl 09:41, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.
• View my edit summary usage.

Questions

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

   There aren't many major edits that I am pleased with more than others, because I'm pleased with all of my edits, however I must say the article re-writes I've done have been probably the most satisfying. It's also good to save an article from a potential deletion.

3. 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?

   A while ago I was having a small argument with Topcattheirrefutable, as he had been accused of sockpuppetry and retaliated against the user who put the tag on his page. It was a discussion on following policies and what it means to Misplaced Pages, and I believed I handled the discussion well. Other than a few angry vandals, there haven't been any other situations like that at all.

User:Bloodpack

Bloodpack (talk · contribs) Hi! ive been here in wikipedia since the beginning of this year, and id like to know what are the things that i still need to do to help the betterment of wikipedia and also help my fellow wikipedians †Bloodpack† 17:26, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Hello there, Bloodpack, how are you doing? Here is my review.

  • The first thing I noticed upon visiting your talk page was a warning for a unsourced image. Reviewing the different ones you have uploaded, I notice Image:Leinilyu.JPG is tagged with apparently an obsolete license (note that it suggest to use {{No rights reserved}} instead). Also, there is no text claiming the image to be free (if it is stated somewhere in the site, please add a link to there). In fact, when uploading images, try to link to both the page holding the image and the image itself, so that users can easily verify the image and the copyright text for it. The same can be said about Image:Marsravelo.jpg, there is no way for any editor to verify the image is free. As for Image:Kudeta.jpg, see if you can use a fair use rationale for it (and any other fair use image you may upload in the future).
  • Examining your statistics, with around 1,200 edits in the article namespace and 200 edits in talk pages, I see you spend some time discussing with other users about the article itself. Although I see several edits where you added different banners, in others you actively discussed. Pretty good. Also, with an average of 4.53 edits per article, I take it you are very specialized in comic-related articles. Maybe you could use that to your advantage, focusing in a single article, polishing it according to the fictional guidelines to achieve good article status.
  • Mathboth reports a very low summary usage, 40% for major edits and 25% for minor edits. Summaries are extremely useful for everyone. First, it allows other editors that have the article in their watch list to know what you did in the last change (in example, reordered sentences to match chronology, wikified section, removing some speculation, someone please add a reference for the other sentence). And second, it allows people (including you) to quickly locate revisions by just looking at the history (in example, if you want to know where your speculation was removed because it was unreferenced and you just found a reference, it is much easier to check the history and find the one that says removed speculation about wings, please add a source than having to blindly check every revision for it). I heavily suggest you to use summaries, as long as necessary to explain your changes to the articles. Even a +comic in the talk page is useful, so that people know you have just added a banner to the talk page and not asking a question (which, if they think you did, would make them go check the talk page, losing seconds that could be invested writing articles).

  Your work with the different comic-related articles is appreciated, especially your ability to write articles about unknown artists (considering most of the articles from America and Europe, don't take that as an insult!). My suggestions are basically that you spend a couple of seconds more writing an edit summary whenever you save a change (if you have problems remembering to do that, just click at Special:Preferences, go to the Editing tab, and tick the Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary option), and that you focus on an article, polish it according to our manual of style (try to encourage participation at the Collaboration of the Month), and to try to achieve good status. Maybe with time you could help also to polish one even more to featured status. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 18:55, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   im most pleased with the articles i contributed specially those that i started, it provides additional information in wikipedia, the clean-ups and the minor edits. i strongly believe that even with the little edits i do, it means a big help in wikipedia

• Comment can you provide any links to your contributions in order for editors to have something to assess you by, please? (aeropagitica) 15:24, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

im most pleased with the Russian (comics) article and seeing it how it improved when i first started it. also with the Carlo Vergara article

1. 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 learned that different people have different attitudes, its just a matter of how you deal with them, but i try to be reasonable as possible and avoid personal attacks, as i also respect the other party's personal opinion

• Comment Can you provide diffs to any conflicts in which you have participated, please? (aeropagitica) 15:24, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

the article that i started Pat Lee caused me to be involved in an edit conflict. it started out with this which eventually led to this

User:Karimarie

Karimarie (talk · contribs) I would like my edits to be evaluated so I can improve my own editting style. Kari Hazzard (T | C) 15:58, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• I felt your rapid reversion of my edit of Israel was unjust.

It seems you often revert Israel edits very swiftly and others may feel similarly to me.

Johnbibby 23:41, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

• You don't want to be sticking banners on article talk pages. This was discussed, for instance, at the inception of the Linux WikiProject. It usually incorrectly claims that the article is being actively worked on by the project, and discourages editors who are not part of the project. Some of the best editors on Misplaced Pages are lone cowboys, and don't like claims being staked all over the place. If policy had allowed me to use rollback on those edits, I would have done. On sight, every time. People waste too much time on bureaucracy these days. Just go and edit articles. Much more satifying. - Samsara (talk ·  contribs) 01:49, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

• Hello there, Karimarie, how are you doing? Personally, I do not agree with Samsara. As every article in Misplaced Pages needs to be rated in both importance and status, articles should belong to a WikiProject to get such ratings. However, I am not a member of the WikiProject Linux. Now, for your review, I notice you have very similar statistics: around 700 edits in the article namespace, 150 in the article talk, 350 in the user, 200 in the user talk and 100 in the Misplaced Pages one. Most of your edits in the article namespace are vandalism reverts, which is pretty good. You could consider joining the Recent changes patrol in order to learn how to patrol and the different tools available for patrolers. However, I am kind of disappointed that you don't warn vandals as often as it should. Remember that we have four level of warnings, thus someone vandalizing an article for the second time should be awarded at least a {{test}}. Also, if you aren't yet, consider checking the contributions of the user you have just warned. While checking for vandals is very welcomed, remember that Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia, where editors should spend some time writing and polishing articles. The fact that you are proud of your vandal fighting indicates several points: that you don't have an expanded edit history while improving articles, that you feel comfortable tracking vandals, and that you may be target of those vandals you keep reverting. I wonder why you did not mention your interaction with Berakhot (Talmud), which seems pretty extensive. With some more effort, and recurring to the manual of style, you should be able to make it a good article. Finally, I find User:Karimarie/Watched/Users somewhat strange. While people have these kind of lists (even I have mine), most times we do clearly state whether they are "good" (in example, "People I respect") or bad (in example, "Spammers"). That you don't make it clear which ones are "good" and which ones are "bad" may bring some shadow for the good users. However, this is a personal feeling, to which you apparently don't agree. Ending, I believe you need to warn users more often and spend some time writing articles (fighting vandals is pretty stressing once they learn to click your signature to arrive to your user page!). If you don't feel comfortable with editing and expanding articles, you can take a break from reverts by checking the different deletion debates. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 04:40, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   I am particularly pleased with my many, many reversions of vandalism. That said, revert edits are not much in the way of contributing content to Misplaced Pages.

3. 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 had many conflicts with other editors, although generally with regards to reversion of vandalism they have caused or the occassional content dispute. Some of these users have caused me specific stress due to their repeated attacks against me. I deal with it now and in the future by belief that I have Misplaced Pages's policies on my side and that if I must defend my actions by gaining consensus that I am able to do so.

4. What major changes do you think are needed here on Misplaced Pages?
5. Optional question from User:Youngamerican. I noticed in a recent CfD that you mentioned WP:SNOW. What are your thoughts on this essay? When should it be applied in the closure of any XfD?

User:Miller17CU94

Miller17CU94 (talk · contribs) I have contributing to Misplaced Pages since Memorial Day weekend of 2006 and I am not trying to become an administrator. I just want to do my articles better and I would like a review on how my edits can be better Chris 14:22, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Hello there, Miller17CU94, how are you doing? Here is my review, I hope you find it useful.

  • For someone who has started in May, you have been very active. I see you have increased your participation in this project until October, when you suddenly cut it by half. I hope it does not mean you burned yourself, but instead that you are still trying to find the right amount of edits per month you can do without influencing your life outside Misplaced Pages.
  • Am I counting right? 13 DYK contributions? Impressive! It not only informs that you have a good number of created articles, but also interesting and pretty long ones! Congratulations!
  • Mathbot indicates you use edit summaries only once every four times for minor edits. You should consider using them more often, There is a check in the Preferences section where you can make Misplaced Pages ask for an edit summary everytime you write something. It is a good way to remember to use them if you just forget about them.
  • Something curious I noticed: Although you have 5,500 edits in articles, you only have 24 in article talk pages. I think (I may be wrong, of course) that you enjoy editing articles that are, as you say, "long overdue", without active editors, and that may be mostly stubs or new ones. Everyone here is able to choose how to contribute, and I think you prefer editing articles yourself, but consider that Misplaced Pages is a place where there is a strong sense of community, where users work together in order to build articles. Experience with other users is also needed in order to handle conflicts, which soon or later will arrive. Also, the high edit amount per article indicates you like to spend some more time in articles than most other users, which is understandable since you write them from scratch.
  • The images you have been uploading as of late have been well referenced and sourced, although you may consider adding a fair use rationale for every article the image is being used in.

  You are doing a great job at creating needed articles. I always say that, between a red link and a stub, I prefer the stub, because anonymous editors can contribute to stubs, but can't create articles. You not only create articles, but develop them into reasonable articles. I don't have many suggestions to do, as you seem to know our manual of style perfectly. I may suggest to try to polish some articles into good articles, maybe asking for a peer review in order to get some feedback about how to expand them. Of course, I suggest you to spend some more time in article talk pages, inviting and discussing with others how to continue improving the article. To some users, people sometimes tell them to stop socializing and begin writing. In your case, the opposite may be true: try to gather some help to carry an article to good or even featured article. Our success is not based in our individuality, but in our ability to share the responsabilities with others. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 02:18, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   I am pleased on two things. 1) The articles on the individual FIS Nordic World Ski Championships which were sorely needed and overdue. 2) The articles I am working on right now in food science and technology.

3. 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 issues I have dealt with previously have been images and the copyright issues, and with capitalization. The eleven images I had first downloaded werre deleted because of my unfamiliarity with the process, but since then I have been able to download without any problems, including two I was able to get permission from the organization officials (Institute of Food Technologists and Phi Tau Sigma). Capitalization has been adjusted on this to where I am not putting it on every single word like I had done previously. My main issue that I am dealing with right now is putting mathematical equations on Misplaced Pages and I have asked for assistance which I am receiving right now, specifcally on the Thermal death time article.

Brief review

I have had only very little contact with Miller17CU94 but have found this user extremely diplomatic and easy to work with. --Coppertwig 14:21, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

User:Poetic Decay

Poetic Decay (talk · contribs) Hello. I'm trying to work my way up to administrator status (but don't plan on filing out or accepting a request until I'm at least 16). But my main concern right now is to find out what my weak points are so that I may improve on them. Any reviews about my edits or tips on being an administrator would also be appreciated. Thanks! // PoeticDecay 20:59, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• SUIT's Review - Okay... Now, first off I want to say you're a good editor, you use edit summaries, you revert vandalism, and all the things a Wikipedian should. Now, you'd like to be an admin one day, have you participated in any AfDs? Since, you know admins have to delete pages, and all that other stuff.. And I also think you should look through some RFAs to, well, see how they're doing and all that, though probably you already know all that stuff. And well, you're a good editor, and when you have an RFA in the future as you said, you may have a good chance of succeeding (In my opinion). That's about all I have to say. Good job! --SUIT 15:34, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

• Kyo cat's review - This is interesting! These are a lot of articles that you've edited and extremely improved. Uploaded images, too, reverting vandalism, being nice in talk pages, and you;re extremely bold! I think you've got the potential to be an admin! But seriously, this is a great edit count, you really know what you;re doing. I know, pretty cheesy review I've just given, but that's just my own thoughts. ¡Adios! Kyo cat 04:26, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

• Jayron32's Review The DragonBall Z articles you site are well written, and overall I think they are very good, but you should be aware that many editors will see these as "Cruft"; they deal with a VERY limited fantasy universe. Again, well written articles, but do you have any edits you are proud of that have a more general appeal? If they are as good as your Dragonball Z edits, you should be very proud. Your other edits (vandal reverts, etc.) seem very helpful as well. If you could show us some more articles to review, it would really help. --Jayron32 05:52, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

• Kyoko's review — A brief look at your contributions shows that you regularly use edit summaries, which is a very good thing. As Jayron said, you might want to expand the range of articles that you contribute to. I am really not the one to say whether something is too frivolous for Misplaced Pages — I obviously enjoy Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex, if you look at my account name — but if you do choose to pursue an RfA, some voters may wish to see a broader scope of contributions, perhaps to prove that you can interact well with editors who don't share your interests. It's good that you have experience in uploading and tagging images with licenses, because admins have to be familiar with copyright and license policy. As has been said, you might want to participate more with AfD and read up on speedy deletion policy, which is a major part of an admin's work. You should also be aware that some RfA voters have demanding standards on what constitutes an acceptable signature, and your present signature might be seen as being too colourful. Overall, you're doing a good job, and you have the potential to make a good administrator.
  • Reply to Jayron32 and Kyoko - I took a look at my 500 most recent contributions (main articles only) and I never realized that (almost) all of my contributions are anime/manga related. There are a few edits here and there that aren't, such as the Wii, but those are nothing to be proud of. I guess it's time for me to start looking into articles of more interest to people, along with the AfD, some RfA, etc. I guess I should also shorten my signature down a bit pretty soon, huh? Well, I don't know what to say other than thank you for the reviews and I'll try to get started on some of these suggestions as soon as possible. // Sasuke-kun27 01:32, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Reply to reply A suggestion: Find articles you can work on that deal with your local geographic area: The town you grew up in, local places of historical interest, local notable people, etc. Find references(your local newspaper is GREAT) and improve those articles. Also, if you went to college, try improving articles from your major or degree; if you still have textbooks and thus have a slew of reliable third-party references to work from. The idea to finding a good article to write is to find the junction of expertise (what you know), interest (what you care about), and resources (what you can reference). Keep working on the anime stuff, but also branch out to other areas... --Jayron32 02:58, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

• Hello there, Sasuke-kun27, how are you doing? Here is my review, I hope it is useful.

  • Good summary usage, although it is somewhat low (75%) in minor edits. Try to keep using them even with minor summaries, as they are very helpful.
  • Checking some of the images you have uploaded, I notice some lack a source. While Image:Tenkaichi 2 Wii.jpg could be said it is implicitly sourced (it is an image of the cover of the game), Image:Kol Skywalker.jpg, Image:Krimzon Guard.jpg, Image:Dark Jak.jpg, Image:Jak II.jpg and Image:Jak.jpg don't reference sources, thus it is not possible to confirm the fair use claim. When uploading images, remember to always state how you got it, if it was scanned, or if you had gotten it from a site. If so, state the url to the image and the page containing it, in case either goes down. And see if you can use a fair use rationale for every fair use image you upload.
  • When reverting, try not to use "rv", "rv v". New users don't really know what each means, and it does not take many seconds more to type "reverting vandalism" or so. Also, if possible, explain what you are reverting, like "reverting blanking", "reverting nonsense", etc, so that users are able to check whether you are applying the correct warning tags to the user. In example, here it is not clear why you reverted. A summary like "The correct name of the place is this one" would help. Personally, I am against "terminal" warnings like this one, when the user has had only two edits in Misplaced Pages.
  • Your signature is apparently too long. recommended maximum length is 200 characters, maybe you would be able to reduce it a bit more?
  • I like the fact that you actively participate at Misplaced Pages:Administrator intervention against vandalism, cleaning the list when possible. That is a good way to prevent the list from becoming too big.
  • I see some participation at Misplaced Pages:Requests for page protection. However, if you want to become an administrator, you need to decide whether you will be user or article oriented, or both. If you want to be user oriented, besides AIV you should consider joining the Misplaced Pages:Recent changes patrol to catch vandals as soon as they vandalize, and spend some time mediating between users, in example, through Misplaced Pages:Third opinion. If you want to be article oriented, besides page protection, consider participating Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion, Misplaced Pages:Templates for deletion, Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion and Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion. For this, you may want to learn about the different notability guidelines. Also, consider joining the different policy and guideline discussions, trying to point out why they should be updated or modified, answering questions from users about those policies, etc. And checking Misplaced Pages:Administrators' reading list will give you some idea about what an administrator does need to know.

  With time, you will become a good administrator. However, if such is your aim, consider spending a bit more time in administrator-like tasks. You may also consider trying to improve an article to good article status, as that would improve your knowledge about style guidelines. Remember, even administrators are expected to edit articles following the style suggestions. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 22:14, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

• Looks good, but please remember adminship is not a prize or tropy or anything like that - it's simply a distraction from editing. Personally I think articles that some editors may be considered "cruft" really enhance WP, it brings people to the site for more than just "boring" schoolwork and that sort of stuff. Keep up the good work :) -- Tawker 00:15, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   A: It would have to be my work on anime articles (more specifically the Dragon Ball articles) throughout Misplaced Pages, such as Grandpa Gohan or Rou Dai Kaioshin, and my reason would be that I just love working on articles that I have huge interests in.

3. 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?

   A: I have been in a couple of conflicts, but nothing that important. If I am in a serious conflict in the future, I would try to be as calm and civil as possible and bring it to the talk page before we get blocked for violating the 3RR rule. It would also depend on how the other user responds to my edits and comments. I've never been in a very serious conflict so it's kind of hard to imagine exactly how I would handle it.

5. Optional question from bibliomaniac15 (talk · contribs):

Suppose you were made an admin, then desysopped due to a dispute. Would you still go on to edit Misplaced Pages?

1. A: I may not be in the mood to edit right away, but I would most definately come back eventually (maybe a week or so after losing my administrator status).

User:SunStar Net

SunStar Net (talk · contribs) Hi, I'm interested in having an editor review to see where my weak areas are, any anything I can improve on. Advice is appreciated. --SunStar Net 16:42, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Hey, there, Sunstar. First of all, even doing an editor review is a good sign, since it allows the community to give you some firm feedback. With that in mind, let's look at some things you have done right:

1. - You have a total of 649 edits. Of those, a whopping 106 were in the AIV section. That's pretty concience focus on stopping vandalism, which warms my heart. Lots of other vandal fighting stuffs too.
2. - 15 welcomes! It's good to see someone who's only been here a few days welcoming new people in turn. It really DOES make a difference being nice.
3. - A good selection in most areas (save one, see below) of activity -- templates, images, name space, wikipedia talk, activism against vandals, etc.

You probably want to improve on the following:

1. - Only 87 article space edits. You should find some more articles to work on. I'd be more than happy to find stuff to work on you with. It's hard to say exactly what you should do differently when we don't have much to go on.
2. - In your actual edits of articles, such as with Tim Hamilton (actor), you confuse (I think) POV with what isn't verifiable. Remember to discuss changes.
3. - I would find a series of articles to improve. Try and see if you can find an article to get to GA or FA status.
4. - Finally , while being anti-vandalistic is good, some of your activities on AIV replicate efforts. Consider reading up some pages from WP:CVG and getting some tools, like VandalProof.

Thanks for asking me to editor review you, and I hope all this helps. If you want a more broken down detailing of your edit activity, I have one : User:Elaragirl/EditorRevStuff. If you have any further questions, hit me on my talk page. --Shrieking Harpy 20:42, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

• Hello there, SunStar Net. A couple of comments, seen that Elaragirl did a very good review. Try to add an explanation at Image:Pca1.jpg about how you got the image. Also, I notice you participate a lot in the Misplaced Pages namespace, which is very good. But 100 edits in the article namespace, a third of your Misplaced Pages namespace ones, is questionable. Remember that Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia before all, and editors (including administrators) are expected to participate in the article namespace. I see you are member of some WikiProjects, I suggest participating in Collaborations of the Week in those projects, and if it does not exist, maybe setting one up so that you get more experience while editing articles you like. Or you can select an article about a topic you like, and try to expand it, discussing in the talk page about resources and wording. Also, check the Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style and Misplaced Pages:Peer review for ideas about how to improve articles. I reviewed some of your deletion participation, and found them all fair enough, although some may have used a better explanation. Remember to always include a link to the policy or guideline you are using in these discussions. Articles for deletions should not only determine if an article should be deleted, but also teach the users who created the articles why their submissions were not accepted. Finally, it is good to see you awarding barnstars around. These small tokens of appreciation are always welcomed, and usually raise the spirit of those receiving them. Try to spend some more time writing articles, and meet users not only during discussions, but also while improving articles. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 21:02, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
• To repeat the above slightly, you should certainly try to look at writing articles a little more. Some people think that having helped with one featured article should be a pre-requisite for adminship - while you don't necessarily have to reach that height (it would have scuppered me, unless you count Sanssouci), it's good to demonstrate that you have the ability to research and write encyclopaedia articles. Even if that's not your main focus, all admins and non-admins-doing-admin-work should understand the writing process. The first question in this review (which matches the second standard question in RfAs) about the contributions you're most proud of is the one where you have the most opportunity to set yourself apart. --Sam Blanning 17:51, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
• Elaragirl covered a lot of the stuff I was going to say. You have made great strides since your ER started to increase your mainspace edits, so that's a good thing. You are a valued vandal-fighter, and you frequently report pages to WP:RFPP. You've been here for about three weeks, yet you have made great progress and continue to improve every day. Continue contributing to AfD discussions and try to narrow down your mainspace contributions to a few particular articles, which you plan to write, expand, and improve. Continue to do what you have been doing on Misplaced Pages, and you'll become a great user in no time. Take a look at Misplaced Pages guidelines (WP:CSD, WP:CIVIL, etc.) and keep up the good work. =) P.S. I found pop-ups annoying at first, but I use them all the time now (they really help with my admin chores). If you want a great external vandal-fighting tool, I suggest VandalProof. Nishkid64 01:17, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   Answer

3. 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?

   Answer

User:Remember

Remember (talk · contribs) I would greatly appreciate hearing from the community about my editing and what I should do in the future to become a better editor. Remember 15:32, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Hello there, Remember. Here is my review, I hope you can find it useful.

  • The first thing I must point out is about the images in your user page. Image:Dean Smith Book cover.JPG, Image:Better tar heel.jpg, Image:Zatopek.jpg and Image:UNC Ramses.jpg are licensed under fair use, and our fair use criteria #9 states fair use images should only be used in the article namespace. In other words, you can link them in your user talk page (just like I linked these here), but not display them in a gallery. Public domain images are fine, thanks for uploading them.
  • Mathbot reports 53% summary usage for major edits. I believe you should increase it, as edit summaries are very useful. Imagine someone has added some information about an event in an article, but someone else removed it. You thought the information was useful and well referenced, and want to add it back. If the one who added the information used a descriptive summary, like adding information about 2004 event where boys were eaten by dinosaur thought to be extint, referencing CNN and BBC articles, you would find it pretty easily. However, if he die not use an edit summary, you would have to guess where the information was added. Both you and other editors will appreciate this in a couple of months.
  • Carolina-Duke rivalry is a pretty impressive piece, with a lot of information. Although some minor modifications could be done (in example, don't duplicate references), overall is very informative. I would suggest checking Misplaced Pages:Avoid trivia sections in articles, the article could be tagged with a {{toomuchtrivia}} tag at any moment.
  • I may suggest participating a bit more in talk pages, as it is a useful way to discuss changes and requesting suggestions about how to improve articles. Also, I would recommend getting some ideas about formatting articles at Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style, and to contact other users through Misplaced Pages:Peer review and Misplaced Pages:Requests for feedback to get some ideas about how to improve articles you write.

  There is no magic recipe for becoming a better editor. Every editor has a unique editor pattern. At this time, you are completely focused on articles, and how to improve them. The more time you do this, the more you learn about style guides and formatting. In the future, you may be interested in advising others about how to write articles, either by peer reviews or requests for feedback. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 20:18, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   I am proud of setting up the Carolina-Duke rivalry webpage, creating the template for Template:University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, uploading various photos from the public domain, and helping get the Dean Smith article closer to good article status.

1. 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 stressful conflicts I have had so far is various conflicts with User:Duke53 over the Dean Smith and Roy Williams (coach) articles. I feel I dealt with this situation well. I have found that if you assume good faith and refrain from personal attacks that goes a long way in helping to resolve disputes. I would continue to use this approach in dealing with future conflicts.

User:Royalguard11

Royalguard11 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) I have decided that after being here for over 13 months, actively for 5, that I should probably get some community feedback on what I'm doing. I spend my wikitime at several different locals.

I really started with Special:CrossNameSpaceLinks, when I started removing signatures from little known articles. Lots of grunt work. I also work at WP:UBM, and can remember when it was WP:TGS. I have my own userbox archive in my userspace, with over 40 boxes. I do occasionally patrol for vandalism when I've got lots of time. I'm one of those unfortunate Mac people, so I use old fashion popups and the the vandalism irc channel to patrol. About a month ago, I joined the Association of Member's Advocates. I am often working on a case (or three), and I also help Martinp23 with the AMA's irc channel. I also help in bootcamp with new users, and help them with wiki-oriented tasks. I also answer {helpme} tags.

As kind of a final thought, I also tried to pile my experience from userboxes into an essay on userbox personalities. I have hoped that maybe it will help us all understand each other's point so view. -Royalguard11(Talk·Desk) 04:42, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

You for some reason decided to delete the Biography I was compiling about the foodwriter Michelé Gentille. You are nothing more than a saboteur or a Nazi. What gives you the right? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wickerbrainpan (talk • contribs) 18:53, December 23, 2006.

• Hello there, Royalguard11, how are you doing? Here is my review, I hope you find it useful.

  • Mathbot reports 100% usage for both major and minor edits. Excellent! I like the fact that your edit summary includes the warning level when applying them to users, that is extremely useful because it allows both knowing how many warnings you have applied, and while reviewing the history of their talk pages, to know how many times they had been warned. I don't recall everyone with popups using that, as far as I remember.
  • Out of your almost 6,900 edits, almost 2,200 were made in articles, and another 2,600 in your user namespace. I admit I was pretty shocked when seeing those numbers for the first time, but then I remembered what you said about userfying userboxes, and a quick search confirmed that the high amount of user edits are because every of those boxes had their own history. Nice to know you did not spend 2,600 edits trying to get your userpage format :-) Almost a sixth of your edits are done in user talk pages, which is pretty good. For me it means two things: you contact other users through their pages when dealing with certain problems, and that you warn users when they are behaving incorrectly. However, you only have 140 edits in article talk pages, which may indicate that you don't discuss changes or improvements in articles.
  • Regarding Saskatoon City Council, note that the article is "temporal", that is, in 3 years different people will be there, which would force a full article modification. How are you going to handle new elections? Moving the article to, in example, Saskatoon City Council, 2006? Or create an entry for every year in the article? And Newfoundland referendums, 1948 is pretty clear, good work with that one. With some styling, and expanding a bit more about the public considerations (whether the township was surprised by the result, campaigns, controversies, etc), the article could achieve the good article status.
  • As a user who spends quite a lot between new ones, I really appreciate the effort members of the different conflict resolution projects put in their task, especially when protecting new users from our overwhelming community.
  • An interesting small conflict appeared when you tagged contributions of an ip as nonsense. After he explained about {{weasel}}, you quickly apologized. From here I make two conclusions: you recognize your own mistakes, and are willing to amend them, and that you don't edit articles as much as one would hope.

  Personally, I believe you are doing a great job here. Constantly reverting vandalism (and almost as important, warning users with appropriate templates) is extremely useful. I would only suggest to focus a bit more in discussing with other users about how to improve articles. Also, you may consider checking Misplaced Pages:Peer review and Misplaced Pages:Requests for feedback, as you will be able to read some constructive criticism about articles that may help you in the future when reviewing articles. You can review some of the templates for articles at Misplaced Pages:Template messages/Cleanup. I see you are most likely a WikiGnome, just like me, and the fact that you do patrolling through IRC could be used as an advantage for other editors. That is, when you revert and warn a user, spend a second more in the article you just reverted, checking if it needs something, or if it is biased, unsourced, or need some cleaning. Since you have (most likely) arrived there by chance, you are in a unique position of giving neutral non-biased feedback to the article. By tagging the article with one of the article templates (maybe even adding a note in the article talk page about why you had added the tag), you will be not only keeping their article clean from vandalism, but also telling the editors of the article which areas it should be improved. Just a suggestion. It is as important to be a good reverted as to give feedback for articles. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 19:48, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

• I can't offer a thorough review, as I have not looked into multiple actions of this user, but I can link to a current discussion on Royalguard11's talk page that seems to be relevant. It is just about one action, so may not give a complete representation of the user's behaviour, but it is at least relevant. User talk:Royalguard11#Jenna Jameson myspace link. The discussion is about this action (the user's sole contribution to that article), and my reversion (out of multiple contribs). AnonEMouse 14:24, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
  • I guess that was a one-off explosion, the rest of the conversation got much better. Carry on! AnonEMouse 14:00, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

• Mate, what can I say - you do an excellent job with the mop and bucket and as a normal editor too. I also really appreciate that you keep on caring for WP:TGS WP:GUS WP:UBM, on my side real life has got me in its nasty maw. You're doing a real good job, man. Keep it up :) CharonX/talk 00:03, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

• Hello there, sorry to have to give a negative review. But I'm deeply disturbed by the way you closed this AfD. There were three votes for keep and three votes for delete, an even split. While I know simple counts of votes is not the be all and end all of AfD, you shouldn't close an AfD with delete so carelessly when there is not a clear majority for deletion (and even worse, you gave no other commentary than the simple word delete! Not even in the edit summaries of either AfD or the page as it was deleted). Mathmo 07:34, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
  • G'day, thought I'd give an update on it. From which I've been generally impressed with this editors action since then. Not just the undeleting of it, but the trouble and nonsense which arouse from it being kept. That you had absolutely nothing to do with making that silly fuss, and you responded to it in a very civil manner. Mathmo 11:34, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

• Slavish process dedication is a failing. WP:IAR is the most important rule we have. Hipocrite - «Talk» 00:41, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

• I don't agree at all with Hipocrite on IAR(often people will use it as an excuse to do whatever they want, whenever they want), but I concur that I can't give a positive review after this edit. I initially took it as veiled hostility before calming down and realizing that you were just trying to convey something neutrally, to which I still haven't figured out yet. Just H 16:24, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. I think your userbox essay is a little simplistic(and that part sucking up to Jimbo at the bottom totally devalidates it for me), but I appreciate coming back and helping rectify the confusion. Just H 04:39, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   Answer: I have written or helped write about 40 different articles, which I document on my user page. The one's I'm most proud of are Newfoundland referendums, 1948, because of all the word I put into it, and Saskatoon City Council, which I'm hoping to expand on the councilors in the near future. And of corse there's the userbox personalities essay.

3. 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?

   Answer: I've been in a few vandal related ones, vandals keep hitting pages, and I keep reverting them, they vandalize my userpage, ect. I was in a big talking match with a user over WP:UM, but I believe we've cleared that up now. The only real big one was with the recent massive deletion of userfied userboxes, and trying to find out why. My way of dealing with conflict is to ask questions, why is it happening. I'm not a person that will go "I'm right, and everyone else is wrong". Misplaced Pages is built on consensus, and I respect that.

Royalguard11 thought it was necessary to delete a small contribution I made to the Saskatoon page. I did nothing wrong but added a nickname some people use for the city. I demand an explanation. This is not excusable

User:no1lakersfan

no1lakersfan (talk · contribs) I am requesting a review so that I may find out what areas of my contributions I need to improve. I hope at some point to be able to become an administrator, and would like some suggestions as to what I need to do. Willy No1lakersfan (Talk - Contribs) 23:22, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Most of your edits seem to be on the Virginia State Highways articles. They look pretty good. I am involved in other highway projects (new hampshire, north carolina) and they look up--to-standard with most other highway articles. Looking at these and other edits, however, it would be nice to see more inline references. I am of the opinion that all assertions of facts should have direct references as to where they are found. I know and understand that sometimes this is hard to do, and I have been known to make lots of writing on articles that I myself have not referenced. Still, I also recognize that it is an inadequacy in articles and something that a "good" article avoids. "Good" articles are heavily referenced. I checked out some of your AfD comments. I am somewhat bothered that a) you act as the closing admin on articles you comment on. Sounds like a conflict of interest and b) you close articles before 5 days and c) you close articles you were not authorized to close. Still, these look like "good faith" mistakes and not maliciousness. Learn the rules and things should continue to go well for you. --Jayron32 03:29, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

• Hello there, no1lakersfan, everything fine?

  • Good edit summary usage, 95% for major edits and 99% for minor edits. However, mathbot had to retrieve 5 times to get enough minor edits. In other words, you haven't been using minor edits lately, have you? :-)
  • Nice edit numbers, although you have a very low amount of article talk edits. These edits demonstrate that you are willing to discuss with others different changes with other users, and you only have just below 2% of your total edits. I suggest spending some more time discussing with other users. Hampton Roads has grown quite a lot, and will someday become a good or maybe even featured article. I also notice many Virginia State Road edits.
  • I see you work quite a lot with Special:BrokenRedirects, although you could take a minute or so to verify that there is no valid article where they could be redirected. I see many of those speedy tags were removed and the redirect changed to the actual article, template or talk page.
  • I count around 20 edits in articles for deletion, all during August. In order to qualify as an administrator willing to work with articles, you should spend time in the different deletion debates, mainly articles, templates, categories and redirects for deletion. As an administrator you will be asked to close deletion discussions, and only through participation you will be able to set create a "standard" for you. For this, you need to learn about the notability guidelines. I also see 5 edits in requests for adminship, all in your own RFA.
  • Also, try to spend time patrolling new pages and new users. You will have opportunities to request for page protections, which will give you experience as to when report a page, and especially when a page should be protected. Finally, it will give you opportunities to edit at administrator intervention against vandalism, where you will learn from other administrators when to block, and for how long.
  • If you need more information, try reading the administrator's reading list, or join the different programs like the Admin school or Admin coaching.

  You have advanced a lot, and have been editing regularly. Only more experience at administrator-related tasks is needed. Try joining the patrol, where you will have plenty of information and will have opportunities to use the different warning templates. Remember that as an active vandal fighter you will likely be the target from vandals, which may stress you. If so, just remember to stay cool, report then when necessary, and take a break when too tired. I won't comment about your early participation in AFDs, because those edits are already too old. Hopefully you will learn from any mistake you may have done, and follow Jayron32's advices. Adminship is not that difficult, but you need to demonstrate that you are interested in those tools, and that you will know how to use them. So far, you still have some time to go. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 23:41, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   I believe that my most pleasing contributions are the ones to pages dealing with Hampton Roads, Virginia. I am from that area, and feel that any information that I can contribute to pages about that area would be great.

3. 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 feel that I have caused any edit conflicts. Whenever someone questions my actions I try to explain what I did and work out a solution peacefully.

User:Arnzy

Arnzy (talk · contribs) I've been editing on wikipedia just under a year (I joined November 13, 2005). I have made about 5126 edits (with 3232 of them in the Misplaced Pages mainspace) up to the point of requesting this review. I am involved in 3 WikiProjects (WP: Airports, Brisbane & Australia, have created numerous articles (Suburbs, organisations) in relation to the Brisbane Wikiproject, and being a keen Public Transport Gunzel (Buses, Trains, Ferries, the lot!) I have been involved in editing those articles too. Being a person who grew up on the Sunshine Coast in Australia, of course I would create articles which may relate to the Sunshine Coast region (ie Suburbs, Education and so forth).

I am regularly active at AfD, and have participated in Request for Adminiships of various candidates and had been inspired by a few of them. So I'm here because I am interested to know how I am doing, and what areas can be pointed out for me to improve on. I dont intend to run for adminship as yet, but plan to branch out a bit in more subjects. --Arnzy (talk ·  contribs) 15:30, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Looked at some of the articles you are involved in. They look really good. I mean, they are pleasing to the eye and nice to look at. Well done. The CityTrain article is nice. I would prefer to see more inline references to assertions of fact in these articles. One specific example is the CityTrain article is in the "Extensions" section. The other parts of the article are easy to reference from the "external links" section, but that specific section looks more like it comes from press releases or newspaper articles. It would help if it were more directly referenced. Other articles you have edited, like Nambour and Gympie North railway line, Queensland do this well. Overall, though, your contributions seem to be substancial and useful. Good job. You should be proud of the entire Brisbane project, and the contributions you have made to it. Your AfD comments seem mostly balanced and helpful, however I am concerned about your nomination to DELETE the London Bus Routes article (though it was later withdrawn) and your nomination to KEEP the Sydney Bus Routes article. Not a big deal though. It doesn't look that bad, and on the balance, your contributions there have been helpful for admins to help them make a good decision. --Jayron32 03:45, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

• Hello there, Arnzy, how are you doing? Here is my review, I hope it is useful to you.

  • Since February you have been contributing to Misplaced Pages with an average of 600 edits per month. It is good to see you have found a number where you feel comfortable, without pushing yourself. Your edit summary usage is well enough, 99% for major edits and 86% for minor edits, although for administrators usually a higher number is requested for minor edits (95% in both is the trend). However, try not to use one letter summaries for deletion debates. It is not harder to write "delete", "keep" or "comment".
  • The fact that you are contributing a lot of edits about your country is extremely useful for Misplaced Pages. Also, your ability to take pictures from Australia-related topics is very welcomed.
  • While reviewing some images you had uploaded in September and October, I noticed Image:Maroochy.gif and Image:Qantmlogo.gif. Although you have sourced them, I would suggest you to upload PNG versions, and to use a fair use rationale for fair use images.
  • If you are not going to use User:Arnzy/Sandbox/Template:Transperth Trains (it is a redirect right now), you can tag it with {{db-user}} to have it deleted. Also, I notice you do some work in your user namespace before moving it to the main namespace, like User:Arnzy/TransLink Busway Network. Any reason for that? If you start them in the main space, others will be able to find it while browsing different articles.
  • Reviewing your last deletion disputes, I really like the fact that, at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Elermore Vale, New South Wales, you changed your opinion based in the modification of the article. At Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of PlayStation 2 budget games, you could have given a better opinion than just Delete as pointless cruft. That isn't a useful comment for the article creator or any of their maintainers.
  • Regarding pointing others to "Misplaced Pages's Good Faith", as TBC put it very clearly at Nightscream's review, "Enforcing" users to assume good faith is, ironically, not assuming good faith. pointing at Misplaced Pages:Assume the assumption of good faith.
  • Tagging an article as speedy deletion when it provided a link to the actor's works may be brought in a future RFA. Also, calling vandalism to apparently valid is misleading. If the added information is wrong, call it misinformation or factual errors, but not vandalism. Although yes, it is a type of vandalism, try to be more specific in summaries.

  Well, you are a brilliant editor, although there are some small things I already said you may want to correct. You have a pretty good amount of user and article talk pages, although try not to forget to substitute warning templates. For adminship, I recommend joining the recent changes patrol. You have experience with articles, and a little one with redirects for discussion, maybe you can also try category and template discussions as well. Joining the patrol will give you more experience when reporting to administrator intervention against vandalism (although I see 3 reports during October, and as many during August), and requests for page protection. Finally, during your participation during requests for adminship during October, this was the only one where you did not explain your opinion. Even when the candidate is either passing or failing the request, you should explain your opinion, otherwise it would look as if you are just piling on the "winning side". Finally, you may consider working with peer reviews and requests for feedback, where you will be able to share your knowledge about writing articles to others. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 22:28, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   A: When I first started, I have created stub articles which are related to the South-East Queensland region and Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Brisbane. But overall, I'll have to say I am pleased with my contributions to the TransLink (South East Queensland) public transport network in South-East Queensland, and their related articles (Buses, Trains, Ferries, and related companies such as CityTrain, Brisbane Transport, Sunbus, Surfside just to name a few). I believe the expansions and groundwork in those articles would provide Misplaced Pages with a clear, unbiased, accurate and accessible information that they are seeking. I am also pleased with the related templates created to ease navigation among the many PT articles related to TransLink in South East Queensland. An overall list of contributions, which includes pages I created and/or improved/expanded are listed on my user page

3. 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?

   A: I have been in a few conflicts in the past (with some of them from AfD debates), but in many cases, I felt that I have conducted myself with reason and logic, without resorting to uncivil behaviour to others. I talk to the user either on the talk page concerned, and outline the reason/logic why I disagree with them, and if I felt I am being attacked I kindly point out Misplaced Pages's Good Faith and Civility and the rule/guideline that they may be violating, which I will continue to do so in future cases. Stress-wise, I have to say that conflicts havent given me that much stress but have on many occasions taken a walk or listen to music before coming back to edit after a conflict.

User:Curtius

Curtius (talk · contribs) I am a new editor. I have spent a fair bit of time on a couple of pages and am looking for advice on style, level of detail in content, etc. Curtius 06:43, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Currently, you have almost as many edits to your user page than articles – 67 edits to User:Curtius and 72 total mainspace edits. (See your edit count using the 'Wannabe Kate' tool for the specifics.) Of the 72 mainspace edits, more than half are to Roman Republican coinage. These are not bad things by themselves, but many of your edits come only one or two minutes apart, meaning you could probably be using the 'Show preview' button a little more before you save the page. Frequent saves of small edits – not minor edits, 'cause there's a difference – tend to inflate a user's contributions, and it puts a heavier load on Wikimedia servers. (Have you ever met the "Misplaced Pages is busy!" page when you've tried to save? If not, you will.) Frequent saves also clutter the recent changes logs for RC patrollers.

Your work on Roman Republican coinage is wonderful – I especially love the photos! A minor, tiny, itty-bitty criticism: the tables you've added are a little crowded and could use some more cell padding for clarity and ease of use. Making the cells bigger will take care of a lot of the white space to the right of your tables. There are lots of HTML gurus here if you need help with it. It's unnecessary to label a sub-heading as "Introduction" – that's more or less a given for a lead paragraph of an article or a section. You've used a reference style in this article with which I'm not familiar, but if that's the style Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Numismatics uses, ignore me. ;-) You do have a lot of citations there, but you could always expand the article to more thoroughly cover the subject instead of cutting the number of referenced works.

In my opinion, you're on the right track, and you're a real asset to the encyclopedia. I suggest you keep writing and get to know the Manual of Style, and consider expanding into other areas of Misplaced Pages by participating at Articles for deletion, Articles for creation, Recent changes patrol, and/or doing some of the maintenance work. Above all, have a good time, 'cause it's not any fun if it's not any fun. :-) Let me know if you have questions or need help, and keep up the good work! - KrakatoaKatie 01:41, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

• Hello there, Curtius, how are you doing? So, you want tips? Here are mine, I hope they are useful. First of all, I notice you have been contributing for a couple of months. It is a very good start. I admit you have as many user as article namespace edit, but I would attribute that to setting up your user page. I will agree with KrakatoaKatie in that your work with the Roman Republican coinage article is an impressive presentation card, one you should be proud of. It is incredible that such a young (in terms of time spent in Misplaced Pages) is able to contribute to an article, almost until taking it to a good status alone. Good work with the images too. If not for the watermark, I am betting they would be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, from where other Wikipedias would be able to use them. Can you get images without the watermark? If you want to be credited, instead of releasing them under the GFDL, release them under Creative Commons Share Alike (see {{Cc-by-sa-2.5}} in example).
  By the way, you should consider adding {{db-user}} to Misplaced Pages:Editor review/CURTIUS, as it seems you won't be using it. That way an administrator will delete it.
  I repeat KrakatoaKatie's suggestion of reviewing the manual of style, from where you will learn the guidelines for formatting articles. And finally, note that as time passes, your interaction with other users will increase, both through user talk pages (which I state are "personal" or individual communications) and article talk pages (public or group conversations). Remember to always stay civil (not that I think you would not, but it is better to state this earlier so that it is clarified), to never reply attacks with other attacks, and to stay as cool as possible. Try "chatting" with others in article talk pages to discuss how to better expand an article, how to improve and which changes you find good/bad. This is the base for reaching consensus, which is how we editors choose between different alternatives. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 20:40, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   The article I have done the most work on is Roman Republican coinage. I am pleased by it because I have expanded it substantially, added a number of photos, and greatly increased the verifiability - it seems to have more references than most articles of comparable length; have I overdone it?

3. 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 not aware of having been in any conflicts over editing. I have made numerous edits as 64.110.221.122, not appreciating the importance of this. This has led to a revert on my user page.

User:Laleena

Laleena (talk · contribs) I want to be reviewed to see what I need to work harder at, and I want to become an admin.. Please tell me about anything you think I could improve on. Laleena 13:06, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

Hi -- I thought I'd do this, since you've reposting this. Well, your edits looks good in general, so that tells me that you're doing a good job. Your previous RFA was premature, but it looks like you've learned from that. You also appear to have really gotten into the swing of using good edit summaries -- something I need to improve on. So, in short, keep up the good work! --Haemo 07:07, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I checked your recent contribs log and found nothing amiss. You seem to have a good balance of writing and community involvement. I'm not going to look at the ArbCom case unless you specifically ask me to do so: I don't think you have been mentioned by name in the Signpost ArbCom report, so it can't have been too bad. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 22:52, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   I am particularly pleased with my work on Wikiproject Denmark, which I started.

1. 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 the ArbComm case over Commonwealth R/realms, which was rather nasty, in my opinion. It took a while to get it over with, and I bet it's still going on. And currently, I am onto John Foxe (user).

User:JQF

JQF (talk · contribs) Hello. I'm requesting a Editor review because I what to know what people think of the things I've done on Misplaced Pages. I think I've contributed a fair amount, but feed back is nice. I ussually do style and format edits, fixing up headers, tables, templates, pictures, etc. JQF 01:34, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Hello there, JQF. Here are some tips, hopefully you will find them useful.
  First of all, User:JQF/Costs is somewhat questionable, but harmless. Remember that Misplaced Pages is not a webhosting, however as I just said, it is harmless. I thought I would mention it.
  You seem to average around 200-300 edits per month. You apparently are a wikignome, someone who prefers doing small edits than to write full articles. Nothing wrong there, I am one too ;-)
  Now, I have heard about all these reverts in the different CVG templates, and never really understood them. Personally, I tend not to revert if I was reverted, instead preferring to talk. Edit wars are bad, and even more when you are affecting something that is transcluded like a template. I would suggest to request a third opinion, or mediation after the third revert.
  Image:NigthcrawlerMUA2.JPG should not be tagged as game screenshot, but instead as {{web-screenshot}}, and probably as {{software-screenshot}} because you also captured the browser (even though it is not the focus of the image). Now that it has no article linking to it, it should be tagged with {{orfud}} as in {{subst:orfud}}, to have it deleted (fair use images must be used in at least one article per our fair use criteria. The same can be said about Image:NigthcrawlerMUA.JPG. Also, note that when uploading fair use images, they should be as big as necessary. These images are just too big to be considered fair use. Also, Image:JeffSmithLastBone.JPG should be tagged with {{fair use reduce}}, so that its size is reduced. And try to use fair use rationales when you upload images.
  Finally, I would suggest you to check the different methods to resolve disputes if the situation becomes as bad as with the templates. Remember that, in order to reach consensus, every side must give up something. If none is willing to, it is better to leave the things the way they originally were until a new opportunity arises to change again. Your other contributions are appreciated, with good edit summaries and useful cleaning. But as you can imagine, edit wars are never useful. Just see Template:Zelda games and tell me what a new user would think if he is checking the different Zelda articles and finding a different template in every one of them. Note that the 31 latest changes only added very few insignificant changes, there was no need for such war. I can imagine the situation was similar in the other templates. This was not your fault, it was the fault of every other editor who also reverted. So, next time, try to "break the circle" and request a third opinion or a mediation instead of just engaging, as that would be a demonstration of better understanding. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 18:44, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

• One last thing regarding List of Firefly episodes, note that there was/is a discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:Fair use/Fair use images in lists about whether fair use images should be included in lists, as it is stated they are purely decorative. Next time you create a list, I would suggest not to include images unless absolutely necessary. Of course, people can tell you that you should be bold until it is decided that images in lists are "bad", but it depends on opinions, and since this is mine, I tell you what I think :-) -- ReyBrujo 18:48, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   There are a number of edits I've been particularly pleased with, but of the most recent, I'd have to say it was my formatting of List of Firefly episodes so that it followed the norm of other episode lists.

3. 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?

   Yeah, I've been in conflict over editing, and yeah, it causes me stress. I deal with it by trying to be reasonable and re-stating the problem if I have to, but that's hard to do when dealing with juvenile users who don't what to be reasonable, and I have slipped a few time. Usually I'll take a break from Misplaced Pages and then go do something else for a bit, so I can come back with a cool head.

User:SFGiants

SFGiants (talk · contribs) I've been on Misplaced Pages over a year, even though I haven't made that many edits over that time period. Most of them are minor typo fixes or reverts of vandalism (as you can probably see by my low edits-per-article total of 1.46), but I've made significant changes to a few articles. I always try to be civil, especially to anons that I have reverted, so that they can contribute positively to the project. I also started and help in maintaining WP:WPBBQ. ςפקιДИτς ☺ ☻ 19:18, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Hello SFGiants, how are you doing? Here is my review, hopefully you will find it interesting. First of all, your userpage is pretty interesting and confusing. Kudos for that :-) It seems you have been contributing since over a year, a little every month. The amount of fixes and maintenance edits makes me believe you are what we know as WikGnome, a user who is happy bouncing through articles, fixing headings, wikifications, categories and typos from article to article, staying just long enough to leave his "mark" in the article. I myself am one, so don't feel it is an insult or anything. WikiGnomes are necessary, because they do things other editors (interested more in creating or expanding articles) find boring. I could say wikignomes are a community inside the community, where it is not what one does the important thing, but the sum of all of us. About images: I notice you have uploaded several images. Please, try to upload them in PNG format instead of GIF, as some images look better in that format. Note that you forgot to add the source for Image:KNBR.gif. Also, try to add a fair use rationale for every image you upload. Fair use images need a justification for their use, which is explained through the rationale.
  Now, you have a relatively good amount of edits in user and article talk pages. Not bad for a wikignome!
  In another note, I see you are participating in deletion discussions, specifically article ones. However, I don't feel comfortable with your justifications. In the last AFDs, your motives were per all, per nom, per all, per nom, per above, per above, per nom, per all, per all, per nom, per all and per nom. Deletion discussions aren't votations, thus the side with the most opinions won't win. Thus, it is the "reasoning" for the opinion that will be considered by the closing admin, not the totals. When you give an opinion, try to justify it. If necessary, review the different Notability guidelines and apply them when necessary. Also, the "per all" gives the impression that you are just joining the "winning side" in the discussion. Even if it is obvious the article must be deleted, try to justify your opinion giving valid reasonings. Remember that the article may have been written by a new user, and he needs to understand why his article has been deleted. Imagine if he finds his article is for deletion, the nominator's justification is "Cruft.", and all the ones below say "Delete per nom". Does this new user learn why his article was deleted? Is that discussion useful for him?
  Also, when reverting try to write something more than "rv" or "rvv". New users don't know what they mean. By the way, this is not vandalism at the time of reverting, just a typo or a test.
  As a fellow WikiGnome, I suggest you to learn the different manual of styles, so that you can help articles in even more ways. Also, check the notability guidelines so that you can give a more expanded opinion in deletion discussions. Finally, hopefully you will never have to walk all the way you have described in the second question (good knowledge about how to resolve disputes, by the way!). Usually by talking through talk pages most problems can be solved. Good luck!-- ReyBrujo 17:45, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   I think that the two things I am most proud of are vastly improving List of state leaders in 864, and deperecating Category:Educational institutions established in the 20th century.

3. 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?

   Suprisingly, considering that I have been a Wikipedian well over a year, the answer to the first question is no. If such a conflict did occur, I would immediately assume good faith, until the conditions made it impossible to do so. If it escalated past that, I would ask for a third opinion, possibly that of an admin. If it went even farther, the admin would probably hand down some blocks, and I might use RfC, but I would only use RfAr as a last resort, when all other steps have failed.

User:ST47

ST47 (talk · contribs) Well, it's been about two weeks since I started editing, mostly vandal fighting and the like, and I wanted to get a review to see how I was doing. Thanks! ST47 17:35, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• 1300+ edits is a good effort, especially in as short a timespan as you've made them in. Overall, I recommend you increase your major contributions to the article space, such as adding infoboxes or large amounts of content - it's generally easier than you think, but it takes a little longer to do properly. Additionally, whenever you make large-ish edits, consider mentioning them on the article's talk page; you don't appear to edit much in that namespace, and RfA regulars like to see some involvement there as evidence that candidates for adminship know how to communicate effectively. That's about the only problem I can see right now, which is a good sign. :) RandyWang (/_{fix me up}) 08:26, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

thanks for the advice, I'll try to do that! ST47 22:44, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• It's an obscure point, but worth knowing: to make information like editing stats more readable, you don't need to place them in a table. Just surround them with <pre></pre> tags, as I've done below. Hope this helps. RandyWang (/_{fix me up}) 08:26, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

yeah, but tables are funner! (actually, I wanted the second line to be aligned} ST47 22:44, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, sorry for interfering, then. :D RandyWang (/_patch) 10:10, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Username  ST47
Total edits  1315
Distinct pages edited  1098
Average edits/page  1.198
First edit  22:43, 17 April 2006
(main)  608
Talk  43
User  60
User talk  446
Image  7
Template  2
Category  2
Misplaced Pages  140
Misplaced Pages Talk  5
Portal  2

Questions

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

   Mostly just the every day revertions, I haven't really made any 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?

   No, not really, the wiki is more of a way to waste time and to relax, and if I let other users stress me out over something, well that would just be conterproductive, wouldn't it?

User:Jersey Devil

Jersey Devil (talk · contribs) I'm just here to see what other editors think about me and my edits. I previously had an RFA which failed, though most of the oppose votes were because of lack of edit summaries which I have since improved. Anyway, I'm not really here for that, just want to get some feedback. Jersey Devil 18:37, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• I've noticed Jersey Devil make some very sensible, level headed, and swift descisions to improve the encyclopedia by afd'ing bad categories, pages and other bits and bobs that are not up to scratch. Jersey also expands knowledge on various subjects that are under-represented on wikipedia. For this he should be commended as a highly valued editor, and one that I would trust to approach a problematic issue with a sensible head. I haven't identified any areas for improvement yet! Keep up the good work.--Zleitzen 06:19, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
• I'll state first off that your use of edit summaries is vastly improved, which is the reason I opposed your RfA. Reviewing your edits of late, I only really see two things that give me pause. One is your actions at El País regarding your fair use image being replaced. You added it back in a different place, but probably an article that size does not need two images, especially when a free one is already available. If you decide to go to adminship again, I would recommend that you thoroughly understand fair use. The other thing is your reaction the editors who approached you ( and ) about moving Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Striver to the main page. No specific policy, but this amounted to a couple people pretty civilly saying "it's bad form" and explaining why, but you still got really defensive about it. That kinda stuff happens every day to admins who delete/protect/block etc., and have to have the ability to go, "Yeah I screwed up, sorry." and carry on smartly. Good luck! --Aguerriero (talk) 16:55, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

• Hello there, Jersey Devil, how are you doing? Here are some thoughts. Considering you have already been nominated, I will believe you are aiming at becoming administrator.

  • Indeed, you have improved your edit summary. I still don't understand why editors prefer "shortcuts" in summaries like rm, rv, rvv, etc, when it takes just an extra second to add a full word, the summary is not 200 characters long, and those are non-friendly with new users, but I would not object a RFA because of that (even though I would suggest using words instead of acronyms).
  • Personally, I don't like when people put massive amounts of external links in their user page. However, in your case this is not much of a problem, as those links appear to be notable on their own.
  • I also notice a you have actively contributed to Misplaced Pages in the last year, with an average of 500 edits per month. As I said in a previous Editor Review, it is good to see you have found your "magic number" of contributions per month that allows you to spend enough time inside and outside Misplaced Pages.
  • Your contributions to Peru-related topics are greatly appreciated, and hopefully you will continue working there even if you become an administrator.
  • Good amount of user talk and article talk edits, shows an interest in discussing personally and in group. Also, good amount of Misplaced Pages namespace edits.
  • Reviewing some reverts, I find this questionable, not because of the revert itself, but because you used a blatant vandalism tag in the user talk page. You indented the tag, which means you considered the previous warning when imposing the new one, although the previous warning was over two months old. This can give the impression to the contributor that warnings are accumulative over time. Also, that was 74.130.38.36's only contribution on the day. I would have used a {{test}} tag instead. While I can't deny the fact that the blatant tag may have made him stop at once, neither I can omit the fact that you may have scared a contributor from Misplaced Pages. Also, the fact that you called vandalism a relatively harmless edit, although you apologized, together with the fact I can't find enough reverts in the last two months, lead me think your lack of (recent?) experience at reverting may be noted during a future RFA.
  • Now, you have stated you would be more interested in WP:AN/I and XFDs if your RFA is successful, a reason that does not appear to be changed. You don't appear to be a reverter, and I bet you have tagged plenty of pages as speedy deletion (and since I don't find edits where you have added a speedy tag, I believe all those tags have been agreed by the administrator reviewing them).
  • You have uploaded several images. However, reviewing some of them since August, you don't use fair use rationales. I would suggest you to use them, as lack of fair use rationale can be considered a speedy deletion reason, and since you may be involved in deleting those images, you should set the example by using them. As a side note, Image:Princesymbol.png is being misused everywhere. Fair use images should only be used in the article namespace, yet it is being used in talk pages, Misplaced Pages namespace, even user space. Would you remove the image from those pages considering our fair use criteria, or leave it there?
  • 3 edits at redirects, 8 at categories, 3 at templates, and over 700 at articles for deletion (although only 20 in October). Analyzing the ones from October, in Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Don't Mess With Football and Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Police v City of Newark I must point that there is no need for the nominator to "vote": it is understood that, if you send it to AFD, you believe it should be deleted unless explicitly stated. This may give the impression you consider the deletion process a simple vote where the side with more people wins. In Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Tom Halden, a more powerful reason (copyright violation) was raised, yet you agreed that notability issues were more important. In Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Arjinderpal Sekhon, you quoted "reliable sources", yet you did not reply when asked which reliable sources. This tells me you don't do follow up discussions after you have given your opinion, which may be inappropriate (if clear evidence that contradicts your opinion is raised, I would hope you change it accordingly, although you did not do that in Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Mathias Bröckers when User:Blathnaid presented his research.

  My personal opinion is that, while you have improved your summary usage, there are some questionable edits done in the last month that may be be misleading. Your lack of vandalism warning experience in the last times and the fact that you don't appear to change your opinion in AFDs regardless of new evidence presented after you have made your decision may be raised in your next request. This last point makes me worry, considering you would be a XFD oriented administrator. If you were to demonstrate that your opinions are not set in stone, and that you can change them if new evidence is found, I would think you would have a successful request in the future. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 14:41, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.
• Comment One of the "issues" in the previous Rfa was a low edit summary use...looking over past 1,000 contributions, this appears to no longer be an issue. Other items such as the now long past Rfc, which was basically a vindictive effort, are of little concern as the "issues" mentioned there are no longer applicable. I can see no reason at this time to not promote this editor to admin.--MONGO 06:34, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Keep up the good work! Cheers, -Will Beback 09:04, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
• Comment I agree with Zleitzen above. Looking through your recent contributions, I see work on several topics, vandal fighting, and clean-up stuff. I think what you do organizing related articles is useful, as with Template:PacificaRadio, and the Peru portal. That takes some thought, and it is an area we need more people working on. Tom Harrison 15:29, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Questions

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

   A: In particular I am pleased with my contributions to the Ollanta Humala article (which has since been listed as a good article), the Ricardo Alarcón de Quesada article, the Cory Booker article (which I've really worked hard to maintain updated), TeleSUR, Open Veins of Latin America, Pacifica Radio, and the Alan García article (though for this one I can only take partial credit as most of my work in that article is in the "The second García administration" section). I have a list of "articles created", "articles contributed to", etc... in my user page which lists more contributions.

   On vandal fighting I always remove it when I see it. I occasionally patrol for new pages and put speedy tags on vandal pages. I've also been active on fighting vandalism on the Democratic Party (United States) article, which seems to be a huge target of vandals (at least once a day it gets vandalized).

   I help maintain the Portal:Peru (adding monthly updates for news, pictures, selected articles, and selected bios) and the Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Peru.--Jersey Devil 19:03, 29 October 2006 (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?

   A: I was in a "conflict" with User:Striver for some time over his insistance on placing down, what I feel was information from unreliable sources (9/11 truth type blogs and such) in articles in a manner which I felt worked to promote his 9/11 truth POV. Along with that also the creation of articles which I felt were unencyclopedic. Anyway, since administrators have been more keen on the user this has died down and the entire incident is pretty much over. I really don't hold any grudges.--Jersey Devil 19:03, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

   Hi. Can you say a little more about Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Jersey Devil? --Guinnog 20:02, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

   A: The RFC was started by the aforementioned user and I think it is pretty clear what the feeling about the RFC was. In the outside view by Pegasus1138 which stated This RFC is a blatant example of not assuming good faith just because someone disagrees with having articles they have worked on AFDed. This is a pointless and hostile RFC. 23 Wikipedians signed on to it. Other statements in that RFC are similar.--Jersey Devil 20:33, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

   Thanks for that, and I'm glad you don't hold any grudges. What would you say you learned from the affair, and how did it help your growth as a wikipedian? I am not disagreeing with your characterisation of the background to the dispute, I am just more interested in what you took away from it yourself. Thanks again. --Guinnog 11:18, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

   For whatever it's worth, on George McGovern you originally attempted to sanitize an article referencing dirty tricks and Richard Nixon, and claimed a POV that was factually wrong. You eventually, after a second revert, left the reference intact, and eventually added a useful link/image and additional reference, which I left a compliment about, as well as a suggestion you be certain to look at page layouts when adding images as well. I've already made my other thoughts known in the prior discussion. Best wishes. Tvccs 11:12, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

User:Nightscream

Nightscream (talk · contribs) I've been an editor since 3/05 with about 4,000 edits under my belt, and a number of created articles. I've been in some edit conflicts, but I've tried to conduct myself with objectivity, honesty and civility. I'd like the ability to respond to vandalism more decisively, and to set a greater example for other editors, particularly in the promotion and enforcement of the Good Faith and Civility policies, which I see too many people ignoring. Nightscream 11:07, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• TBCΦtalk? 's Review:

Positives

• Great work on improving, writing, and maintaining articles, especially those dealing with popular culture.
• Nice job working on images as well. They seem to be correct sourced and tagged.

Suggestions

• You need a lot more project edits. For example, you could participate in AfD, Peer Review, or the RC Patrol.
• "Enforcing" users to assume good faith is, ironically, not assuming good faith. See Misplaced Pages:Assume the assumption of good faith.

• Hello, Nightscream, how are you doing? Here is my review, hopefully you will find it useful.

  • I would like to point out that your user page is somewhat strange. I see duplicated sections (in example, the Image:ConanAndyCaricature.jpg image appears several times. I think you are transcluding your user page within your user page, see if you find a {{User:Nightscream}} somewhere, which is usually the reason.
  • Now, you did not state you were aiming to become an administrator, so I won't tell you that you need more project edits. Article WikiGnomes like you and me enjoy their time working with articles, doing small modifications until they become good. I can understand that. Your statistics are pretty even through the full year, at around 200-250 edits per month in average. It is obvious you had settled yourself at that pace, and there is no need to ask from you more edits per month, as that may burn you out. As I say, some do an average of 500, others 2000 edits per month. The average should make the editor happy, giving him enough time inside and outside Misplaced Pages, and it is good to meet an editor who spends in Misplaced Pages the needed time, no more, no less. I saw what you answered at TBC's comment, but since you did not modify your original request, I am guessing you are not that interested in adminship.
  • Also, remember that Misplaced Pages is not a web hosting. Try to make every image you upload in Misplaced Pages count, by using it somewhere. You can upload extra images at Wikimedia Commons.
  • As with others, I ask not to use "rv", as it can't be understood by new users. Instead, try using "reverted" or "reverted vandalism" if necessary.
  • You have not been blocked since your early days around, which implies you have understood the different policies at Misplaced Pages. The fact that it was a 3RR violation won't affect your future chances of adminship were you interested in them, as it is a "understandable" offense for new users.
  • I notice several uploaded fair use images. Note that images like Image:JoRhodes.jpg, Image:PamLing.jpg, Image:MohammedBilal.jpg, Image:MohammedBilal2.jpg, Image:CoryMurphy.jpg and fair use images of living persons are usually tagged with {{replaceable fair use}} or {{fair use replace}}, as it is possible to obtain free images. You should use a fair use rationale for every fair use image you upload. Note that Image:MohammedBilal.jpg, which you replaced with Image:MohammedBilal2.jpg, should be tagged with {{orfud}} (as in {{subst:orfud}}). Image:HarmonMeadowMap.jpg may have the wrong license (if you take a pic of a map in a book, it it not yours to give away, it continues to be copyrighted by the owner). I suggest either sending it to Misplaced Pages:Possibly unfree images, or ask at Misplaced Pages:Fair use to see if you have tagged it correctly. Also, I have tagged Image:Blood&Water1.jpg and Image:Flash109.jpg with {{fair use reduce}}, you should either tag with that any other image that is too big fair use image (in example, having the "Download high resolution" message). That is because fair use images should be only as big as necessary according to our fair use criteria.
  • Your edit summary usage is good for major, but only 35% for minor edits. By the way, mathbot had to retrieve 3500 edits to get a good amount of minor edits. I found 231 minor edits in almost 4000 edits, but only 2 in October and 3 in September. Try to mark minor edits as, well, minor edits, as some users have set an option in their preferences to not see them.
  • Finally, you have a good enough amount of user talk and article talk edits, showing a good interaction with other users in the last time.
  • A comment: I don't see how these edits could be considered vandalism. However, I don't know about the topic, so I am just pointing out that vandalism is usually associated to blatant vandalism, and if that was misinformation or other kind of vandalism, you should name it appropriately in the edit summary. Finally, consider checking the warning templates, as it will save you some typing time when warning vandalism.

  Closing, I believe you have a advanced quite a lot since your first contributions, learning from our policies and guidelines, and applying them when able. I would agree with TBC that telling others to assume good faith can be misunderstood, especially by new users. Due your behaviour, you could consider joining Esperanza or Concordia, two groups that are focused on making users welcomed, and trying to help others. As for your contributions, they are pretty good. You can consider requesting some more feedback at requests for feedback or peer review to know how to improve the articles even further, possibly to make them good articles. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 02:58, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   I'd say the contributions I've listed on my user page, because they're the ones that either required a lot of hard work, or are on subjects of interest to me.

3. 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 edit conflicts in the past, but in such cases, I always try to conduct myself with logic and reason, and without responding to uncivil behavior by others with similar behavior on my part (and indeed, I have been attacked thus many times). Even when people accused me of vandalism (as when shortly after I became an editor, a number of other editors disagreed with my edits on Wolverine (comics)), I don't respond in kind. I respond directly to others' statements, and always providing the underlying logic or reason as to why I agree or disagree with their position, and politely point out to them that they're violating WP's rules on Good Faith and Civility. I will continue to deal any such behavior in the future in the same way. I wouldn't say that such conflicts cause me much "stress", since these things are to be expected among the anonymous crowd of the Net, and since I'm fairly dispassionate, and have dealt with many such people over the years, it hardly ever gets to me.

User:Mariano Anto Bruno Mascarenhas

Mariano Anto Bruno Mascarenhas (talk · contribs) I have been here for over one year. I started with the User Account Doctorbruno and at present editing with this Username and not using the old user name. Please review Contributions from the old Account and point out my mistakes.  Doctor Bruno  21:08, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• TBCΦtalk? 's Review:

Positives

• Great work on writing and improving Indian related articles.
• I'm also impressed with your work on Indian AfD's and WikiProjects.

Suggestions

• I suggest focusing on topics other than India. Doing so can allow you to interact with a larger group of editors, which would defiantly help you if you ever consider requesting for adminship.
• You also need a lot more project edits. For example, you could participate in Peer Reviews, Esperanza, or RC Patrol.
• Instead of creating a new account, you should have renamed your old one. See Misplaced Pages:Changing username.

• I vocally agreed with TCB on the account renaming note :-). The only place I've really seen you around was at RfA, but you seem to be a very good editor, especially to India-related articles. I'm not sure what TBC is talking about as far as project space edits are concerned. You seem to be a very active participant at both RfA and sometimes AfD. Since you chose to create another account rather than renaming your old one, you will probably have to wait longer to enter an RfA. Still, I think you have the potential to be one of the many Indian aminiatrators we have on Misplaced Pages. - Mike | Trick or Treat 01:55, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

• This is concerning however. You'll probably get slammed for that on an RfA ;-). Creating articles about yourself is both against WP:AUTO and WP:VANITY. Probably if you have a consistant track record for a long time, people will be able to forgive you for it, but I can still see a few a oppose votes happening as a result of the incident. - Mike | Trick or Treat 02:15, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

• Response to this. Oh, well that makes it much less serious then. I'm glad to see that you've decided to go back to the old account :-). Be sure to fix your old redirects and redirect this page there. However, your behavior at the AfD was pretty bad, especially the constant shouting (or BIG TEXT the online equivalent). Since this was a relatively recent incident, I would wait several months to a year before an RfA. - Mike | Trick or Treat 02:26, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

• Let me clarify, when I said project edits, I meant those not directly related to India (as detailed in one of my suggestions). For example, Esperanza, Peer Review, RC Patrol, the Welcoming Committee or Editor Review.--TBCΦtalk? 03:08, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

• Hello there, Mariano Anto Bruno Mascarenhas. Reviewing the previous comments, I agree with the username change. I would not have removed the petition, it is better to know if it is possible to merge both users into one so that further reviews don't recommend you to do that again. Also, consider that this review will end in November 26 (a month after being published), so it may take a time until then. Now, the review. It is good to see you have improved quite a lot since Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Mariano Anto Bruno Mascarenhas, understanding Misplaced Pages philosophy and even adopting a username to contribute. I notice you had uploaded 4 images with your old account, including Image:Wikiblock.jpg. You can't license a screenshot from Misplaced Pages as GFDL, note how Image:Www.wikipedia.org screenshot.png is tagged. If you don't need it anymore, I suggest you to nominate it for deletion (remove the license tag and use {{nld}} (as in {{subst:nld}}). The dual license for Image:TvMCEmblemColourWeb.jpg is strange. Can I take the image, modify it slightly (in example, include a sun behind the image) and then use it as a new magazine logo? If not, then the Creative Commons license should be removed, and the image reduced in size with the {{fair use reduce}} tag. As for your contributions, you have done a lot in Indian related articles. As you can imagine, most of the editors in the English Misplaced Pages are American or European, thus having people from other nations working in articles about their own places is always welcomed. I see a lot of participation in AFDs as well, however some comments like It is a wonder as to how it was termed as non-notable should not be made, as not everyone knows about Indian topics as you or other Wikipedians. Other than that (and considering your edits from September and October), you have done pretty well, and with your membership in Indian-related WikiProjects you will obtain more experience at writing, plus improving the quality of Indian-related articles. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 23:49, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.
• View this user's edit count of his OLD ACCOUNT Doctorbruno using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.
• Just a note that at this point since you have made so many contributions with it I think you should stick to the new account. Nice job organizing your archives on your talk page BTW. - Mike | Talk 02:05, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Questions

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

   Nothing Special. I have not contributed significantly to FA. I have made substantial contributions to Articles relating to Tamil Nadu, Cricket.

3. 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?

   Few Minor conflicts, especially when I try to bring a POV article, I sometimes overstep make it POV at the opposite side !!! Like Sachin Tendulkar or Reservation_in_India. Other than that my concept of Notability and use of Hard Copies as reference have not found agreement with many people. Usually I don't revert the changes without discussion at the talk page. I can say that I have been never involved in 3RR or such. If some one gives stress, I would rather wait for sometime and allow things to settle  Doctor Bruno  21:16, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

User:Zunaid

Zunaid (talk · contribs) I've been editing actively for about a year now. While I started out mostly on AfD pages (I was and still am a deletionist and exclusionist), I've of late taken to editing articles about South Africa and sports cars. I am also an NP and RC patroller, and regularly AfD, PROD or CSD articles. I would like feedback on my South African-related edits (especially POV-wise as these topics are very controversial), my XfD nominations and participation, my User talk conduct towards new users and my reverts of content and vandalism. Comments about my editing style (I subscribe to the bold, revert, discuss philosophy and maybe get over-zealous using it) and other general comments are also appreciated. Note: I do not intend to run for adminship but would nonetheless appreciate comment on what my chances would be should I change my mind. Zunaid 11:01, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• TBCΦtalk? 's Review:

Positives

• Great work on writing and improving articles, especially those dealing with South Africa and automobiles.
• I'm also impressed with your numerous AfD contributions and vandalism fighting.

Suggestions

• There isn't a lot I'm concerned about, though you should give vandals a warning after reverting their edits. See Misplaced Pages:Vandalism#Warnings.

• I do not agree. The editing buddies and / or sock puppets of this editor placed the above comment. This editor, and some of his mates, is ganging together to edit all articles that are exposing the true situation in South Africa. They are clearly vandalising other people’s work, and systematically destroying articles that are of value. Therefore they are of great value to the ANC government in South Africa, but of no value to an encyclopaedia. This editor is creating propaganda. His method is to systematically delete sections on an article that does not support his POV —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 222.155.4.60 (talk • contribs) .

• Hello there, Zunaid. Here is my review, I hope you find it useful.

  • I should mention that your user talk page layout is pretty strange. It is nothing bad, just thought I would mention it.
  • I personally don't agree with one part of the BRD essay, the one where you discuss personally with one or at least two editors about the change, as you would have to do the same cycle everytime another user reverts your change. However, as long as you discuss in a civil way and don't revert back, it should be ok.
  • Very good work with South African farm attacks and Honda S2000. You could do some minor polishing to the articles applying some style guides like Capitalization, but overall they are pretty well written. Also, when the references has several entries, consider using references-small to minimize the size of the references section, see here for an example. As for Nissan 350Z, you should tag it as belonging to the Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Automobiles so that it gets qualified. And consider sending one of those articles to peer review to get information about how to improve them to good or maybe even featured status.
  • I also notice you have uploaded 3 images in the past, all of them deleted. Hopefully you have learned the different image copyright tags since then :-)
  • Analyzing your edit numbers, you have 10% of article talk edits and other 10% in user talk edits, with 50% in the main namespace. Because of BRD, you are bound to have discussions often, and it is a pity one was big enough to go to ArbCom. However, the fact that you decided to step down and wait until its resolution (something suggested in this essay) implies a good knowledge about human behaviour.
  • Your edit summary usage is very high, and they appear to be pretty long and descriptive. It is good that people still consider them important.
  • A very high participation in AFDs, which is obvious as you consider yourself a deletionist and exclusionist. In Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Parekh, you chose the best option even though it was the last added and nobody had supported it as of that time. In Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Aashiq al-Rasul, however, I would have suggested Userfication instead of deletion, but since I didn't see the original article, it is just a thought. Note that you tagged an article for speedy deletion, but ended userfied. Note that, when you send the article to AFD, you don't usually "vote". It is understood that, when you AFD something, you favour the deletion unless otherwise stated. The other AFD participation I had checked were "common", and I have no comments about them.
  • Also, check the different warnings you have available. As a patroller, you should have knowledge about them, so that you don't need to edit the comments every time. Also, as seen here, it was good that you took your time to write down the warning, but try not to use shortcuts, as new users don't really know about them, see this for an explanation :-)
  • Finally, apparently you maintain a good level of neutrality in your edits. As you can imagine, reviewing every edit you have made is time consuming, so I will trust the small sample I took for this. As long as you provide a reliable reference for conflicting edits, you should be neutral enough.

  Answering your questions, you are pretty neutral regarding South African topics. Your participation in XFDs is good, although you focus mostly in Articles. You can also spend some time with categories, templates and redirects for deletion, where few people actually spend time. Also, the fact you spend time talking with new users, explaining them (although with acronyms) why their edits have been reverted or their articles being deleted. However, you should also consider using the templates that already exist in addition to your explanation, as these are standard ways of warning and informing users in most situations. Finally, please consider sending some of the articles where you edit to peer review, where you will get information about how to continue improving them until reaching good or featured article. And, as always, remain as cool until now. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 23:09, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Guinnog's comment: Gosh, I can't be nearly as comprehensive as ReyBrujo was above. I just wanted to say that I am very impressed with what I have seen of your work. I really appreciate the thought, care, patience and neutrality you put into your edits, sometimes in the face of huge provocation. Please keep up your good work. Best wishes, --Guinnog 14:03, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   I am particular pleased with my contributions to South Africa-related articles, in which I've strived to introduce balance by removing or editing unreferenced and strongly POV statements, the best example of which is South African farm attacks (which I boldly rewrote at one point, citing what I thought was well-considered reasoning), which is now as neutral as an inherently POV topic can be. I've also done extensive work on Crime Expo South Africa (rewrite) to remove POV-pushing. I am also pleased with Mazda RX-8 (rewrite), Honda S2000 (rewrite) and Nissan 350Z (edit history), articles which I boldly edited to rewrite for style and/or NPOV at various points. I'm also proud of the article on The Stig (rewrite), which at one point was filled with speculative fancruft, but which I now consider to be one of the best primary source-derived articles on the 'pedia.

3. 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?

   There was a MASSIVE edit conflict (history) on Honda S2000 for a few months, with User:SpinyNorman strongly pushing his POV and constantly reverting other editors. I dealt with it by trying to reach a consensus on the talk page first, and then seeked a RfC when that did not help. The issue was eventually settled through the ArbCom, who placed said user on multiple probations. It didn't cause me stress but it was extremely frustrating, to the point that I left the article until the conclusion of the ArbCom case.

5. Any particular reasons that you chose to work on South Africa-related and sports car-related articles? -Invmog (talk) 03:18, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

User:Perfect T

Perfect T (talk · contribs) I know I am new but I would like some help and input in my writing etc. I feel totally alone in this. Perfect T 04:16, 25 October 2006 (UTC) Perfect T 04:16, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   Answer

3. 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?

   Answer

• Follow-up comment: Perfect T has been confirmed by checkuser as an abusive sockpuppet and indefinitely blocked. See also User:Courtney_Akins. --A. B. 00:56, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

User:Atomic-Super-Suit

Atomic-Super-Suit (talk · contribs) I simply wish to know how I'm doing and which areas I shoud improve. SUIT 04:48, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Hello there. As promised, here's my review. :-) The first thing I'd like to comment about is the frequency of which you appear to change your signature. You don't just change its colors, you change your nickname as well. Because of that, I've taken you for a new user several times at the Esperanza Coffee Lounge because of your signature revamp. Therefore I could suggest that you establish at least a permanent name so that other users will get used to it and be able to easily recognize you in the future.
  Now, the proper review:
  I believe that you wish to become an administrator one day (as stated in one of your userboxes) so I will analyse your contributions in the perspective of an eventual RfA. And so it appears that if you attempted an RfA at this moment, your chances of succeeding would be very low. I see no recent participation in admin-oriented tasks, especially no participation on WP:XFD (which is corroborated by your low Misplaced Pages space count). Administrators are given access to a page deletion tool, and they are naturally expected to know under which circumstances should a page be deleted. Participation in XfD discussions would familiarize you with WP's consensus building for deletion, and broaden your knowledge of WP's deletion/speedy deletion policies. I also see only sporadic vandal fight (and in many of those cases you did not warn the vandal). If you wish to become an administrator then I strongly suggest that you really get more involved with countervandalism. Without it and XfD, other users will simply say on your RfA that you don't need the admin tools for the tasks you perform on Misplaced Pages.
  You're a good editor, I see that you are particularly involved with articles related with DragonBall (you might even be involved with WikiProject Dragon Ball), and that is quite commendable. You're also a social, easygoing user, something I've witnessed many times due to your permanent connection with Esperanza. I, for one, really appreciate that. I believe that it's a strong indicator that a user cherishes contact with other users and is willing to communicate with them.
  Finally, my last suggestion would be increasing your edit summary usage for minor edits.
  I hope this was helpful. Happy editing! Regards.--Húsönd 23:59, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

• Hello there, Atomic-Super-Suit, how are you doing? Since you want a general review, here is mine.

  • First of all, try to improve the amount of minor edit summary usage, which is currently at around 60%. Since some people can't check minor edits (there is an option to disable them from the watchlist), it is almost more important to use summaries in them than in major edits.
  • I see you have uploaded several images, including fair use images like Image:Mace2.jpg and Image:P.Eric.JPG, Image:Ar-iel.JPG, Image:FreeGuard.JPG, Image:Errol.JPG and Image:Flipfort.jpg. Since you upload many, you should consider setting a fair use rationale for each of them, and the new ones you upload, as it will prevent the image from being deleted in the future. Remember to give as much information as possible: from where you picked it, url of the image, url of the page holding the image, if a screenshot, the episode number and title, if a magazine, the number and page, etc, etc.
  • Now, considering your free images like Image:42picman.JPG, Image:Halweenie.JPG, Image:HapWorm.JPG, Image:HGGFlag.JPG and Image:StrongWorm.JPG, I must remind you that Misplaced Pages is not a file storage areas. Only upload images that are to be used and necessary for Misplaced Pages.
  • I see you are still new to Misplaced Pages, you have done around 300 edits in August, 1100 in September and 1700 in October. You don't still have an "average", that is, several months contributing a very similar amount of edits, the amount that gives you enough time inside and outside Misplaced Pages. Once you find that point, keep it up.
  • Spending time reverting, that is good. I suggest you to use the -n test warnings, in example, {{test1-n}} and {{test2-n}} instead of {{test}} and {{test2}} to remember to pass as parameter the article name. Warnings like this one are misleading, as people is not able to know which articles the user modified to receive those warnings without checking the user's contribution history. I suggest not using "rv" or "rvv" as edit summaries, because they are not understandable for new users. It is not harder to type "reverting nonsense", "reverting vandalism", etc. And don't forget to substitute the warnings, like here, here and here. Also, please consider whether you are reverting a vandalism or a good faithed effort. This does not appear to be vandalism. Nor this, nor this (the user admitted he removed content and was asking for help to correct the page), this (it is just a test), and this (appears to be a good faithed addition).
  • Although your signature is shorter than the previous ones, at 250 or so characters is still too long. Try to keep it below 200 characters. Also, you may consider changing all the references to Suit-n-tie to your current username, so that people don't get directed to your old page by mistake.

  I believe you are doing pretty well. For someone who have recently joined Misplaced Pages, you have several friends, you are involved in a WikiProject and and Esperanza, revert mistakes and warn vandals. You also seem to be focused on articles about anime and games, so I would suggest you to try to polish one to good article status by adding sources and references for their claims so that it becomes useful for the community. And remember, some edits that may appear as vandalism are either tests or good faithed attempts at improving the article. Be careful when labeling them as vandalism, as that creates unnecessary conflicts. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 21:53, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   Well, I started the Andy Davis article... It's Stub-class, but I'm proud of it nonetheless.

3. 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've been stressed out many times before, as I'm usually being personally attacked in one way or another. It hasn't happened recently, though.

User:DoomsDay349

DoomsDay349 (talk · contribs) Hello. I'm DoomsDay349. I just felt like knowing what my fellow Wikipedians think of me. I would like to be an admin one day, and it would really help to know what people think about me and my contribs. Thanks to everyone who reviews me! DoomsDay349 20:23, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I'd also like to say that I would like to get into AFD and other such things, but the amount of material to read is staggering. A condensed review would be very nice. DoomsDay349 02:13, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• TBCΦtalk? 's Review:

Positives

• Interacts civily with a lot of users in the community through Esperanza and WikiProjects.
• Has done a lot of work on Dragonlance related page.

Suggestions

• Needs more project edits. For example, you could participate in Peer Reviews, AfD, or RC Patrol.
• Also, I suggest focusing on topics other than Dragonlance or Esperanza. Doing so can allow you to interact with a larger group of editors, which would defiantly help you if you ever consider requesting for adminship.

SUIT's Review:

Well, first I'd say to use more Edit Summaries. Next, you said you'd like to be an Admin one day, now: You should participate in more AfDs and maybe look at some RFAs, and listen to what TBC said. Other than that, you're a good editor and keep up the good work.--SUIT 04:39, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Zoot Review - There are 2 types of Wikipedians. No, not the bad & the good, nor the female & the male (I heard an "it" contributed once!), but yes, the actual writers & the social users. You my friend, are mainly a social user. Social users skulk around Esperanza & Wikiprojects & user talk pages. They are really fun & usually nice & usually get elected to adminship more often because they socialize a lot more than worker users. You really want a mixture of both social & actual work edits. Although you don't actually need admin powers for actual work, I find it crazy when editors get passed of Adminship solely on their social rep. After all we are here to edit an encyclopedia... I'd suggest taking part in a weee bit more article editing & definitely visit RfA's etc like TBC up there... You're a nice guy (or so it seems...) & with a little more editing & understanding, you'll get to be an admin in no time... Which is more than I can say about myself! :( Spawn Man 05:03, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

• Hello DoomsDay349, how are you doing? I finally arrived here, there are just too many reviews to do and too little time :-( Here are some tips you may find useful.

  • First of all, although it is nice that people may consider me a good wikipedian, I do not like the "role model" label. Every wikipedian is unique, and comparing each other is not useful. Sure, everyone may admire a wikipedian, but please don't take from them just more than their general behaviour or edit means. Every of us must be independent, have their own ideals (not clashing with those from Misplaced Pages) and work as best as possible. As I usually say, if we were to compare each other, we would all lose against SimonP ;-)
  • Mathboth reports 89% of summary usage for major edits and 84% for minor edits. It is suggested to keep both above 95%, especially for administrators where every edit may be judged by their peers. It is curious that you had done around 37 minor edits in total out of almost 3000.
  • I appreciate your work at the Dragonlance environment, it has been very important, especially when our WikiProject is so small. As suggested above, though, if you want to become an administrator you need to expand your participation in Misplaced Pages to other topics. You will find yourself in a situation where an article has been tagged as speedy delete, and only your experience when reviewing similar articles may help you during the first weeks.
  • Indeed, you need some more participation at the different deletion debates, as you only have 40 or so edits in ], none in categories or images, and only a couple in Templates. I agree that AFD conditions may seem overwhelming, however nobody asks you to learn everything at once. Begin reading one of our notability guidelines, in example the one about companies, and then review the different articles for deletion about companies, either agreeing or not with the proposal. If there is a bordeline case (it appears to be notable but the article does not really give insight), you may consider searching the web for more information, to either justify or reject the deletion. Don't be afraid of expressing your opinion, as every one is valuable. Once you think you have understood the idea behind that notability, just pick another, read and understand it, and search for discussions where the guideline can be applied. Only practice will help you learn them, and corrections from others should not be feared but instead appreciated. Finally, try not to pile on: if a debate has already 20 delete opinions, don't add yours just to add it. People will judge you according to your opinions, and prefer someone who is open to debate and participates in controversial discussions (those that nobody knows which "side will win") than those who participate in discussions that are already decided. Again, don't be afraid of giving an opinion even if it is a Keep when there were already 20 Delete ones, or vice versa.
  • Although you have 342 edits in the Misplaced Pages namespace (including 120 in talk pages), over 200 were at Esperanza. While Esperanza will improve the quality of your relation with others, it will barely improve your chances of becoming administrators. This is because administrators are expected not only to treat users cordially, but also know the different policies and guidelines to apply when working with vandals and non notable articles.
  • As for User:DoomsDay349/WikiPlomacy, it appears to be a good way of approaching other editors. But I would limit the time spent there, as Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia and not a networking site.
  • Reviewing your contributions, indeed you spend a lot of time talking with other users. You have proven you are good establishing contact with others and to cover Dragonlance topics, maybe it is time to widen your participation in other places. As recommended, deletion discussions are a good way, as it helps the community and gives you some knowledge about admin-oriented tasks. Also, peer reviews are a good way of helping others improve their articles without having to edit them. You can either help them by sharing your knowledge about the different manual of styles, or by reading the article from a casual point of view (someone who does not know the topic), pointing out the problems you found (in example, sentences that you could not understand: if you can't, the casual user who does not know about the topic would not be able to). You can also participate in feedbacks, and with a good knowledge about style, featured article candidates and featured article reviews.
  • Finally, besides interacting in maintenance categories, you should spend some more time patrolling. When warning an IP with no previous warnings, please use {{welcomeip}} before posting the warning, as it gives them useful information. I don't see edits at Administrator intervention against vandalism nor requests for protection, but I guess if you focus more in patrolling you will have opportunity to edit there (note that, one day, you may be the one reviewing the petitions there, so you need to know when and how to report).

  You have a lot of potential, but need to expand your "influence". Try using the Special:Random link and improve the article where you end. Just polishing the article is enough. As for adminship, I would wait at least a couple of months. Spend some more time patrolling and less in Esperanza, and someday you will become an administrator. As long as you stay cool and learn from past examples, you should be able to nominate yourself and have a good chance of success. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 20:33, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   I think all of my contributions have been good on Misplaced Pages, but I do particularly think my contributions to the removal of many Dragonlance stubs. When I first joined Misplaced Pages, there were about 60 Dragonlance stubs, and now I believe there are about 20. I am rather proud of this.

3. 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?

   Well, a while back, there was a discussion after the move of Speaker of the Sun to Speaker of the Suns. It started of fairly civil, but a Dragonlance Nexus editor, Kranar drogin got involved and questioned the move. We proceeded to talk about it and things got heated. My role model on Misplaced Pages, ReyBrujo, stepped in and cleared it up. I do feel rather badly about that. Aside from that, not really. In the future, I will try to keep my cool and handle such situations in a more mature and civil way.

User:BrendelSignature

BrendelSignature (talk · contribs) In the near future I would like to run for adminship. Additionally I would also like to know how I am doing and will appreciate any input you might have. If you beleive I could be doing something better, please let me know so I can make the according improvements. Thank you. Signature 05:43, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• · j e r s y k o talk ·'s review: based on your relative calm under intense pressure in the American (ethnic group) conflict from a couple months ago, and judging from your other contributions, I would happily support your RFA. You kept a relatively level head when an editor was essentially attacking your heritage for no reason other than spite over and over. Grace under pressure is possibly the most crucial quality for an effective editor.

• Hello there, BrendelSignature. Here are some thoughts I hope you will find useful. I will consider your last 5,000 edits, which cover your last 5 months at Misplaced Pages.

  • First of all, checking your user page I notice several things: You have had a very good participation creating articles and taking them into Good article status. Also, the fact that you had spent time expanding articles means that you have the community sense that is needed in editors and administrators, where nobody owns articles and, at the same time, everybody shares the responsibility of improving them.
  • However, I also notice in your user page a good amount of editcountitis. Personally, I don't really have problems with that, but some editors may consider that you spend a good amount of your time gathering statistics of yourself (especially because of Image:My edits as of October 2006.jpg). I remember seeing people oppose nominations because the candidate had changed his editcountitis box very often.
  • A quick review of your statistics indicates you have spent over 400 edits in Lincoln Town Car. That is an incredible amount (most users would not spend that amount of time and edit in an article, not even when self created), and it is good to see you have made it a good one. In 10 different articles you have spent 100 edits or more, and they account for 1820 edits, or 35% of your edits in the mainspace. I can make two conclusions: you are a perfectionist in topics that you do like and enjoy, but that you appear to be limited exclusively in those topics. Note that this is not something bad, I personally spend a lot of time in fantasy articles, and would be bored if I were to write about Argentinian politics. I guess you have already noticed that, though!
  • I am a bit curious about your usernames. As explained, User:Brendel can be someone else. If you did not create the account, nor activate an email nor remember its password, why you would redirect it to your own page? Until a username purge is ran, I believe it is safe to assume someone else registered the account but never used it. Also, there are still some old signatures around, you can change them to your current one if you want. Finally, you should request an administrator to merge your old User page history with your current one. Although it is not necessary, it will be useful for people to learn how you have modified your userpage (even if they might be used by those who don't like editcountitis).
  • I like the fact you have contributed many free images. Some may be moved by commons administrators there someday, which will help the whole Misplaced Pages project.
  • I divide administrators in two classes: those working with articles and those working with people. The ones taking care of articles close AFD discussions, delete speedy tagged elements, protect articles, etc. However, your participation in AFDs is pretty small, just 5 during October, and although more in September, most of your edits were in a single AFD. Participating in these discussions (and templates and categories) will help others to learn which judgement (inclusionist or exclusionist, mergist or m:deletionist, etc) you apply. You don't have reports at Misplaced Pages:Requests for page protection, which is one of the means to contact these administrators. As for the other class, the ones focused on user interaction, you have only one edit at Misplaced Pages:Administrator intervention against vandalism, and although there appears to be a good amount of user talk, you are not focused on patrolling. This reversion of an apparent harmless test was answered with a pretty harsh warning that gave no advice as to where to test (as we should assume good faith, we could think he was testing this "wiki" thing, and considering it was his only contribution, leading him to the sandbox or by using a {{test}} would have been enough). When I say harsh, I mean that it is the equivalent to giving him a {{test3}} warning. Also, this edit, which can be considered misinformation (like a {{verror}}), and only edit in the day from that IP, was answered with a pretty hard warning. He was warned on September 15, September 19 and October 26, yet you pointed out that it was his third warning. This may mislead him to believe that warnings are accumulative over time, which is not true.
  • It is good to see you have congratulated 70.108.251.128 for his contributions! I would suggest that everytime you post a first message in an IP, being it a warning or a congratulation, use the {{welcomeip}} message to feel him welcomed. Some may realize they had been wrong and change their behaviour, while others will know the community acknowledge their efforts and actively join our encyclopedia.

  I believe you are an excellent editor, but are still learning the ways of the admin tasks. Administrators spend less time in articles and more in other tasks, and would be a pity to "lose" such a good editor. However, if it is your decision, I suggest to spend more time in deletion discussions, to join the recent changes patrol, and learn to use the different template warnings. These had been reviewed by multiple users, and are considered to have the exact wording for different situations, welcoming until it is not possible to assume good faith, and increasing their tone until it is obvious they will not stop. Gather experience in both areas, and you should have no problems with a future RFA. You have already proven yourself as a very good editor, now you only need to demonstrate your capabilities to handle vandals and judge articles that require administrator help. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 19:04, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   I am particularly pleased with the articles I have written pertaining to socio-economic issues in the United States, such as Household income in the United States, American middle class, Educational attainment in the United States and Crime in the United States. I believe that these articles will provide Misplaced Pages readers with the unbiased, objective and accurate information they are seeking. I made sure that every piece of information is referenced in manner that assures our readers that Misplaced Pages is a source they can trust. My goal for the use of in-line citations is to enable the readers of my articles to re-trace much of my research. I am also pleased with the templates I have created to ease navigation among the many articles pertaining to American society.

3. 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 involved in my fair share of conflicts. Perhaps, this is due to my interest and involvement in issues that may be seen as controversial. I also try to keep an open mind and try to learn from the criticism of others. I have, however, encountered some individuals whom I had to report to the administrators. I believe that Misplaced Pages ought to be a civil place where editors comment on issues not each other-I have made a successful effort to always remain civil and keep the focus of discussions on the issues. I should perhaps also mention, that I do make a habit of warning (and tracing the contributions of) vandals and reporting them to the admins.

User:BradBeattie

BradBeattie (talk · contribs) I've been on Misplaced Pages since 2004, although my contributions were only spurty at first. I'm trying to take a more active role here and I'd like to know if I'm working in the right direction or if there's a more productive route for me to follow.

More specifically, I requested adminship about a week ago. I was declined primarily because of low activity, votes in AFD that weren't backed by policy, and reverting vandals without leaving messages on their talk pages. In the past week, I've tried to take that feedback and use it appropriately. I won't make another RFA for another couple of months, but I'd like to know if I'm on the right track. --Brad Beattie 02:26, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Hi, Brad. How are you ? You are headed in the right direction. What it takes is time. I am in much of the same "boat" as you having been a long-term editor(more than 1 year), but starting out good, editing sporadically for a while, and then kicking it up a notch in the past few months. And you have certainly kicked it up a notch in the past month with more than 800 edits this month. What it will take is time. I am a frequent voter on Rfa and I see it all the time. Some of the more picky voters see the graph on the wanna-be-kate's-tool and get alarmed whenever they see a recent jump in activity. Sometimes they look less faorably on a old sporadic user who comes a live than a newbie who comes flying out of the gate. Here's some more specific advice:
  • You've got your piece de resistance article.999, and that's good. Now work on it some more, or maybe find some other articles which need polishing up.
  • Try to vote in Rfa at least a few times. Being absent from Rfa and then showing up when you want to become one, is to many of the voters on Rfa like not registering to vote for years and then running for political office. You're already very active in Afd and that is good.
  • You have excellent experience with images(something I need to work on).
  • Maybe a little bit more experience with categories and templates may be a good thing for an Rfa.
  • Consider becoming involved in one or more Portal or working on a wikiproject. That will help round out your wiki-experience.

Closing: Don't get discouraged. These things take time. Your "spread" of articles is good- you edit to WP namespace, talk pages, etc. One more thing I'd like to add: Next time you go for Rfa, try to have a better statement and read the questions posted now. Even if you don't vote on Rfa, read how every candidate answers the questions and think how you would answer them. Additionally, there are the "optional" questions (which aren't really optional), prepare for those. Quick cookie cutter answers to the Rfa questions give the voters the message that you are either not taking the Rfa very seriously or that you don't know what being an admin involves- not saying either of those were the case in your Rfa, but that's the impression they got. There is no "right" answer on the Rfa questions- they are more there to see what your thought process is, how you see your role on wikipedia, etc. Keep up the good work. Hope this helps. Jcam 00:22, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

• Hello BradBeattie, how are you doing? Here are some comments (which may clash or agree with Jcam's ones, of course).

  • Out of around 2100 edits, I see about the same amount of edits in user talk and in article talk pages, half in the article namespace, and around 17% in the Misplaced Pages namespace. Those are good numbers, but as you had seen, they can be considered low by some. Users who give opinions in RFAs don't ask for thousands of edits, but instead, a good number of contributions in the last months. Personally, someone who averages 500-750 edits in the last 6 months is well enough. As I told Cbrown1023 in his review, the fact that he has 10,000 edits in a single month means relatively little when requesting adminship if his contributions in previous months were null or near null. As I said, people don't ask for a huge amount of edits, but instead, regular usage of Misplaced Pages. Some users have an average of 500 edits per month, which is fine for them because they are busy, but make each of those edits weight. Others have an average of 2000 edits per month, because they are able to spend more time here. If in the last four or six months both maintain that average, both will have the same chance for adquiring adminship (that is, if their reasons are valid). So, don't worry about failing a RFA, if you let enough time to pass, and focus in an average number of edits instead of trying to break records in contributions, you will have a new chance soon.
  • I see you have sent a good number of webcomics to AFD, and have actively participated in others, with near 250 edits in AFD. However, you have very few in TFD and CFD, either try to spend some time there as well, or whenever you request adminship, state that you will stay away in the beginning from those maintenance tasks.
  • Mathbot reports 100% for major edits and 61% for minor ones. Try to keep both of them above 95% at least. Summaries are useful for everyone. Good to see you use them always with major edits.
  • Checking some reverts, this and this one do not appear to be vandalism. This could be called a misinformation ({{verror}} in example). 6 reports to AIV could be considered too few for someone interested in adminship to handle vandals, but it is good to see you have done them all since your RFA, which indicates you have learned something.
  • I have been told that, when reverting something from an anonymous user without warnings before, you should use {{welcomeip}} before placing the warning, as it is an even a "friendlier" way of approaching them. Maybe you could consider that as well?

  I don't see major problems (other than calling vandalism in edit summaries to some tests). You are on the right track, and it is good to see you were not disappointed by the result of your RFA. Consider checking TFD and CFD a bit more often, continue with AFD as you are doing, and be a bit more specific in summaries when reverting vandalism. Remember, it is not important to be the first one reverting, but it is to be as exact as possible. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 16:46, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

  • One last comment: in User:BradBeattie/WikiGuard, you have a screenshot of the program, Image:WikiGuard.png. However, our Fair use criteria does not allow fair use images in the user namespace. If the program is indeed free, it should be possible (though I am not sure) to release screenshots free as well. Check {{Free screenshot}}, in example. Good luck with that program, too! -- ReyBrujo 17:54, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   I'd say the biggest effort that's pleased me is my continuing efforts to combat vandalism here. I used to watch the recent changes feed manually, but that got tiresome, so I developed my own app (WikiGuard) to help me out. It's still in its birthing stage, but I have high hopes for 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?

   Honestly, not that I can recall.

User:Cbrown1023

Cbrown1023 (talk · contribs) In the future, I would like to become an administator. Right now, I'd like to know what types of things I'm doing correctly, what I'm not, and on what I need to improve.

I joined Misplaced Pages in March 2006 and I have almost 14,670 edits (all edit counts are as of 01:50, 24 October 2006 (UTC)). About 2500 of them are in the article namespace and almost 10,000 of them are in the talk namespace (from tagging and assessing articles). I also have 675 edits in the user talk namespace.

Thanks for any and all feedback that I receive. Cbrown1023 01:50, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Wow. That is an incredible amount of edits in the past few months. Oh yeah, almost got carried away- I am Jcam and this is my first review so feel free to review my review, and perhaps consider the source. Anyway, you say your goal is to become an administrator- I am a frequent voter there and I know what some of the tougher voters "nit-pick" about, so we'll go with that. For the record, if nominated today, you would get my vote. But here are what some would say if you had an Rfa today:
  • As you mentioned, 2/3 of your edits have been in talk(article, user, etc). I've seen many Rfa voters complain about a user who has too much in talk and not enough in article namespace. You do have over 2000 edits there which should deflect much of that, although I could see some opposes anyway.
  • Your vandal fighting skills are good.
  • Your edit summary usage has got much better, although a picky voter could look through the history and see that at one time, you used them sparingly or not at all.
  • One of the things which you will likely find opposition about is a lack of "quality" edits. A large chunk of the most 1000 recent main namespace edits have been redirects, adding categories, adding headings, etc. The "FA" crowd in Rfa are not going to like that very much. You might want to work on finding that one article which will be your baby (keeping in mind, of course WP:OWN.
  • Looking at your WP namespace edits, I see a lot of WikiProject edits, which is good. You have experience with images. And you definitely have much experience with categories.
  • You certainly like to "talk" alot and it's good to contribute to talk pages. One thing I haven't been able to find is much in the way of substantial "talk" with users (other than the standard "welcome" template. Try to interact with users a little bit more- and I don't mean shoot the you know what. Read an article and if you see deficiencies or a whole section lacking(even if it's an area you know little about), say so on the article talk page. If you see a controversial page in which an author shows POV, revert the offending part, leave a message on the author's page, and hammer it out with them(remaining civil of course). If you see sources weren't cited, bring it up to the attention of the author.
  • Contribute to Rfa and Afd. These are a good way to interact with your fellow wikipedians.
  • It will likely be mentioned that you have only been active for three months so many will say "too new." A couple more months of good editing will certainly shut up the "too new" critics.
• Closing: What I would recommend: slow down on the edit counts. Make it your goal in November to do no more than 2000 edits. Sure, you can continue some of the maintenance edits you'e been doing, just slow them down. Get involved in some Rfa's and Afd's. Find a few articles to work on (things you're interested in) and add to them substantially. You have the numbers, you just need the quality edits to help you out and then you will be a shoo-in for admin. I hope this helped. Feel free to contact me or leave a message on my talk page.

Jcam 23:43, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

• Hello there Cbrown1023, how are you doing? Here are some thoughts:

  • I agree with Jcam, you have an incredible amount of edits, considering the time you have spent here. Especially the amount of talk edits. Looking at Wannabe Kate result, most of your contributions are done in the last three months. Sometimes, users in the Requests for adminship page will request experience in time, and not in edit count (in example, most consider having 2000 edits in the last five months better than having one month with 10,000 edits).
  • Checking your five last image upload, I notice you don't write a fair use rationale in the ones tagged as fair use. You should consider doing so from now on, and as time permits, write the rationale for previous images. Also, I tagged Image:Flipped.jpg with {{fair use reduce}} as it is too big for Misplaced Pages (if fair use, only upload as big as necessary for the article).
  • As a WikiGnome, I can understand the high amount of maintenance edits. Out of your last 10,000 edits, I agree with Jcam in that most of them are not necessary for Adminship. I can count (some numbers can be slightly off): 250 article sorting, 228 welcome messages, 2270 {{film}} tags and 238 category tags. I am assuming the almost 5700 edits you have with AWB are maintenance ones. Unluckily, when presenting yourself to a RFA, most consider your interaction with vandals and how you work in the Misplaced Pages namespace, especially with administrator-like tasks. In these last 10,000 edits, you don't have Articles for deletion edits, three Templates for deletion, one for Categories for deletion, and none for redirects.
  • As a "trivia", I find it curious that you have marked 14 edits as minor out of your last 10,000 ones. Mathbot had to retrieve 6 times in order to find enough minor edits to calculate your percentage.
  • As you can imagine, it is pretty hard to get solid data when the user has so many edits, especially if there is not a "standard" way of informing in an edit summary that you are warning a user. I count 10 "test" in user talks, and 28 welcomeip. Assuming all of them are warnings, then you have done a pretty good amount considering it covers a month, but due your extremely high amount of edits, they appear as insignificant. In this last month, you did not report to Administrator intervention against vandalism, nor Requests for page protection. And only participated in Plunge's request for adminship. This way people is not able to correctly measure when you ask for administrator to handle a vandal, nor when you consider a page has been defaced enough times to ask for protection, nor what you consider an article to be deleted from Misplaced Pages.

  Closing, you are doing great! This is how a WikiGnome should work, fixing and sorting articles, keeping articles tags updated, etc. However, if you want to become an administrator, you will have to leave these tasks and begin patrolling both new users, new articles and recent changes to catch vandals more often, participate more in the different deletion debates, and spend some time in the requests for adminship, to see what others say about candidates. Give your opinion, and don't be afraid of "missing the mark". You learn by doing mistakes, and mistakes as editor are easily corrected. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 22:51, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

• Thanks for helping with Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Web operating system/archive1. - JohnPritchard 11:43, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Questions

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

   Of my contributions to Misplaced Pages, I am very pleased with my work for various WikiProjects. I have assessed many articles on their quality (class) and added the project's banners to many talk pages. Two of the reasons why I'm pleased with this is because it took so long to do it and it makes up most of my work.

   I have also been helping recently with patrolling the recent changes and the new pages. My work here has allowed me to welcome many new users, nominate pages for deletion, and revert vanadalism.

3. 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 had many conflicts in editing in the past. However, the ones that I can think of have all ended peacefully. Very few have caused me stress, but they helped me learn how to deal with it in the future.

   In future disputes, I will probably go about them the same way. I will try to be civil, watch my tone, and make sure that what I write is not interpreted negatively (this has happened before even when I didn't write it that way).

   Any passed disputes can be found in my achive at User talk:Cbrown1023/Archive 1.

User:Firefoxman

Firefoxman (talk · contribs) I was wondering if I was an acceptable candidate to be an admin. I have been on the wikipedia for over 2 years and have been contributing in every way I can. The Fox Man of Fire 21:28, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• I appreciate your enthusiam but you currently have virtually no chances of a successful RfA. You're a registered user since 2004 but until now you were a very scant contributor (several months with zero edits actually). October is by far your most fertile month and if you keep your current pace for a few more months then you could consider an RfA. Until then, there's a lot to improve. First: your edit summary usage is much below expectations, you must try to provide an edit summary for every single edit of yours. I see that this month you've been involved with countervandalism, which is commendable and it's currently the only thing in favor of your eventual adminship. However, you would have to be an exceptional vandal fighter in order to have your RfA approved just for countervandalism. You should have your admin-oriented tasks more balanced with participation in WP:XFD. Getting accustomed to the deletion policies is of extreme importance for an administrator (and that requires time and substantial involvement). If you cannot prove why you should need the admin tools, then your RfA will not be successful. Now, I see that you're a Wikignome. Which is good, but many users will prefer to see some article building. I suggest joining a WikiProject that interests you, or contributing to a Portal. Last but not least, I recommend that you don't attempt an RfA before you have at least 3,000 edits (at least 1,000 of which should belong to the article mainspace). I hope this was helpful. Happy editing! Regards.--Húsönd 02:28, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

• Hello there, Firefoxman. As you asked directly if you were suitable as administrator, so I will be sincere: no. You have barely above 1000 edits, sometimes considered the minimun requirement. However, you have contributed little in June, July, nothing in August, and then September and October. 27 article talk edits is pretty low, because editors are expected to have experience dealing with large groups of editors working in the same article. Also, reviewing some of your reverts, this edit is apparently a good faithed edit (if unreferenced), and does not justify a test4, especially since the user has not vandalized in 3 days. Here you did revert to a still "vandalized" version of the article, you should have reverted even further. Also, here you reverted a valid addition (even if some may consider it questionable as a reliable source), even warning him for that. You did two edits in Articles for deletion, and four reports to Administrator intervention against vandalism. These numbers unluckily are not enough to prove your experience regarding when and how to block, and when and how to delete articles. Also, the fact that you can't say "I am proud with what I did in _this_ article" could lead people that you would have problems knowing whether a new article can be speedied deleted or just lacks references and formatting. I am sorry, but if you try to request adminship right now, you are likely be turned down. So, I suggest editing some more articles, learning the different style guides, sharing time with other users in article talk pages while improving an article, and probably joining a WikiProject where you could work in articles you like. Good luck, and maybe in 6 or 7 months you would be prepared to assume adminship. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 21:12, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   No, I mostly fight vandalism and spellcheck

3. 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:Martinp23

Martinp23 (talk · contribs) Hi, I'm looking for some opinions on what I'm doing right and what I'm doing wrong. Some time in the far future, I hope to become an admin, but please don't base your review on that statement (in fact ignore it, as it'll be a long time before I apply!). I've become obsessed with fighting vandalism recently and (strangely) I enjoy doing some of the more menial tasks involved with WP - namely welcoming new visitors and NP Patrol (as well as RC patrol using VandalProof or Lupin's tool). Something which I also do (but enjoy slightly less) is spell checks with Lupin's tool, but since yesterday I've mostly used VP (after being accepted to use it). Thanks for your time. Martinp23 22:07, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

Comments

• See this user's edit history with Interiot's tool and edit summary usage (Warning:Both tools have stopped updating and the edit counts are way off. Please consider using Flcelloguy's Tool or Interiot's Tool 2)

 Statistics for: Martinp23
(Permissions: N/A)
- Total: 1642 -
Main: 594
Talk: 50
User: 158
User talk: 583
Misplaced Pages: 236
Misplaced Pages talk: 5
Image: 5
Template: 6
Category: 3
Portal: 2
-------------------
Total edits: 1642
w/ edit summary: 1484 (90.37%*)
w/ manual edit summary: 1382 (84.16%*)
Minor edits: 605 (36.84%*)
First known edit: 30-Jan-2006
-------------------
* - percentages are rounded down to the nearest hundredth.
-------------------

Questions

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

   I'm fairly proud of my first page start: Dave the Chameleon which survived an AfD and which taught me quite a bit about using WP. Since then, I'm proud of my vandal fighting edits and my attempts to welcome users, which included my production of the Template:Firstarticle template to encourage new users to submit after their first articles are marked for 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?

   Today I got slightly annoyed by a number of users who removed sd notices from a page (Fagatron) repeatedly. Myself and another couple of users had to revert this vandalism, and on my doing of this, a message was left on my talk page by one user, and another message left on the article page insulting me. To remedy this, I warned the user who edited the article with test4 and {{attack}}. There also appeared to be a huge use of sockpuppets by the vandals, and I warned as many IPs as I could using the appropriate templates (and sent a few to AIV, but can't remember how many). There is an ongoing (but hopefully soon to be resolved) dispute in Sculpture of Ancient Greece whoch I entered via WP:3O. There are a few problems with one of the users involved, noted by other editors, but I'm trying to work around these problems.

3. What's your problem with my hamster?

   I don't have a problem with you hamster. I reverted your edit because it was "adding nonsense to articles". Thanks

User:Jorcoga

Jorcoga (talk · contribs) I would appreciate some feedback about my editing. I think Misplaced Pages is great and all websites should be wiki. Anyway, Thankyou if you comment!  Jorcogα  09:41, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

Hello there. Well, my first and immediate impression is that your flow of contributions is too scant. Although you've been around for 8 months, you have less than 900 edits and seldom make more than 10 edits a day (with many days with no edits at all). This would make it virtually impossible for you to become an administrator as of this stage. But of course, if you do not desire to become an administrator, you don't have to worry about that. At the same time, I see that you participate in administrative-oriented tasks, such as AfDs, RfAs and vandal-fight. Likewise, your participation and experience in these areas would have to grow exponentially before any RfA attempt.
Now, off to non-admin areas. You've made some mainspace contributions, but like you say, not too many. You may try searching for a WikiProject or Portal about something that interests you. You're already a member of WikiProject The Simpsons but you could definitely get more involved. If you feel like you're not into article building, then you may always help with tasks such as stub sorting or categorization.
It's commendable that you haven't been involved in any conflict, but that's not surprising considering your low edit count. In short: increase your participation on Misplaced Pages in all areas, in order to better enjoy your involvement in this rewarding/enriching project.
One last note, your edit summary usage is much below expectations. Try to always provide an edit summary for your contributions. Frequent users of WP are expected at least 95% of edit summary usage. I hope this was helpful. Happy editing! Regards.--Húsönd 02:03, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

• Hello Jorcoga, how are you doing? Since Husond did most of the comments, I will just point a couple of things. First, as mentioned, your edit summary is pretty low. Summaries are pretty useful for everyone, since it allows you to quickly locate revisions by looking at the page history. While it is true you don't have a lot of contributions, I notice you have quite a lot of edits in the Misplaced Pages namespace, through opinions in the different request for adminship, and the user talk namespace, especially through Esperanza messages. I see a few vandalism reverts. This one could have been interpreted as a {{test2}} or as a {{verror}} instead of a {{test3}}, considering the user had done only one edit before it, although I am sure you would find several other opinions about it. You have participated in a lot of RFAs, although you have opposed very few ones. Personally, I did not like that you took into account a candidate's faulty english, that was unnecessary. However, along with Betacommand RFA, they are just some of the few times where you did not go with the "majority". Just wondering, do you review the user's contributions, check what they had done, or just base your opinion in the edit count, the answer and the previous opinions?
  One last think, if Jorcoga Test Account (talk · contribs) is your account, you should put {{User Alt Acct Master}} in your main account, and {{User Alternate Acct}} (as in {{User Alternate Acct|Jorcoga}} in the user page of Jorcoga Test Account (talk · contribs), to let others know this fact. It is not wrong to have alternate accounts if they are used correctly and marked as secondary accounts.
  I won't suggest you to participate more as Husond. If you are happy working at your own pace, then there is no need for trying to increase it. Misplaced Pages is a very interesting experiment, but which can become pretty stressing. The trick (one I know but should remember from time to time) is to not spend here more than the necessary time. Otherwise, you may end up editing at 5 AM, four hours before an important exam! Real case ;-) Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 03:40, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   I created List of Magarey Medallists, which isn't great, but I'm not really an article writing person.

3. 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?

   By some miracle, I actually haven't.

User:HelenKMarks

HelenKMarks (talk · contribs) I would like to get an idea what I'm doing right, what I'm doing wrong, and maybe get some advice on improvement. --HKMarksTALKCONTRIBS 21:38, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Hello HelenKMarks, here are some comments I have about you. Hopefully you will find them useful.

  • First of all, I think you should consider shrinking your signature a little. A 200 characters one is considered too long by our guideline.
  • Now, checking your contributions, I see a pretty good participation in talk pages, 20% of your total edits, implying a lot of communication with group of people to improve articles.
  • Mathboth reports summary usage of 53% for major edits and 81% for minor edits. Those numbers are pretty low. The edit summaries are very helpful for other editors, as they are able to locate revisions faster, and prevent misunderstandings. In example, here you did not use a summary, and thus the default summary makes us think you have added an external link, so a WikiProject Spam member watching the article would likely go check to review the external link. I am guesing the ability of using AWB will allow you to increase it, so I am not really worried about that.
  • It seems you upload a good amount of comic-related images. You were pretty fast to reduce an image when it was tagged (incidentally by me). Maybe you should review the images you have uploaded and rescale them? I see Image:AmazingSpider-Man530cover.jpg, Image:Amazing spider-girl-1.jpg, and Image:Spider-man man-spider.jpg as possible candidates for reduction. And although you replaced Image:Spider-Man Death-of-Gwen-Stacy.jpg, it apparently is still considered a high resolution image (see the link about downloading a high resolution image just below the image itself). However, since apparently it will be discussed in the Fair use page, as you have noticed, I would not tag it with {{fair use reduce}} again, at least for the time being :-) Oh, also, you should see if you can supply a fair use rationale for images you upload, at least beginning from now, and working with the previous ones as time allows.
  • I see some work at reverting vandalism. As with everyone, I suggest not using "rv" or "rvv", as they may be confusing for new users. Personally, I liked the fact that you didn't call vandalism to this revert.
  • Most of the changes you do makes me believe you are a wikignome, someone who prefers to do small changes to a large amount of articles than big changes in a single one. Now, you obviously know a lot about comics, and probably have a good collection or means to get information about them. I am guessing you have already thought about this (the Watching long-term section in your user page makes me believe that), but I will ask anyways: have you considered focusing in a single article to make it a good or maybe even a featured article? Although I do not think tagging articles with the {{unencyclopedic}} was a good move, the fact that you quoted the fictional guideline makes me think you have a good knowledge about it, which makes me think you would do a great work polishing articles.
  • I like the fact that you took the time to explain why you were removing something.
  • Regarding User:HelenKMarks/playpen and User:HelenKMarks/mockup, note that Fair use images can't be used in the user namespace per our Fair use criteria #9, as someone already explained you here. If you want to create a test to propose a change, consider using a free image to illustrate (in example, Image:Wikipe-tan head.png.
  • Finally, about the conflict you had: as you say, it is alright to "lose" as long as there is a reason. Note that the definition of consensus is that everyone has to give up a little to agree. I reviewed some parts of the discussion and I think you handled it correctly. Sometimes people are somewhat touchy about things either they have created or they like, and any attempt to modify them may trigger a lot of discussion that, in the end, is interesting but not really necessary. I handle a lot of those discussions related to gaming material, external links and fair use stuff, so I know it can become pretty hard to stay cool. Glad to see you have managed to stay in a reasonable mood throught the discussion.

  Personally I believe you are doing an excellent job. It is evident that you feel comfortable working with comics, even participating in discussions when a comic-related article is being considered for deletion. That is why I think you should try to focus in an article, much like the collaboration of the week but at a personal level, to improve it to good article status. With the sources you may have, it is not really hard to do that, and you would then be able to propose to the WikiProject a collaboration in order to reach the featured status. I have Neon Genesis Evangelion in my watchlist at least since May, so I noticed how it was being modified until the end of the collaboration. Reviewing now your specific modifications, I noticed you were a big influence into shaping it. Hopefully you would be able to do something similar with other comics-related articles without the need for the full WikiProject to be behind you. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 05:50, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to do this review, ReyBrujo!

• Shrunk sig
• Promise to use edit summaries! I didn't realize they were important until someone said in ChrisGriswold's RfA "Oh, you only use them 98.6% of the time?... not enough... no good..."
• Removed images from user space, that's another thing I didn't realize was important. Working on shrinking my old images, and other ones as I come across them. For the Death of Gwen one, I don't think it has a high-res link anymore, and I'm worried about making it unreadable. Most of the others are getting shrunk, though.
• WikiProject Comics has just adopted the rating system, so hopefully improving stuff to GA and FA will be a big priority. I'm quite optimistic about Spider-Man!

Thanks a million again! It's a huge help :D --HKMarks(T/C) 01:50, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   I did some huge reorganizations on Spider-Man, Neon Genesis Evangelion, Spider-Man's powers and equipment, and separated out Gwen Stacy and The Night Gwen Stacy Died. I thought those turned out particularly well. Other than that, just a lot of maintenance and trying to stay out of trouble. I recently started doing some work on simple:Misplaced Pages, but not much yet. I think it's important to make Misplaced Pages accessible to anyone.

3. 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?

   This TfD discussion (TfD talk and other simultaneous discussion) got quite heated. I thought it was pretty clear the templates had to go, but a handful of editors were sure they had to stay. In the end it was a bit frustrating to explain (over and over) why they weren't needed--and the "compromise" reached at the end was really close to what I intended all along. Just a little stressful. That's about it though. I think it's alright if I "lose" a discussion as long as there's a decent reason it goes the other way.

User:DBD

DBD (talk · contribs) Hi - I'm an active editor, contributing mainly through the Misplaced Pages:WikiProject British Royalty, and have been for some time. I want a peer review just to see where people stand as to how I've been doing // DBD 22:06, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Hello DBD! You seem like a great editor, especially with your creation of WP:BRoy and associated biographical work. I have a few minor suggestions:

• You do most of the time, but try to always use an edit summary: this can be quite helpful when reviewing the history of a page and trying to get an idea of what changes were made when.
• Your might want to consider shortening your signature a bit. The signature length policy suggests not using more than 200 characters, and you currently use 366.

Keep up the good work! Cheers, Dar-Ape 01:49, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

• Hello there, DBD. Indeed, you are quite active at the British Royalty WikiProject, in fact most of your Misplaced Pages namespace edits are there. I like the fact that, when there was a discussion about a common style guide, you decided to create a proposal to solve possible conflicts. I did not like, though, the comment This page is only an initial proposal - discuss its contents here, please DO NOT edit it - Thanks I know, I know, it was just a stub and you wanted to give some shape before asking others to review it. However, you could have done that in your own user namespace, finish it there, and then moving it to the WikiProject namespace for others to review. Usually you write something, and then let others edit it. Also, I am guessing most would have respected your style guide without having to ask them not to edit it.
  I agree with Dar-Ape in that your signature is almost twice longer than what is suggested. Believe me, I have seen people editing signatures too long to make talk pages more readable.
  I notice you don't warn vandals when reverting. This could have justified a {{blank1-n}} tag. This could have deserved a {{test1-n}} too. Here you reverted valid edits without noticing, until someone else reverted that on the following day. I would also suggest not using "rv" nor "rvv", as it is confusing for newbies. Apparently, you don't have a lot of experience when warning users, so I would recommend checking the templates for user talk pages, and use them when necessary. These templates are useful when some vandal has been defacing articles lately, as they allow to know which pages they have modified and how many times they have been warned.
  I may be wrong, but I notice very few edits in the WikiProject talk page. Most of your edits are done directly in the WikiProject pages. Although I objected that line, the style guide seems pretty solid, which implies a good knowledge about main style guides.
  Overall, I believe you are doing pretty well, although a little more communication would be appreciated, especially to warn vandals. I liked the fact that you congratulated someone for a good effort. I also liked the fact that you take the initiative when something is missing (like fixing the templates or creating the guide). Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 04:44, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   Well, I am quite well-pleased with the formation of WP:BRoy and its integration with WP:WPBIO. My proudest individual work would have to be Template:Infobox British Royalty, and its evolution since

3. 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. On both counts. I dealt with conflicts in the way I usually would - I remained calm, polite, and reasonable, and, when that is not well-received, I pursue the proper channels for intervention

User:James086

James086 (talk · contribs) I would like to see where I can improve, I would like to become an admin some day (but not for at least 6 months, I only started contibuting in late August) but for now I would like to know if there is something I should concentrate on improving. I frequently partake in RC Patrol and I have a few pages on my watchlist which I frequently revert (hence Halo 3 being my most edited, though I have never actually added anything new to this article). James086 14:02, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Hello there, James086. Reviewing your current contributions, you have little over 1000 edits, with 130 in user talk pages. I see many of them are warnings to vandals, which is good. I suggest, though, not using "rv", "rvv" or similar as edit summary. New users aren't supposed to know what that means. It takes just a second or two more to write a full sentence with a real meaning. Remember, we must educate users, even the most serious vandals. I am worried about the amount of blatant vandalism tags you use per day. This contribution does not seem blatant vandalism, just silly vandalism. Note that the recommendation at Template talk:Blatantvandal is that the template should be used where vandalism is extreme or obscene and not for newby tests and general silliness. Especially when considering that it was God Lab (talk · contribs) second edit. Also, This is a test from someone pressing all the buttons in the bar. Note that he has no vandalism in his record (before or after the tag). For things like this, you can use {{verror}}. While several users deserved that warning, I think these (and maybe others) did not. Remember that as an administrator you won't be tagging as blatant vandalism, but maybe directly blocking, and it would be harmful if you were to consider every nonsense edit as blatant. Also, despite the amount of reverts, you have only reported three users to AIV (I would have expected some more). A growing participation in articles for deletion will give you experience when deleting articles. Remember that there are similar places for templates and categories. I can understand you are staying away from categories and templates, having edited only a couple so far, but remember that administrators should have at least knowledge about every namespace. Finally, your work with the Maserati MC12 article is pretty good, you may consider making it a good article. Administrators must know how to edit, and the best way to prove that is by creating and polishing articles. You may want to read the administrators' reading list, which lists the articles that are useful to know. Finally, reviewing your latest 20 AFD contributions, hopefully you have learned something about Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Mir Chakar and Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Crazy german guy: you don't need to the result count, but instead what the results are. In Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Mission: Impossible IV (2009 film), note that articles about future movies can't be speedy deleted, as it does not fit any speedy criteria.
  I believe you are a good vandal fighter, who is willing to learn. With time, you should become an administrator. However, there is no rush to do that in the near future. My suggestion is to continue learning. I see your wikistress can go upwards while fighting vandals, so when that happens, take a break and edit articles to relax. The beauty of Misplaced Pages is that, if you don't catch a vandal, someone else will do it. You are neither the first nor the last patroller, so trust them to catch the vandals while you are taking a break. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 05:25, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   My rewrite of Maserati MC12. It was a horrendous article, which survived AfD, it was beyond repair in my opinion so I started from scratch as one of my subpages here. Since I replaced the actual article I have extended it and put it through a Request for Feedback, archived in one of my subpages here. The diff page for my changes to the prior article is . I also made Shift Time and a few Conker the Squirrel related articles.

3. 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 tend to be pretty easy to get on with. I have never had an altercation with anyone (on Misplaced Pages) though I haven't been here very long.

User:Whats new?

Whats new? (talk · contribs) I have been with Misplaced Pages for about two months, and I know that is a short time, but I would just like an indication of how I am going, and which areas I can improve in. I would like to be an administrator some day, but I think I'm too inexperienced to be one at the moment. I would love to hear tips about steps to becoming an administrator, and improving the quality of my edits. Thanks for all your comments. --Whats new? 03:25, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Hello there, Whats new?, how are you doing? I have checked your user page, where you state the articles you have created, and I must say I am impressed. Over 20 articles created for someone with around 500 edits is extremely good. And considering your articles are related to Australia, they are even more. You know, everyone can contribute with some articles like fantasy books, american TV shows and worldwide history, but very few about country-specific topics, and thus your contributions are really appreciated. This can also be applied to the images you upload, thanks for doing so. Please continue this way, as the best way of improving Misplaced Pages is by contributing obscure topics (as in, not known everywhere) and free content. As for tips to become administrator, I remember some editors wrote a couple of pages with suggestions, but I can't remember them right now. The administrator's reading list will give you some weeks to ponder about, understand the different concepts and see how administrators apply them in real cases. A word of warning: candidates with less than 1000 edits are not usually successful, so you still have some time ahead. Another word of warning: increasing your edit count to reach that 1000 mark should be "unconsciously", that is, you need to continue the way you are doing without caring about that mark. People usually ask for some months of hard work, maybe 2 or 3 months, some as far as 6, and a good knowledge in the different style guides, guidelines and policies. Personally, I suggest you to check articles for deletion, which is a section that grows pretty fast. I notice you had contributed there in one discussion, you should consider doing that regularly, first as an observer until you learn about the different notability guidelines, to know what should be included in Misplaced Pages and what not, and then begin participating, learning from others, studying before giving an opinion. "Waterfalling" is not useful, we need your opinion. In example, if there is an article with 20 delete opinions, although you can add your delete opinion there, it is not as useful as when you add it in a discussion where, currently, there are 5 keep and 4 delete opinions. That is because in the first case is clear the article will be deleted, while in the second consensus has not been reached yet. Also, check requests for adminship to see what people ask from candidates. Also, consider joining the patrol to learn how to prevent vandalism, read about the different templates that can be used in a user talk page so that you are prepared to warn vandals as they appear. Consider reporting to requests for page protection when a page is being reverted many times in a very short period of time, either by an apparently unsolvable content dispute (known as war edit) or by vandals. If such vandals are persistent, request intervention from administrators. Also, if you find an article that has been copied from another site, you can report it to the copyright problems section. Learn about the speedy deletion criteria, learn to apply it, and how to inform users having their articles speedy deleted. Also, spend some more time in article talk pages, discussing with others how to improve determined articles, gathering ideas about a new layout without breaking the different manuals of style guides. Interaction with others is extremely necessary as an editor in Misplaced Pages, and even more as an administrator, so you should be fluently there, not as in speaking well (I am still learning!), but as in learning to stay civil and cool when others appear to lose their mind, to never make personal attacks and, if necessary, applying the different suggested steps for resolving disputes. All these wikilinks may overwhelm you now, but as time passes, they will become second nature. Just remember: adminship should be given to those needing it, and currently, you don't need it. If you are happy as an editor, continue as an editor. I am happy being a wikignome, even though I have had some offers to become an administrator. Being one is a lot of responsability, and some people just can't handle the stress. So, I suggest you to "enjoy" this time as editor, and leave for the future plans for adminship. If you decide to become an administrator, hopefully this review helps you get information about who they are, why they exist, how they work and when you could become one. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 17:56, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   I don't build many full size articles, mostly stubs. One of my most recent articles, Bathurst railway station, New South Wales is one I'm very happy with. Template:Seven Network schedule is a template I made and think it is well done.

3. 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 haven't had any real conflicts over editing. In the future, I will contact the users who I'm having the conflict with and try to resolve it civily.

I'm happy enough with stubs - but unlike Sean Berry (journalist), they need to assert WP:NOTABILITY from the get-go, using references unlinked to the employer / subject in question.Garrie 05:56, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

User:Dark jedi requiem

Dark jedi requiem (talk · contribs) I've edited Misplaced Pages for a year, today. I've edited a lot of different articles, participated in Featured Pictures, DYK, dealt with vandals, copyright violations, and POV articles. I've uploaded loads of pictures. I've created articles and improved and expanded many. I've been active in The Star Wars portal, and recently joined Esperanza. I try to make constructive edits and have wanted to be an Admin for a while, but tried first to learn more and improve my edit count. I'm mostly curious as to what would best help me be successful in running for adminship. I would love constructive critisism that will help me on my way. Dark jedi requiem 01:16, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Hello there, Dark jedi requiem, how are you doing? Here are some thoughts about you, hopefully it is what you are looking for. I will be as straight as possible:

  • Having your detailed editcountitis in your user page is curious. Some users believe having it there means they are interested in showing others how they progress instead of showing links to articles you are proud of. I am neutral myself, but I do not really voice an opinions in requests for adminship unless I know the candidate. However, I think I remember there was once (can't say exactly who, when or where) someone who opposed because the candidate updated the userbox holding his edit count as soon as he passed a new mark. In RFAs, there are very strange people.
  • Now, I am pretty happy that, although you are a Star Wars contributor, you are proud of two articles that have nothing to do with it. I was once told that fictional articles were good, but that they would only be useful for a niche, a small group of fans, while other articles are useful for a much wider range (especially those topics that are treated in school or universities). Although I decided to continue my way writing fictional articles for the time being, I try to pass this advice to others when possible, as it makes sense. It is good to see two articles of such quality. Maybe someday Image:Naso tang picture.JPG will be moved to Commons to be shared through all Wikipedias! It is also good to see you have a good knowledge about our manual of style. Administrators are also editors, and they are expected to know how to edit articles correctly. Some people have the 1FA rule, that any candidate should have written at least one featured article. Although I am not one of them, I believe every candidate should have written at least one good article, which demonstrates a basic knowledge about formatting, verifying and citing information, research and layout taste.
  • I see you upload a lot of images, but don't really use a fair use rationale. Also, note that there is a very strong movement lately to delete fair use images that can be replaced, especially those from living people and relatively easy topics like cars. Images like Image:Chris Cornell promo.jpg and Image:Stretch Arm Strong press photo.jpg could be sometime soon be tagged with either {{fair use replace}} or {{replaceable fair use}}. Also, although it has been some months already, when you upload an image from Amazon, try to add the full link to the page containing the image and the image itself, and use the {{amazonimages}} template to mark it as downloaded from there. As an administrator, you would probably be handling image deletions, and it is necessary to know about how to handle them when reported.
  • Although you apparently work in a lot of articles, you have done around 50 article talk edits. Those edits usually indicate how you communicate with groups in order to create, modify or polish an article, and the low amount could be considered a lack of experience in search for consensus when modifying an article. Note that this is my own interpretation of article talk edits, and that others may not even care about that number at all ;-) Also, these are different from user talk edits (of which you have twice that amount), because in user talk edits you communicate towards a single user, not a bunch of users at the same time where consensus may be hard to achieve due different positions and ideals. Adding both talk edits result in less than 10% of your total edits. Personally, my minimun threshold for a candidate is 10% for user and 10% for article talk pages (that is, 20% should be done in those both namespaces), but I also consider other circunstances (in example, if the user spends a lot of time in deletion discussions, or discussing policies, it is understood that he knows how to handle discussions, and the previous threshold can be ommited.
  • Now, I divide admins in two types, those handling humans and those handling articles. The user-oriented administrators deal with vandalism and blocks, they hunt them down, warn and block when necessary. However, you don't seem to fit this category, as I see little participation in patrolling, with just 4 test warnings in the last month, and no apparent reports to administrator intervention against vandalism. The second group of administrators handle article-related matters: speedy deletions, closing deletion discussions, protecting pages, reporting copyright violations, etc. However, you have a very low participation in articles, templates and categories for deletion, nor you have reports requesting page protection. While adminship is nothing really important, as people usually say, I believe it should only be given to those willing to act as administrators. And, unluckily, you don't seem to need those tools.

  You are a very good editor, and hopefully will stay like this. Adminiship is not a prize someone can claim for doing things well, it is a full set of rights and responsabilities. If you want to become an administrator, you will have to spend more time "behind the curtains". Review my previous point to get some ideas of what you can do in order to "qualify" as administrator. You are free to nominate yourself for adminship if you want, but I am afraid it won't be successful, and that it may be closed early. Finally, note that you don't need to be an administrator to be a good editor, which you are. Try doing some administrator-like tasks for some weeks, and see if you can handle the pressure and stress. One thing is discussing with people about who the strongest character is, another is trying to explain a good faithed editor about why his edits were removed, and another quite different is to warn vandals who will deface your user page, insert tasteless images into your talk page, and go around heavily modifying or even moving articles while they can. I can tell you, it is pretty stressing. Just meditate, check the options, and decide. As long as you assume good faith, are civil and stay cool, it will be the right decision. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 15:52, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• One last thing I forgot to say. Your signature has around 220 characters. The guideline claims that a 200 character signature is already too long for most of the talk posts you may be doing. It is nothing very serious, but you may find people who will ask you to shorten it. -- ReyBrujo 15:55, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Questions

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

   I'm very happy that I have edited a wide variety of articles, but I do like Naso vlamingii and Acanthurus achilles particularly. I made both articles (and even took a picture for Naso vlamingii, and was successful in getting them on the front page in the DYK box.

3. 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've never had any real conflicts with editors. The most that has happened are when fellow editors voice a concern about something, and I disagree. It's never anything upsetting and since I always try to assume good faith, there is never a problem. Overall the most frustrated I've been is when I was explaining a copyright violation HERE. I never got upset, just frustrated I couldn't explain it properly.

User:Thief Lord

User:Thief Lord (t)(c) Started in November, 2005. I am thinking becoming a adminstrator. I clean up articles. I also try to improve articles such as Rugrats. I even tried to help get Rugrats to be a featured article. I don't use edit summary. I have started a couple of articles such as Felix Newton Pitt and Pitt Academy.Thief Lord 20:32, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool

Reviews

• Hello there, Thief Lord. Here are some tips you may find useful.

  • First of all, the (c) in your signature is broken. Try replacing ] with ] Now, for the review, I notice you have around 550 edits. I must point you at Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Standards, where you will see that candidates with less than 1,000 edits are really rare, just 24% this month, and their success rate is null. This is because it is understood that experience in both time and participation is needed in order to become a good administrator. You cite some problems with copyright violations and moving mistakes. These are common during the first weeks as editor, but they can easily be fixed. However, to request the administrator tools you do need to need them. In other words, why one would want to be an administrator if he is not going to act like one? In your case, you specify that you want to be an administrator, but the tasks you say you like doing do not require them. You don't need to be an administrator to clean up, create or improve articles. You would need them to fight vandals, but I see around one edit warning vandals per month, which is extremely low if you are willing to patrol. And only two participations in deletions, extremely low if you want to work with backlogs. Also, as Alex stated, you do need to use edit summaries, they are extremely helpful, and I am not sure even a very good editor would be able to have a successful request for adminship if he does not use them. I believe you should continue doing what you do, expanding and helping in writing articles for the time being. You can learn a lot of style formatting, which is required by adminstrators as they are also editors. Try making all the articles where you participate editing good or maybe even featured articles, although you must know by now that featured articles are rare, and that it is very hard to get the community consensus to achieve that. If you do want to become one someday, then I suggest you to check the recent changes patrol, learn how to use templates to warn people accordingly, and to participate in discussions about articles, templates and categories for deletion. This way you will learn experience about what is appropriate for Misplaced Pages, and what is not. Remember, there is no need to be an administrator to be a good editor, as that adds a set of responsabilities that may stress those that are not prepared. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 14:52, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• If you are thinking of becoming of an administrator, you must use edit summaries for every edit. --Alex (Talk) 17:38, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Questions

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

The aforementioned articles. Some things I do is try to improve the links, get rid of vandalism, and I really do not edit except when I find more information for the article pages. I am a good communicator. I make suggestions and put them on the article's talk pages.

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?

There was some but I contacted the other editor and he realized the mistake I did. The mistakes include copyright violations, and moving mistakes. I also tried to defended a article from deletion.

User:Katr67

Katr67 (talk · contribs) I'm not sure I'm interested in being an admin--I'm just looking for any advice that I can use to improve as an editor. Mostly I'm hoping to improve my understanding of various learning styles (including not assuming other editors' brains work the way mine does), then apply this knowledge to improve the civility of my interactions with editors who frustrate me. Katr67 17:09, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

As far as admin-related duties, mostly I revert vandalism on articles on my watchlist, and I warn them about 75% of the time and add appropriate sharedIP tags when needed. When I have time, I check to see if the vandal has edited other articles not on my watchlist. I have recently started reporting vandals. I also welcome new users and thank anons for good contributions. Other areas of interest include helping remove backlogs at Category:Misplaced Pages articles needing copy edit, Category:Articles that need to be wikified, and Category:Category needed. Katr67 13:40, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Hello there, Katr67. Here are some thoughts.

  • Over 4700 edits, with a 100% edit summary usage in both major and minor edits. 440 or so edits in user talk pages, and nearing 800 article talk edits. These numbers tell me you are willing to discuss with others. As I usually say, Misplaced Pages is both a community of editors and an encyclopedia. Thus, every one of us must both know how to write articles, and how to communicate with others.
  • Now, I notice a lot of "small" edits, like categorizing, disambiguation repairs, tagging, etc. You could be considered a WikiGnome, someone who is happy bouncing across articles, doing small fixes here and there. WikiGnomes are usually in charge of making articles fulfill the different manual of style recommendations. If you are willing to give the WikiGnome' spirit an opportunity, you may check the manual of style, choose one recommendation, and bounce through Special:Random, seeing if the article needs that fix or not. That is a pretty good way of learning how to format articles.
  • The fact that you are creating new articles is pretty good, indicates you are confident in your experience about style, referencing and neutral point of view. Even stubs are good, because as I say, when an anonymous finds a red link, he can't create the respective article. However, if he finds a stub, he will be able to contribute without needing to register.
  • You have around 250 edits in the Misplaced Pages namespace, mostly WikiProjects, a few AIV reports, and some AFD participation. If you want to become an administrator, you will need to spend some more time patrolling, reverting and warning users in their talk pages. This will allow users to check how you would handle, as a future administrator, reports in the administrator noticeboard and incident board. And some more in the different AFD discussions. Remember that people will create a profile about your deletion capabilities by examining the way you participate in AFDs.
  • Now, handling users who don't want to understand. That is a big topic, and I guess people could write books about that. Personally, first and foremost I respect the 1RR: if you make a change and it gets reverted, unless it is plainly vandalism, I don't revert back, but instead discuss in the talk page. Sometimes matter go to a more personal discussion through user talk pages, although I have been lucky to have solved most (if not all) my problems through article talk pages. It is important to note that these users are likely to have problems not only with you, but with anyone else, thus keeping the discussion public (article talk pages, in example) makes them feel the "pressure" of consensus. Now, this may sound harsh, but when people just don't understand, I slam the different policies and guidelines in the talk page as they are required, to show that people have agreed on a set of rules. The most useful ones are Ownership of articles (nobody owns an article, useful when a user does not accept your valid modifications), 1RR (it is always preferred to discuss than revert), 3RR (when in presence of an edit war), cool, when people begin rising their tone, and both civility and no personal attacks when things are boiling. Note that the more times you quote different Misplaced Pages essays, guidelines and policies, the more chances you will be successful if you need to change the approach. If the discussion is leading nowhere, you can always request a third opinion. Also, check resolving disputes to learn the different steps that are suggested to apply in order to solve disputes. The most important thing is always to stay cool and civil, no matter the situation. And, if it is a lost case, just do what you did, leave the discussion. Misplaced Pages is supposed to be entertaining, a relaxing experience. If it is stressing you, it is better to take a wikibreak.

  You are a very hard-working editor, interested in working with article backlogs. Note that you don't really need administrator tools to do what you do (categorize, wikify, tag, etc). If you enjoy doing these tasks, keep doing them, as they are extremely important (I usually tag maybe 50 articles per day with {{uncategorized}}, {{linkless}}, {{wikify}} and {{inappropriate person}}). If you want to be an administrator, know that you will have to focus in vandal fighting and XFDs, tasks handled primarily by them. While the way you handled that third inconvenient is good enough to keep things cool, it is as important to have stayed cool and civil. As a side note, you are likely to have quite a lot more of discussions like those ones as administrator, and you are expected to be even cooler, as you have both different abilities and more experience. I think you have potential for becoming an administrator, but you need to focus on that. Good luck -- ReyBrujo 02:37, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

• Well this is the first one of these I've written. We'll see how I do...

  If you're looking for how people approach the wiki, you could do worse than reading through Misplaced Pages:New user log for all the different rationales on why people show up and the first thing they do. If you haven't already looked through the "faction" descriptions, such as m:Darwikinism, and 'association' descriptions, such as the leaving-nothing-to-the-imagination m:Association of Wikipedians Who Dislike Making Broad Judgements About the Worthiness of a General Category of Article, and Who Are in Favor of the Deletion of Some Particularly Bad Articles, but That Doesn't Mean They Are Deletionist. They're not particularly useful in nailing down a particular user, but you can see certain traits or arguments pop up when watching a large debate, such as at WP:FAC or WP:RFA.

  You can also follow the edits of users who appear to be a good at handling disputes. The obvious place to look is Misplaced Pages:Mediation Committee, but it may be worth digging into the contribution history or talk page of any user who gives you a "Well, that was a nice way to handle that"-moment.

  As for general editing, I have little to say, which is a good thing. You are a content specialist in a particular subject and carry out a variety of related tasks. That's all good.

  I would like to add that there are a variety of admin tasks that you do based off the three cats you list above. As you know, sometimes these articles should probably be deleted or are copyright violations. Keep with WP:AFD until you get a feel for the where the bar is and the hot button issues (bands, schools, webcomics, etc), and then move your way up through prods and varieties of speedies. See User:Kjkolb/Copyvio for how to go about determining if an article is copyvio. Steady work in these areas and knowledge of the processes will get you an admin-ish profile. As you are a copyeditor, you may be interested in noting mistakes at WP:ERRORS.

  Your reverts look exactly like that of an admin's. I don't know what script you're using but I find it a bit offputting, in that it looks like you're trying to appear like an admin. On your contribs page you have a featured star next to New Carissa, which makes it look like you are claiming it as an article you got featured. Given that FAs are one of the few undebased forms of credibility on the wiki, I would be very certain that this is what you want to present. Some people will go through the actual article contributions to see if the user may be poaching another users's work. The big question that I ask at RFA is "Do I trust this user?" and you don't want to cause doubt through simple stuff. Set your preferences to force edit summaries; there is no reason for every edit not to have one.

  Regardless of what sort of admin-ish task one does, you find yourself in the middle of a dispute eventually. Many well respected and long term editors choose to avoid the hassle and there is no shame in waiting. The longer you wait, the deeper your experience on the wiki and the clearer you are in why the mop would be useful to you, the more likely you are to pass RFA. - BanyanTree 05:17, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

• Reply to BanyanTree: Hi BT, thanks for your review. As far as "what script I am using" for my vandal reverts, I copied a bit of boilerplate I found somewhere and put it on my Userpage, which I then copy and paste into the edit summary and add the Usernames by hand. I did not realize this would be construed as "trying to appear like an admin". I had no idea that's the summary you get when you revert using admin tools, I just figured other people were using some fancy anti-vandal program I didn't understand. I starting doing the copy-and-paste thing because I thought doing it that way would be a lot more helpful to other editors than simply typing "rvv". If I should stop or use another approach, please let me know. On my contribs page, New Carissa is under my heading "Added to/improved", and though I have certainly seen editors who take credit for the tiniest contributions, I try to only add things to that list that are at least somewhat significant. The New Carissa article was started by EngineerScotty and became a collaborative effort for several of us in WikiProject Oregon. You can see some of my questions about that on the article's talk page and on the project page. I doubt EngineerScotty would feel I was "poaching", and in fact he thanked me for my copyediting. I placed the star there to point out to whoever wandered by that the article was a featured article, as I am darn proud that WPOR got one. If this generally indicates to other editors that it is "my" article then I can take if off. Again, I did not realize this and had no intention of misleading anybody. If you can point me to any relevant policy about these issues, I would be grateful. Oh and BTW, I already have a 100% edit summary count for both major and minor edits. :) Thanks again, looks like I have some reading to do! Katr67 06:21, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

  Hi Katr67, I perhaps didn't clarify that I was offering an evaluation as if you were someone I was giving last minute advice to before nominating, taking the approach that a pleasant surprise when my dire predictions don't come to pass is better than a rude surprise. I was not actually accusing you of anything. Sorry, I don't know how these editor review things are supposed to work. The problem with RFA, at least in many people's minds, is that many of the norms are not written down anywhere, despite the existence of WP:GRFA, or at least that there are so many different things that people might be concerned about that the only way to know what the biggies are is to watch RFA for a long time. There's actually an example of someone being challenged over the FAs they claim on RFA right now, though I doubt you could find a relevant policy. If you want to clarify your involvement in the FA, simply adding a note (Added some content and copyedited in FA push), or whatever, after the star is a perfectly valid way of clarifying your involvement.

  As for rollback, the format "Reverted edits by 71.7.210.179 (talk) to last version by JaneDoe", where the IP address links to contribs, is the form produced by the admin rollback button. On rare occasions, I've seen users in need of urgent admin help check recent changes for an admin rollback to see who was actively editing. Some admins do not self-identify on their user pages, in which case one way to find out is to check for admin rollback. If you're not an admin and have identical rollbacks, you can see the concern. Here's a list of rollback emulation scripts that can be added to your monobook. All of these slightly modify the edit summary so they can be distinguished from admin rollback. I highly recommend popups as being insanely useful. (You may want to tell the user that you got the boilerplate from about how grouchy I am about this issue.) Good to know about the edit summaries; that was an afterthought as I was finishing up and apparently forgot I had already read about it above.

  Like I said, you are a fine user and, frankly, if you show a demonstrable need for admin tools you would be a serious candidate now. Don't tell the people at RFA I said this, but sometimes it gets a little Escher-esque. Many voters are on the margin: they would vote if they saw something that sparked their interest or they are on one of the divides between support/neutral/oppose and are looking for something to push them in one direction. An oppose based off one of the disputes you mention above (again, I did not dig that far) might be such a push for some voters. Smart RFA behavior is to remove any of the silly stuff that people point out (like me), before someone points it out in the RFA and it becomes, by its existence, something that instills doubt. For example, based off my quick review I would lean towards support but probably would probably pass by (which I normally do for users I don't know and aren't having interesting RFAs). But I might notice your rollbacks and leave a note in the questions or comments about it. Let's play this out: You say "I had no idea that's the summary you get when you revert using admin tools". Someone else says "So you aren't familiar with the tools?" Regardless of what happens next or how reasonable you're being, people on the margin just took a mental step away from where you want them to be. Of course, if you have a strong enough candidacy, the marginal people may not form enough of a group to derail an RFA, or may be nonexistent - all the neutral people being moved into support and all the opposers moved into neutral or just passing by without comment.

  I have a feeling that I offended you in my previous post and, if so, I apologize. These editor review thingies are much more involved than I thought they would be and I think I will refrain in the future. I wish you the best, BanyanTree 13:01, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Nope, you didn't offend me but thanks for explaining your approach--looking at me as a last-minute RfA candidate. That makes a lot of sense. I was just really surprised to think my actions might be being misconstrued, as I try really hard to discover what the rules are around here and apply them. (As evidenced by my lack of serious (as in outside the realm of a user or two) conflict so far.) And I had just had another little run in with someone. (You can see the results here), and so I was a little bit sensitive about having my actions misconstrued. Your additional comments are really helping me understand what's at stake in an RfA. I'm beginning to think I'm way too sensitive to be an admin, but if I decide the rollback feature will help me keep the vandals at bay, and I run out of Wikignomelike things to do (doubtful) I may consider it if someone nominated me. (I doubt I would self-nominate.) I'll see about my vandal boilerplate thingy today too. Happy editing! Katr67 14:57, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I checked for the template. I actually found it on a Misplaced Pages help page, so if this incorrect it definitely needs to be changed, because as a relative newcomer, I treat these pages as Wikigospel and don't wish to be penalized for following the rules. Katr67 18:31, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I'll refrain from repeating the expletive that I uttered when I read this. The Help pages are all copied from the masters at Meta, but it this case there hasn't been an update since November 2005. The Meta page had been quickly corrected to avoid mimicking admins. I'll remember this next time I want to complain about a Misplaced Pages mirror with outdated content. I've done a manual update of that Help page, which now suggests that you use "rv" rather than "revert", for which I have no concerns. Thanks for checking on this. I have to wonder how many other users are going on this bad info. As for being penalized, in this case, you gain bonus credibility for being the victim of a ridiculous oversight. ;) Best, BanyanTree 21:21, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

(unindent)Awesome! If I ever go for an RfA, I'll be sure to look you up so you can vouch for me. :D But seriously, I'm glad I could help. Katr67 21:26, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Questions

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

   I'm pleased with all of my work on Oregon so far, especially my work adding articles on small communities and the associated clean up that goes with that. (I have yet to have anyone point out that I completely screwed anything up, anyway.) Currently I'm helping Misplaced Pages:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places untangle the mess that is List of Registered Historic Places in Oregon. I think I've done a pretty good job fixing up that list, though obviously there is still a lot of work that needs to be done.

3. 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've had encounters with about three editors that I found stressful. In one case, I was accused of vandalism for removing links to an article that been through two thorough deletion reviews and subsequently deleted. I think I handled that one pretty well. The next one was with an editor who disputed my removal of what I considered a rant from the front page of an article. In that one, I was accused of censorship. Looking at that one, I think I acquitted myself fairly well in the end, but I now approach the deletion of information from the main article space a little more gingerly. Finally, I became completely frustrated with an editor who doesn't seem to grok how Misplaced Pages works. In dealing with that one, I had to take the article in question off my watchlist and cool off. That is the approach I plan to take in the future if I feel stressed, though I would rather learn how to find new ways to reach the editors who frustrate me rather than just walk away.

User:Tjstrf

Tjstrf (talk · contribs) As seems to be the case with the majority of editors approaching this page, I am essentially seeking an RfA Primary. I wish to pass RfA in one fell swoop if at all, and wonder where I stand in that regard. As such, I seek more criticism than praise here, though praise would be fine as well if you seriously think I deserve it. Specifically, I desire to know what weaknesses I have as an editor that I am not already aware of. --tjstrf 06:52, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's Tool (Firefox only).

Edit counts all listed on the talk page, so unless you want an up-to-the-minute tally, go there. Also note that I've placed questions above reviews, as it seemed more sensible that way. --tjstrf 08:01, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Questions

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

   My most significant contributions have mostly been to those articles within the Bleach (manga) category. Building accurate, non-speculative articles on any area of popular culture is always difficult, but we've managed to accomplish it. Outside of article-space, I am an active contributor to the village pump and policy talk pages, and contribute to AfD.

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 rarely enter into conflicts with other users in good standing, mostly because my personal policies dictate I avoid subjects in which I am emotionally involved. However, I can name three instances from memory in which a significant dispute has taken place.

• • • • The first was Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Christ psychosis, an article which consisted of original research, vanity, and extremist anti-christian point of view. While I was never called on it due to nature of the situation, I found myself degrading into rhetoric and borderline incivility. As a result of this situation, I have concluded that users should not edit controversial articles on which they strong feelings.
      • The second was a 51 kilobyte naming dispute on Talk:Roronoa Zoro. Though some users's emotions ran high, I was able to stay calm and not let my emotions get the better of me. (I think I was sarcastic one time though.)
      • The third and most recent (about a week ago) was on external links in Riviera: The Promised Land. In this case, I can say that I handled myself well so far as civility and discussion went, however in the early stages of the disagreement I mistook an IP editor who didn't know to use talk pages for a simple vandal, and reverted him several more times than I probably should have, though it was over several days.

With the exception of those 3 situations, I believe I have not been party to any significant disputes.

Reviews

• Well, we have been working together on Bleach-related articles for a long time and I recognize you as an excellent editor and fanboi/girl fighter. At the moment, I can only find 3 things to criticize you about.
  • Check the articles you are redirecting to. Actually I just found this one instance randomly, but here you attempted to redirect to a page that doesn't exist.
  • While this may be difficult if your knowledge is mostly covered by Misplaced Pages, try to edit more non-fiction articles. For example, I frequently edit Israel-related articles. If you are fluent in another language, you can translate articles from that language's Wikiepdia. I think this is important for other users' perception of you (but may be wrong).
  • Sometimes you revert a bunch of edits by a single user seemingly without checking whether all edits are indeed harmful. While most of the times you are correct, there are some cases such as this where you reverted many non-harmful edits just to kill one or two. Manual reverting may sometimes be worse than automatic but in some cases it shows more effort on your part and increases understanding between users (combined with edit summaries which you already use well), among other things.

Lastly, try to use IM more to interact with your fellow editors :P -- Ynhockey 11:19, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

• Hello there, tjstrf. Here are some comments.

  • Just over 4300 edits, around 470 user talk edits and 730 article talk edits, those are pretty good numbers for me. They mean you interact with people very often, both personally, with user talk pages, and in groups through article talk pages. Your edit summary usage is perfect, but I guess you already know that :-)
  • 118 edits in AFD, 43 in TFDs and 85 CFDs, not bad numbers at all, although the amount of AFD participation could be better (considering there are at least 50 articles sent to AFD per day). Checking this opinion it looks like you are not afraid of giving your own opinion, although that may bring some controversy as seen here. This participation suggesting to send the article to DRV implies you know about the deletion stage, so even with a low amount of AFD participation, I believe you will be trusted if you ask to take care of deletion backlogs.
  • I notice you created the Category:Bleach images. When creating a category that will hold fair use images, you need to tag it with , because thumbnails in categories are considered a breach to our Fair use criteria.
  • Regarding this edit, there has been a discussion in the Japan WikiProject (between several other places like the Album and Song WikiProjects, the anime, etc), and it was agreed that articles should follow the manual of style, not the original typography. In other words, your summary is misleading. Even if BLEACH is a j-pop group, the article in Misplaced Pages would be named, in example,Bleach (j-pop band) (as Bleach (band) already exists), and not BLEACH.
  • Regarding this edit summary, I find it slightly offensive, mainly considering it was 66.74.128.148 (talk · contribs) first edit.
  • Interesting that you need to apologize for opposing a RFA. Note that I don't think that is bad, I just think it is interesting, because I don't happen to see that. Maybe people should do that more often.
  • You also like writing fictional articles? Just like me :-) I suggest you to review the fiction guidelines, to enhance articles about Bleach, especially those about the characters.
  • Remember to substitute warning templates when leaving them in user talk pages. Here is one you forgot to ;-)
  • Now, going back to possible administrator duties, as I said you have a vast experience with the deletion process. I am guessing you have a good amount of deleted edits due speedy tagging. But the amount of vandal fighting is rather low. I like the fact you warned two old users due their behaviour in the Danny Phantom AFD. I like when people is "pro active" and not "re active" when something serious like a scalating edit war/personal attack issues. But, overall, your amount of reverts of vandalism is somewhat low. Apparently you don't do vandal patrolling. Although you have a good number of AIV reports, I am somewhat dubious about the amount of warnings you have left. I mean, I have left 20 user warnings this last week (15-22), and I am neither a recent changes patroller nor wanting to become administrator as of now. Were I really interested in adminship, I think I would spend some time patrolling. Of course, it depends in what you are willing to do when becoming administrator, which you have not specified.
  • I am assuming your average is doing 500 edits per month, spending a good amount in the Misplaced Pages namespace. I see you have been working pretty hard in these last two months. If you are chosen as administrator, will your edit average stay at 1000 per month, or will drop back to the 500? For me, there are three group of editors: less than 1000, between 1000 and 10000, and over 10000, where people in the first group should not be chosen as administrators due lack of experience. I am interested in knowing how much of your time will be spent in administrator-like duties, and how much in what you are doing right now.

  As I said, my opinion is that, if you base your adminship request in XFD and backlogs, it should be a successful one. I am a little worried about vandalism, as you aren't much focused in that area. In any case, remember that adminship is nothing special, and if you fail achieving it in the first attempt, you will have other opportunities. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 00:39, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

--"I rarely enter into conflicts with other users in good standing." I.E., he has had no problem entering into conflicts with new users or anonymous users. Censoring such users, forcing messages on their talk pages to provoke more disputes, etc. This person is not qualified to be an admin of Misplaced Pages. Look at his edit history for examples. --Purposely left unsigned by a sock of User:DougHolton.

You're right, I have no qualms whatsoever about reverting trolls and vandals such as yourself and your IP socks, User:66.230.200.227 aka User:68.52.79.104 aka User:68.52.207.200 aka User:69.138.37.99, etc. etc. etc. --tjstrf Now on editor review! 19:07, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Admin blows referee whistle

Not a good move there, tjstrf. Link to diffs and block logs if it's necessary to prove your point, but stay away from the t-word. As soon as an editor gets sysopped the baiting quotient can raise by an order of magnitude. Suddenly you become an Authority Figure, which draws inherent wrath from people who hate authority figures in general. A certain type of user delights in taunting admins into losing their cool until somebody gets desysopped or (at the very least) general respect for administrators erodes. Step back for a moment and suppose this were the Village Pump. Now pretend you visit the thread as Joe Wikipedian with an edit count of 350: the exchange looks ugly on both sides. That, in fact, amounts to a succesful example of you-know-whatting-that-starts-with-a-t. Isn't it tricky how skilled those rubbery green bridge-dwellers can be? Durova 04:25, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

User:Siva1979

Siva1979 (talk · contribs) The main reason why I am requesting for a second review is that I am thinking of self-nominating myself for adminship in the near future. I have previously experienced three failed RfAs. The first RfA was on April 2006. The second one was in June 2006 and the third one was in August 2006. All of these RfAs were NOT self-nominations. Based on my edits from August 2006, I need critical comments on the quality of my edits. If I am able to gain a significant analysis of my edits, I would be better prepared to decide whether I should run for adminship again after about three months. I would like my fellow editors to point out their concerns and tell me whether I am likely to finally pass a fourth RfA. I have to admit that a fourth failure in this harsh process would be quite difficult to take! This is the main reason why I have to make sure that the concerns of my fellow editors are addressed first before nominating myself. Thank you for your time and kind understanding in this matter. Siva1979 05:17, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• I have no major knowledge of your edits; however, I guarantee you that you won't succeed unless you hold it off until December or so. People will frown upon four RFAs in six months. Wish I could be of more help to you. Ral315 (talk) 06:49, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
• I concur with Ral315 that 4 RFAs in such a short time, a self-nomination further more so, will be used to oppose you. Other than that, you might want to look at your contributions to "vote" discussions to see if they may be misconstrued, and try to change them. Otherwise, I can't find anything. – Chacor 08:16, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
• I recommend going through the oppose votes in your most recent (and maybe the older) RFA. For instance, an editor brought this article up, noting that you started and didn't expand it: 1989-90 in Scottish football. It seems the article is still in that state. In repeat nominations I often go back and check what the problem areas were and if the nominee addressed them. The issue of AfDs was clearly on a lot of editors' minds, so make sure this is settled to everybody's satisfaction. And I concur, I wouldn't consider another run until early next year. (And it's ok to turn down offers for nomination until then. It's your call to decide when you're ready.) ~ trialsanderrors 09:22, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
• Many of your edits outside the main namespace seem to serve only the purpose of increasing your namespace edit count. Many of these are not useful at all, like this insertion of an unhelpful link or this linking to an inactive project. Your mass edits to image talk pages like Image talk:Epsomandewellfc.jpg are also completely redundant with the edit they explain and its edit summary. Also, I don't see what you need administrator tools for, as I don't see deletion nominations, listings of copyvios or serious vandal-fighting. Your apparently strong wish to become an admin and to fit into RfA standards also do not inspire much confidence - I would prefer if you could just use (and show) your own common sense and judgment instead of trying to be how others want you to be. Kusma (討論) 09:49, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
• All good feedback to date. i agree that given your frequent trips to RfA you need to hold off in this one. The longer the better. There is definitely a negative vibe against those returning to RfA after the minimum period. Much better to err on the side of caution and hold off until new year, at least. Second, you should not be tailoring edits for adminship. It stands out. Working on your own projects will cause you to go where you need. You need to have enough edits in the bag to allow users to see how you work with others. Your football projects are going pretty well. i noticed your attempt to get the logos all up todate with the correct tags. However, it is a concern that you have left some pages untouched, re: 1989-90 in Scottish football. Definitely do not self nom, if you are not getting offer for nomination then it is defintiely too early. But you need to use your jedgement here because quite a few people jump on the first nomination that turns up without considering if they are really ready. or should I say do not consider if the community is really ready. For your upcoming RfA you need to have a strong nominator that is going to do a lot more than just say "here's Silva, a good chap with tons of edits, been around for a while and definitely deserves the mop". That kind of nom would make me lean to oppose. You need some one that is going to present your case in the strongest fashion. Someone who takes the time to reserch your contributions and present them to the community. Yourself, you need to consider how your work on the encyclopedia could be made more efficient with the tools, as well as how you can use the tools to the benefit of the enccylopedia. It is so easy to just list off the usual stuff, block vandals, speedy delete etc. But you need to do more than that. Outline a situation where you had to request help from an admin to either block or delete a page. Feel free to ask more questions if you feel this is not helpful. David D. (Talk) 21:30, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's Tool (Firefox only).
• I haven't reviewed the contribution. You give an impression of a person who is pursuing adminship very much. As a result your next RfA will probably fail as well, unless lots of time elapses and you make some excellent contributions in the interim. - CrazyRussian talk/email 12:19, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
• Hi Siva, thanks for asking. I do agree it's way to soon for another RfA. Of course, now is the time to look at what needs fixing to have things straightened out for later. I would say at least January. I think some !voters are harder on repeat RfA's than on the 1st one. Another problem with repeat RfA's, as the Russion points out, is "longing for adminship". I will go through your edits and see what I see. It may take a while, I'm working more than I prefer to. I've noticed you voting "oppose" on RfA's, so hopefully that matter is cleared up. We don't always agree on AfD, you're more of an inclusionist than I am. That's OK, we need to look at AfD from more than one angle. Some of the opposers on your last RfA were more stringent than I am. For instance, I don't know how you will deal with Kusma's critique. Good luck. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 15:45, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Hi, Siva-- A quick survey of your edits makes me think you need to take part in more XfD discussions and vandalism fighting/reporting. You might want to ask one of the admins about the possibilty of closing AfD's as a non-admin. I see you've started welcoming visitors. I think it's important to let people know what the rules are form the start. Welcoming is also an opportunity to review new pages and nip problems in the bud as well as making small, meaningful edits. I would also recommend tackling articles for clean-up. There are thousands of them. If you shape some of them up, you may meet some critics' desire for more substantial edits. Hope this helps. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 00:07, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
• Siva: you're a valuable, committed editor who clearly desires to be as involved in the project as possible. Balance your edits between technical stuff and content creation, keep your eyes and ears open to all the feedback you get and (you won't like this part) wait until February for your next RfA. You're not the first to have got caught in this situation, nobody wants to see you get knocked back again and lose faith in the project. Deizio talk 00:19, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
• I have essentially the same issues with you that I did on the original vote. You rarely, if ever, actually make substantive contributions to the encyclopedia, apart from making automated vandal reversions, minor project edits and making votes on RfA, and it seems that your entire presence here is aimed towards the goal of adminship. Should I see some genuine (and not insignificant) work on the encyclopedia, I will think about changing my vote, or at least lessening it from a strong oppose. Rebecca 01:06, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
• I have to agree with the above. Give it some time and make some quality contributions to Misplaced Pages articles. All of your actions point to a desperate attempt at attaining adminship status. After some time, and a lot of substantial article edits and a less zealous persuit of adminship, I would be happy to support. Wikipediarules2221 20:30, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
• Hello Siva1949. Out of respect I am telling you that, due both the huge backlog there still is here (up to now, 10 review needed), and the amount of reviews you have had, I will be skipping you. If the backlock lessens, I may come back and do the review later. I thought it would be good to mention this, in case you wonder why I am skipping you. Cheers! -- ReyBrujo 22:27, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
• I voted against you because of your actions in afds. I recall after that Striver incident that you went to every afd of his articles and seemed to systematically vote keep regardless of the content of the article. That to me seemed in bad form and that is why I voted the way I did.--Jersey Devil 18:19, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
• You should forget about edit counts, and you should forget about wanting to be an administrator and doing things specifically in order to become an administrator. Instead, you should make substantive, productive contributions to the content of the encyclopedia and become involved in policy matters where it specifically interests you. If in the course of that you have demonstrated an understanding of policy you will naturally become an administrator. Right now, it just looks like you are doing everything just so you can become an administrator; the goal instead is to help improve an encyclopedia. —Centrx→talk • 21:20, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Questions

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

   Answer: I am pleased to be able to remove all the red-links of English soccer clubs in the English football league system from step 1 to 6. I have also created links for all the English soccer leagues from step 1 to 7. Although most of the articles I have created are just stubs, I have recently began to add images to these articles. I have also incresed the content for some of these articles. I also wish to give credit to other users who were able to expand some of these articles into having a more encyclopedic content. I also welcome new IP addresses and users and added signatures for comments that lack proper signatures. I have also taken the initiative to start articles on all the football seasons within the English football league and Scottish football league. Lately, I have fixed some of the older portal pages and directed them to the correct Portal namespaces. I have also more accurately categorized and added more defined licensing logos to most of the the football images of the various non-league teams. However, this has yet to be completed. I am also pleased in helping out to categorize uncategorized articles within this project as well.

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?

   Answer: Yes, I have been through a few minor conflicts but I always maintain a personal policy of one-revert rule. In this mannar, by discussing with the other users of their conflicts with mine, I am able to more clearly understand their point of view. This causes me to feel more at ease with their reversions and in this manner, stress is removed from my mind and editing on Misplaced Pages begins to be more enjoyable after the initial conflict. I will most likely follow this course of action in any potential future conflicts as well.

User:Wirbelwind

Wirbelwind (talk · contribs) About four months ago, I made one or two minor edits on Misplaced Pages and then decided to create an account to mask my IP. Since then, I have spent more and more time on Misplaced Pages, and recently, the thought of becoming an Admin crossed my mind. However, I don't feel as if I'm completely ready, but I would like to know if I am heading more or less in the right direction and making significant contributions, however small. I would like to be reviewed for such things as following and enforcing Misplaced Pages guidelines, as well as not making too many minor edits that are insignificant and contribute to clogging up the edit histories, and of course what I might do to improve future edits to guide me on my way in becoming a better Misplaced Pages editor. Thanks in advance for your time as well as constructive criticisms, if any. Wirbelwind 22:41, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Hello, Wirbelwind. Here is my review. Hopefully you will find some tips to improve.

  • First of all, I checked your edit summary with mathbot, and noticed you don't really use them (55% for major and 71% for minor edits). I suggest using them more often. When you modify something, the modification is listed in the watchlist of the persons who are watching that article. If you provide a summary, they will be able to know what you did before checking the differences, however if you don't provide one, they will be forced to check the diff. Thus, using edit summaries give some extra free time to everyone.
  • 13 user talk edits and 99 in article talk pages. Those numbers are not bad for someone who just recently started contributing. It is good to see you are sharing time with other editors in talk pages, the earlier you begin doing that, the faster you will accumulate experience to handle different conflicts.
  • The amount of time you spend at the reference desk is quite interesting. I noticed this talk, remember to always start new conversations at the bottom of the current talk page.
  • I notice you fixed some wikilinks like ]. Remember that you can "escape" wikilinks with ].
  • Checking your contributions, I realize you are what is known as a wikignome, someone who prefers doing small edits to articles than creating and expanding existing ones. I consider myself a wikignome too. As such, you may be interested in learning about the manual of style, and then clicking Special:Random to arrive to a random article, and apply the different styles depending in what the article needs. I also notice you contribute with some games like Harvest Moon, you may be interested in joining the Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Computer and video games, where you may find others who are also interested in the series.
  • Now, as your thought about becoming an administrator. It is still too early for you to try to become an administrator. If you check Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Standards, you will realize that the more edits and time you spend in Misplaced Pages, the more chances you get for becoming an admin. This is because spending time and editing here gives you experience that otherwise you would not get. I divide administrator in two big groups: those that are user-oriented and those that are article-oriented. The user-oriented ones primarily deal with vandals, reverting vandalism attempts, protecting articles, reporting and blocking users, etc. However, I don't see you reverting vandalism, nor reporting users to Administrator intervention against vandalism. The second group, the one oriented towards articles, mainly deal with deleting articles, images and categories. But I see an almost insignificant amount of time with Articles for deletion, reporting articles for speedy deletion, etc. So, I suggest you to do some patrolling, reporting pages that fit the speedy deletion criteria while patrolling, warning vandals with the correct templates, etc.

  As of now, you are right, you are still too young to consider adminship. You need at least a couple of months of active patrolling, and a good amount of interaction with others. As I said, adminship should be given to those who are willing to act like administrators, and so far, you have not done enough administrator-like actions to get it. If you want to continue the way you are going now, you will become an excellent wikignome. If you want to become administrator, you will have to change most of your current actions in Misplaced Pages, which may be too stressful. Meditate what you want to do, and whatever your decision is, just remember to stay civil, have a neutral point of view, and assume good faith. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 21:15, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's Tool (Firefox only).

Questions

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

   Answer: At the moment, I am most proud of Flyff because it was my first big edit, and I tried to make everything as fitting for an encyclopedia as I could, including removing content which is more suitable for a game guide as well as giving it a neutral POV. However, there is a section in the article "Criticism" which I have not really touched upon. There are also sections of the article which I have not touched, but I went through the first half fairly thoroughly, while learning more about Misplaced Pages.

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?

   Answer: I have had conflicts over editing, however, all but maybe one of the editors I had real conflicts with were problematic users who have histories of being warned or temporarily blocked. The less serious ones were mostly different interpretations of Misplaced Pages policies, but discussed in a meaningful manner. I haven't felt stressful over Misplaced Pages because it allows work to be saved and continued at a later time, which cuts down a lot of potential stress. However, there have been one or two times where I wished I had an easier mean to block persistant vandals, especially one who has a very extensive list of warnings and blocks. In some cases, I would put a template on the vandal's userpage to make a more noticeable record for admins about their history in vandalising. --Wirbelwind 22:54, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

User:Wikiwoohoo

Wikiwoohoo (talk · contribs) I joined Misplaced Pages over a year ago in August 2005 and have tried to involve myself where possible in WikiProjects that interest me, as well as groups such as the AMA which are very useful in solving disputes. I don't get flustered very easily here, I save that for my work outside Misplaced Pages! It would be good to see what other users think of both me as a user and also my actions. I will welcome all comments. Thank you! Wikiwoohoo _talk 19:22, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Hello, Wikiwoohoo. Here is my review, I hope it will be helpful.

  • Almost 2800 edits, with excellent summary edit usage. 270 user talk edits and 130 article talk edits, which personally is a little too low (I would expect some more talk for someone who spends time solving disputes, although since I don't know how the AMA works, I may be mistaken.
  • Another personal note: after participating in a lot of controversies (too many to be counted) in games with a large number of fans (games, literature, computer science, etc) and thus having spent quite a lot of time mediating, I know it is pretty hard to stay cool. I really appreciate your work in solving disputes.
  • I noticed a lot of your edits were related to BBC even before reading your first answer. As you can imagine, there may be a conflict of interest between your work and your edits, thus I suggest sourcing as much as you can from second sources (being BBC sources considered first party ones).
  • I notice you upload a lot of images. There is something I don't understand: Image:BBC Gavin Hewitt.jpg is sourced www.tvnewsroom.co.uk, however that is a very generic link. Is it because you took the picture from a video from the site? Try to link to a more specific address (the site and the video, the video, the page, etc), in example: found at www.tvnewsroom.co.uk, more specifically www.tvnewsroom.co.uk/test/1/movie.wmv, otherwise it is similar to upload an image and write that its source is google.com. Note that images like Image:BBC Gavin Hewitt.jpg and Image:BBC Kirsty Lang.jpg may be tagged with {{fair use replace}} or worse, {{Replaceable fair use}}.
  • It has been almost a year since your last attempt at RFA. In this time you have done over 2000 edits, have understood how the community work by spending time at WikiProject BBC and british tv shows and channels and especially AMA. Your efforts to improve BBC-related articles are good headed, and hopefully you will be able to make as many of them good articles as possible.
  • If you are not using User:Wikiwoohoo/Temp Page anymore, you can tag it with {{db-user}} to get it deleted (redirects in user space are not that useful, and since you are free to create new pages in your user namespace, having it there may not be necessary).

  As I stated, you are a very good editor, improving articles and, especially, working to mediate in conflicts. Since you already have experience at mediating, you may check third opinion and current surveys from time to time to see if you can give an advice to those in conflict. Being a mediator, you have experience that not many of those participating in these events can claim. With time and more experience, you may get a position in the mediation comittee. For now, keep it up. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 00:03, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• Thank you very much ReyBrujo. Your kind comments are very much appreciated. I will try to address your comments in turn.

1. When talking about my edits on user talk pages, you have mentioned this twice though each with different totals. Were you refering to other types of talk pages?

   Yup, sorry. The second was about your article talk edits. I have fixed the original review.

2. I had realised that I could be accused of having a conflict of interest when editing BBC related articles which is why I try to add information with sources that can be listed. There is plenty I could enter about the corporation through my work but as I do not have sources to back any of it up, I am unable to include it. Where there are other sources that can be included for information, I will do my best to list them.

   Good to hear. I am not as concerned about your neutrality as I am about thirds not assuming good faith, thus I wanted you to clarify the matter here in case it appears in the future.

3. I have always thought that images can help to give the reader a sense of what they are reading about; to help them to understand what the article is about, particularly for those outside of the UK who may never have seen the television channel or journalist for example of whom the article is about. I try to ensure image summary pages carry a source link, unless they have been captured or created by a user instead, and that a fair use claim is entered. The images such as those you have mentioned are basically the best for what the article is about, they show newsreaders or correspondents in their work. Other images such as those taken at press conferences or similar as an example are much harder to find but could still be taken. Before anyone suggests it, I can't really go around BBC Television Centre with my camera :). I will however try to clarify the exact pages where such images come from on the websites I found them.

   No problem. I usually ask for two links, a link to the page where the image is situated and a direct link to the image, in case either goes down. However, there is a very strong movement lately to remove fair use images that can be replaced with free images, and images about people with a good amount of contact with common people (in this case, news reporters) are likely to be the target of such movement.

4. I will list the 'Temp Page' for deletion. I will also do the same for another version of my talk page archive which I made into redirects to pages with better names.

• I hope these answer your concerns; thank you once more for your comments and suggestions. :) Wikiwoohoo 14:13, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

  Glad to have helped. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 17:17, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

• Just a pointer towards my two failed RfA self-nominations: 1 and 2. Wikiwoohoo _talk 19:40, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's Tool (Firefox only).

• A great user helped me on my fair use photo issues. Thank You Wikiwoohoo Cocoaguy 従って _contribs 19:47, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Questions

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

   Answer: I have been actively trying to improve BBC News and BBC One to the good article standard and have been tidying other articles recently. I stick to articles relating to the BBC and BBC News as I work there and my aim is to get most articles in that category to at least good article standard.

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?

   Answer: I can't think of a conflict I have had with a user as such. Recently however I was accused accidentally of vandalising the BBC News article but that was sorted really as quickly as it came around.

User:Chabuk

Chabuk (talk · contribs) There are a couple reasons I'd like a review. First off, I would at some point in the future like to contribute to Misplaced Pages as an admin, but more immediately, the Vaughancruft debate seems to have finaly settled down to the point that I've been back to normal editing for a while now, and would like some feedback on how I'm doing, if I'm on the right track, etc. Chabuk 20:51, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• I think so far you're on the right track. It'll be nice once the election is over, then the whole VaughanWatch debacle will definitely be done. It seems you're doing a good job on RC patrol, but RC patrolling doesn't require the admin tools. If you want to be an admin someday, you should read WP:ARL and think about what kind of admin tasks you'd be interested in, and start getting involved with them. Blocking and unblocking? Start reading WP:AN and its related pages on a regular basis, become familiar with the policies, and offer opinions when others ask for them. Deletion? Participate in a wide variety of AfD debates, not to mention other XfD, Prod, and CSD. You might consider getting VandalProof or AWB if there are general categories of things you want to work on cleaning up. Mangojuice 18:22, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
• Hello there, Chabuk. Here is my review, hopefully you will find it useful.

  • Mathbot reports a pretty high summary usage, 100% in major and 88% in minor. This is a way of helping other users when writing articles, and is appreciated.
  • As I don't use tools for editcountitis, I will do it manually, so some numbers will be slightly off. As of this review, you have 3220 edits, with nearly 800 in user talk pages, and nearly 350 edits in article talk pages. My personal belief is that contributors should spend time in talk pages as much as in articles as this is a community effort. In your particular case, it is easy to notice you contribute as much in community discussions (both individual discussions with determined users as with several others in article talk pages).
  • I noticed you have "advertised" this editor review with at least 12 other users. Since this is an informal procedure to get feedback, I don't see anything wrong with it for now. However, I hope you understand having a similar action in your future nomination will not be seen kindly.
  • I am somewhat worried about your prod participation. In example, COBS Bread was prodded because it fails the corporation guidelines for notability. You deprodded it with a disagree. deprodd comment, however you did not specify why you disagree with that. The {{prod}} tag clearly states If you can address this concern by improving, copyediting, sourcing, renaming or merging the page, please edit this page and do so. You may remove this message if you improve the article, or if you otherwise object to deletion of the article for any reason. To avoid confusion, it helps to explain why you object to the deletion, either in the edit summary or on the talk page. If this template is removed, it should not be replaced. However, you have not given source to demonstrate this company fulfills our notability guidelines, nor you have used the talk page in order to give your reasons for deprodding. As you have done with articles where someone deprod'ed it and you sent it to AFD, I would have kind of expected you sending the article to AFD yourself if you are not able to provide the references or working the prod tag asked for. Also, you have prod'ed Oil Thigh with the comment NN. While it is clear what you meant, I think you should make statements that are understandable for everyone. Imagine a casual user arriving to the page and seeing NN as reason for deleting the article. Were he able to contribute, giving citations or demonstrating the subject is notable, he may not do it because of not understanding what NN means. Also, you seem to think AFDs are votations, as seen here, here, here, etc. In multiple instances you mention "vote." Two things about this: an AFD is not a vote, it is a search for consensus (I have been around for some time, and I have seen articles with just few delete opinions and plenty of keep ones getting deleted, and on the contrary, few keep and many delete opinions still around), and second, when you nominate an article, it is believed you nominate it because you think it should be deleted, so there is no need for adding Delete when nominating an article. When someone objects the deletion but still nominate the article (in example, an orphaned AFD, or when someone questions the article notability and, not being able to get consensus in the talk page, you nominate the article for deletion in order to get a broader set of opinions), they would state No opinion or alike to indicate they don't have an opinion, and that the motive was raised by others and not by themselves.
  • I would suggest reviewing your contributions as Pm shef, replacing them with your current user and talk pages, so that it is less confusing for others. Although you don't need to, it is a possibility you can. Of course, you are free to do it or not :-) -- ReyBrujo 21:23, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Regarding your speedy usage, I would like to see a "friendlier" approach. In example, you tagged the Uzi and Ari article 20 minutes after it was created by Wonfrost (talk · contribs), an obvious new user. When you speedy tag articles created by them, you need to inform the user with {{nn-warn}} and probably with {{nn-notice}} after it was deleted. We should educate new users about our notability guidelines, and these notices help answering the most common questions. Yes, I notice the user contacted you and you replied, but it also happened with Perini Navi. Also, tagging as speedy a user page is something that may surface in your future RFA.
  • I look forward your contributions as Esperanzian. As you say, it is a hard work to be nice with people when they offend you, but that is the only way of making Misplaced Pages a better place.
  • Good to see you spend time with articles other than politic ones. After learning about references, I think you should begin learning about m:Cite/Cite.php, inline citations that make reading much easier, as you can find the reference inside the text. If you expand these articles a little more, you may make them become good articles. Remember, administrators are also editors, and they are expected to know about copyediting.
  • A little comment about adminship. I don't see right now a strong reason for you to become administrator and, as I said, there may be a conflict of interest as you contribute to topics where people may think you don't have a neutral point of view. Also, your 3RR block and the fact you have made a libel summary with your previous account less than 4 months ago will scare people from supporting you in some time. Personally, I think people should have no blocks in the previous 6 months before a request for adminship, but other's opinion may be different.

  If possible, I would suggest you to continue contributing to Jason (high priest), Morris Winchevsky and The Family Markowitz, trying to make them good articles. That should give you a rest from the VaughanWatch sock family, will improve your editing capabilities and will help Misplaced Pages with information that not many know but the few ones that do are willing to contribute. Adminship is not out of question for everyone, however I would suggest you to wait at least until next year, as you are still too young a user to handle admin responsabilities. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 21:23, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's Tool (Firefox only).

Questions

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

   I'm most proud of the articles I've created and edite on Jewish topics, especially as part of the Wikiproject: Jewish History such as Jason (high priest) as well as Jewish literature articles such as Morris Winchevsky and The Family Markowitz. I'm pleased with these specifically because unlike my politics edits, they're a part of society which does not receive the same kind of glamour, yet is still very important to culture and to the project. In addition, my work on McGill University related articles has been positive.

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?

   Heh. That's an understatement. Anyone familiar with the Vaughancruft debacle will already know the answer to that (I used to be pmshef). In short, it was a massive (52 or more) sockpuppet farm, all focused on making my life miserable and inserting massive PoV into Vaughan, Ontario related articles. In the end we went through like 5 Checkusers, 1 RFC/U and even had to create a new template to label the User:VaughanWatch socks. Since then however, I've joined Esperanza, and have made a concerted effort to be nice to users, even if it's not always reciprocated. I've also learned a valuable lesson regarding the importance of references. Including proper references in articles make life a lot more difficult for PoV pushers. Chabuk 21:01, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

User:Electricbassguy

Electricbassguy (talk · contribs) I am looking for help on how to work better at Misplaced Pages.

Reviews

• Hello, Electricbassguy, how are you doing? A few comments you may hopefully find useful.

  • I see you are contributing massively through October. Not bad at all! You will have to contribute through some months, I would say 6, in order to request adminship as you did earlier this month.
  • Mathbot indicates you use edit summaries in 25% of your major edits and 73% of your minor ones. That is a pretty low amount, and it is apparent you are trying to use them more regularly now. Remember that an objection in your RFA stated you lacked civility and some were abusive. Try not to use summaries like this, this (note that you may have a conflict of interest here, thus I recommend not editing articles from companies where you work at), this and this. Note that I usually check the latest 2500 edits, or the last two months, whichever has the more amount of edits, that is why I am including diffs from August.
  • Remember that Misplaced Pages is about verifiability, that is, things we can check through reliable sources. The fact that you add information knowing it is original research makes me think you still don't understand this fact.
  • Some cold numbers: 25 user talk and 17 article talk edits in 361 edits is not a bad amount. However, I believe you should spend some more time discussing in article talk pages, gathering ideas about how to improve a determined article, talk with others to think what they think, etc.

  Overall, you are a starting user who is willing to contribute. I suggest picking four or five articles about a topic you like and that need some expansion, and begin working on them, remembering to gather reliable sources and cite them (probably with m:cite/cite.php, while writing the article. Remember, we are about things that can be verified, not personal opinions. Everytime you add something, try to add a source to back it up. Also, I would suggest doing "style runs". In other words, read about the manual of style, choose one of the suggestions, and then click the Special:Random. You will arrive to a random article, review if the article is faulty at the manual of style suggestion you have chosen, and if so, fix it accordingly. As a good amount of articles in Misplaced Pages need work, you are likely to find several needing improvement. It will also help you learn the manual of style suggestions faster. Just remember to stay civil at all times, and that some comments you may find common may offend others. This is specially true with sarcasm and irony, so be extremely careful with them (or better yet, don't use them at all). Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 19:17, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's Tool (Firefox only).

Questions

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

   Mostly my poetry.com and AMC edits. I also created the Hollywood Mogul page which has developed nicely with help from others as well.

1. 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 tend to make sarcastic comments on my edits sometimes. I haven't had any fights with other members too much though.

User:Aaron

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Aaron (talk · contribs) I'm seriously considering making a run for adminship soon, so I'm looking for a full-blown "worth it or not" WP:RFA-style review. I've been a Wikipedian since 2002, but I was pretty much just a lurker until the last year or so. I've got 2900 edits at this point, with (I think) a good spread across various namespaces. As I've spent more time here, I've discovered that I'm a process junkie with a sick love of AfDs, POV patrolling, WP:AN and intermediate WikiGnoming, so obviously the admin tools would be quite useful to me; I'm not looking for the sysop bit as a medal. But I've never done a whole lot of the "community" thing around here - no hanging out on IRC or the mailing lists or any of that - so I definitely could use some advice as to where I stand. Thanks, --Aaron 05:10, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• I've seen you around at RfA and I really like your positive attitude and your sense of humor. You seem to be a great, active editor (nearly 3,000 edits), many of them in the field of the U.S. Government. You want to run for adminship? why the hell not? ;-) - Mike | Talk 22:34, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
• Hello there, Aaron. Since you are asking for a RFA, this will be a straightforward review. Note that since I manually examine your contributions, some numbers may be slightly off.

  • I see almost 1,700 contributions in the Misplaced Pages namespace, that is over 50% of your contributions. Over 50% of those are in AFDs, with 5% in TFDs and 2% in CFDs. Although I am not sure people would like an admin nominating for deletion (or speedy deleting, for that matter) an article with a comment like the one you did at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of fictional characters missing an appendage, you have a very solid experience in deletion discussions.
  • As for vandalism, I see very few reports at AIV.
  • 220 edits in user talk pages is just a 7%, which can be considered very low for a future administrator (they are expected to spend time warning, explaining and answering questions from people about why their articles were deleted). Around 210 edits in article talks is also low. Personally, I would not support (but neither oppose) an editor with less than 20% of talk edits, however you would be an exception as XFDs involve a lot of interaction with other users.
  • Now, as you said in your Q1, the lack of an article to point out may bring some negative opinions. Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia first and foremost, and thus everyone, including admins, are expected to know how to write an article, how to polish it, and convert it at least in a good article. While 1FA is too much for my taste, 1GA is not.
  • I see you warn some people, and a few reports at AIV. However, they appear not to be that many. Supposing you warn every user when using popups to revert, that makes less than 100 warns.
  • So, you use WikiDiscussion Manager? Hmm... I remember a discussion about it, whether it was useful or not, and if it should be deleted. Personally, it is a way of finding which discussions have already a good consensus, and piling on. However, I also believe people should program in C instead of Visual Basic, that IDEs are evil if you are using them to learn, and that the wheel needs to be reinvented every other week to not forget why it was invented in the first place, so you can just skip this point.
  • I don't see fair use rationales for Image:Associated Press favicon.png or Image:73 Front Cover September 2003.jpg. I believe administrator should be the example for others, including when uploading fair use images.

  Now, suppossing you present yourself to a RFA, I believe you have a very good chance of a successful one if you state that you want to close AFD, work with the speedy deletions backlogs, and generally maintenance sysop chores. Do you think you are experienced enough to handle vandalism (blocking vandals reported at AIV, in example)? It is already 2:30 AM, so I will stop here. If you answer my question, I will take my time to review your reverts and warns later to see whether you apply them fairly, and maybe check some more AFDs for more information about your judgement in them. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 05:22, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

• My review is in two parts:
  • As an editor: I may disagree with you a lot... especially with AfDs, but I think you're a good editor. I have a huge ammount of respect for the work you do getting rid of vandalism and fixing POV issues. And I think it's great that you're helping some of the newbies by participating in Articles for Creation. Also, I like that you insert humor into discussions sometimes (I still chuckle when I think of your "Just look at it!" AfD nom). My only complaint about you as an editor is your support of using WP:C&E in AfD discussions, but I realize that has more to do with me disliking that proposed guideline.
  • As a potential admin: I would have concerns if you became an admin. Those concerns largely deal with AfDs and other deletion-related things. I'm worried that, once you get an admin's delete button, you might see several articles as deletion-worthy without giving us all a chance to get a consensus. I've seen you make reference to being a deletionist in places. While holding that opinion is perfectly fine, I wonder how that will translate into participation in deletion activities as an admin. That's my concern.

That said, I might not vote to oppose you becoming an admin if you did go up for RfA. Like I said, I think you're a generally good editor. I do agree with Rey that it would be nice to see more work on articles from you, but I'm certainly not one of those people who requires a Featured Article from admin candidates. I hope I have you some helpful comments. - Lex 04:59, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's Tool (Firefox only).

Questions

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

   I, of course, find all my edits pleasing, heh heh. But if you're one of those 1FA types, I'm probably not your guy. I'm a Wikinibbler, a classic ADD sort of editor; my edits are all over the place. I get intrigued by a certain article, or policy discussion, and am all over it, then a day or so later it's on to something else. But if absolutely pressed to name something, I'd probably say my work doing some of the initial piecing together of the puzzle of edits made by all the various IP addresses during the Congressional Staff editing scandal, and my POV/vandalism patrolling, particularly on news media-related articles. Actually, what I'm most proud of is that, except for a single 3RR block in my early days (which itself was reverted by another admin), I've never found myself dragged into any dispute resolution process beyond hashing issues out on talk pages; not even a mere RFC or information mediation. Given the amount of day-to-day contentiousness we all deal with around here, I think that counts for something.

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 been in conflicts and been stressed; anyone who says otherwise has either only been an editor for a few hours or else doesn't do anything except going around correcting spelling errors. But I've learned the best thing to do in such situations is to blow off steam somewhere else. If you try to blow it off at the source of the conflict, all you're going to do is escalate it into something worse. It's far better to talk it out on a friendly editor's talk page (a third party opinion never hurts anyway), or just to walk away from the conflict entirely if you have to. After all, the article will still be there later when you've calmed down. (Or if it's an AfD, the issue will get settled without you.) Like I said above, I've never been in any sort of dispute mediation, so my system must be working pretty well.

3. If you become an editor, how will you handle closing Articles for Deletion? - Lex 04:59, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

User:Teh tennisman

Teh tennisman (talk · contribs) I want to become an administrator, but am curious what others have to think of me, thus this request. Also, I wanted to know what others think of me as an editor on Misplaced Pages. Teh tennisman 13:34, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Comment from Editor I realize I have spent a lot of time with my userpage; but I put all of my userboxen on individually, so they added up. Also, I am now more into the AfD'ing and recent change patrolling kind of thing. Teh tennisman 19:09, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Firstly, you really must be congradulated on your elegant layout to your userpage and the amount of time you have spent working on it - perhaps a little bit too much since around 1/4 of your edit count is towards your userpage!

Secondly, I noticed while searching through the AfD records that you enslisted yourself. Perhaps a little too hastily? Administrators are mostly involved in anti-vandalism which doesn't seem to be your type of thing. Of course, you have listed Mucky for deletion which is a start.

Lastly, your edits don't seem to be very substantial; this is PERFECTLY OK (see WP:Editing Policy/MajorChanges) and don't panic. However I find that it is better to balance between major, minor and wikignome edits and if you want to do the same it's completely up to you. If this case and you are going to be doing larger edits in future, I'd advise you to view Misplaced Pages:Featured articles and devote yourself an article and make it shine!.

To summartize: Spend a little less time glamourizing your userpage; wait a few months before AfDing; and if you still want to be an Admin get down to some serious Vandal duties!

Hope I've helped. Cheers,

--Anthonycfc (Talk to Me) 00:38 29 Dec 2024 (UTC)

• Hello, Teh tennisman, here is my review. Sorry for the delay, but Misplaced Pages spends 30 minutes down for every 5 minutes up, at least from my point. Since you are requesting opinions of you as editor and as future administrator, I will split my review in two parts, the first regarding your current status and what you would need in order to become an administrator. I hope it will help you.

  • Out of the 579 I am reviewing, mathbot reports an edit summary usage of 99% for major edits and 76% for minor edits. Although the numbers are high, since summaries should not take more than a couple of seconds to fill, some suggest to have a higher (above 90% at least in both). 104 edits in user pages indicate a good interaction with other users in personal matters, but 25 edits in article talk pages aren't good numbers, as editors are expected to interact with others when working with articles. My suggestion is to choose an article you like, maybe one about tennis, Michigan, american football, cycling or the Inheritance trilogy, as you are a member of those WikiProjects, and expand it to good article status, coordinating efforts with others in the article talk page, asking for opinions, giving suggestions, etc.
  • Now, I notice you are really willing to be an administrator. You have tried to sprotect articles even though only administrators are able to do that, you have presented yourself in two requests for adminship in June and October, and spend some time reverting vandalism. But your 579 edits in Misplaced Pages and 76 edits in the Misplaced Pages namespace is pretty low for most editors, especially when considering you have not posted in Misplaced Pages:Administrator intervention against vandalism, stated your opinion in only one request for adminship other than your own, participated in two articles for deletion discussion, don't warn vandals with warning templates, and have contributed regularly only this month (in September you contributed in 5 days). I believe you don't really understand what an administrator is supposed to do. Note that this is not an insult, instead it is a comment. My personal point of view is that adminship should be given to those who really need it. It is not a prize for being a good contributor, but instead a right for those who are willing to act as administrators. In the first RFA, you wanted the tools because you were a good user. In your second RFA, you learned that you won't get it by just being a good editor, and instead added some more information about what you would do with the administrator tools, however you don't need them in order to revert vandalism, copyedit articles and help novices. You can do that without having the administrator label. I should be hitting 20,000 contributions pretty soon, and have no interest in becoming an administrator for the time being. Why? Because I don't need those tools for reverting vandalism, helping new people and copyediting. As I said, adminship is not a reward, it is a right, but only for those who are willing to act like administrators.

  In order to become an administrator, you need to first become a good editor. Try to edit articles, to show others you know how to edit (this means not only fixing typos, but also creating good and featured articles. Learn about our manual of style, and give suggestions to others through peer review and requests for feedbacks. Edit articles that are going to have their featured status removed at reviews to keep them as featured. Once you do that, you may begin working your way towards adminship by participating in recent changes patrol, warning vandals with the correct tags, and reporting them to the administrators when necessary. Show others that you understand what fits and what does not fit Misplaced Pages by participating in articles, templates and categories for deletion. Give opinions about candidates for adminship, to see what others usually request, and to form yourself an opinion about to expect about an administrator. And then, just then, consider posting a new nomination. I am sorry, but I think your next request will fail if you don't stop to think about why you want to be an administrator. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 22:15, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using a PHP version of Interiot's tool.

Questions

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

   Well, I have worked a lot on a few pages that were totally illegible and brought them to where they made sense. I have also reverted some nasty vandalism on pages that are about sensitive issues (to some people anyway).

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 really haven't had many issues; the few that I have I have worked out without too much stress and hope to continue peaceful negotiations in the future.

User:Pcbene

Pcbene (talk · contribs) In my never ending quest to make myself a better Wikipedian, I would like to submit myself for peer review. Although I have few edits under my username (I made several hundred before registering), I am sure I have a grasp of the basics. I would like to know if I am making a positive contribution to Misplaced Pages. Pcbene 19:16, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Hello there, Pcbene. Here is my review, I hope it is helpful.

  • I notice you have been contributing from May, but started to contribute daily a week ago. You will soon become an addict ;-)
  • I am a little worried about the images you have uploaded. Image:Saint Annes Belfield Seal.gif, Image:Saint Annes Randolph.jpg and Image:Saint Annes Lower Aerial.jpg don't have a license tag. I wonder why the bots did not caught the images yet. Note that, in order to categorize the image as fair use in Misplaced Pages, you need to use a tag. It is not enough to just state in text. So, I suggest to use {{logo}} for the first one, since that is the right license for logos under fair use, and maybe {{replaceable fair use}} for the others two. Note that this last tag will mark the images for deletion in a week. It should be trivial to get a free image from the school, just take a pic with a camera, and release the image under a free license. I suggest tagging those images before a bot arrives and marks them with {{no license}}.
  • Your summary usage is pretty low, 24% for major edits and 67% for minor edits. While it is true you don't have many edits, you should consider using them now that you are starting, so that it becomes second nature with time. Before saving a page, write in the edit summary a short summary of what you have done, so that others will know what you did before checking the differences.
  • I notice you have done some vandalism reverts. When doing so, I suggest using the different warning templates you can find here. Also, don't forget to use your own signature when leaving a note like here, especially if you are warning someone.
  • About your second reply, while it is fine to ask for people for help about how to deal with vandals, remember that there are established ways of treating them (in example, warning them in their talk pages, reporting them to Misplaced Pages:Administrator intervention against vandalism, etc). Try learning your way through them so that you become independent from those friends. Remember, we need to trust everyone, not just friends.

  Your work at St. Anne's-Belfield School is pretty good for someone who has just recently began contributing. I suggest to reference as much as possible, as information in Misplaced Pages must be verifiable through reliable sources. Gaining experience while editing is one of the first things an editor must do, and the fact that your twelfth edit was creating an article is a token of your dedication to the project. I suggest expanding the article using references and then sending it to requests for feedback or a peer review to get more ideas about how to polish it. With some time, the article could be considered a good article or maybe even a featured article. It is good to deal with some vandalism too, so I can just stay to keep up as you are doing. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 16:17, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

ReyBrujo, thank you so much for your review, it is much appreciated.

• I think I am already becoming a Misplaced Pages addict- lots of fun :-)
• I looked over the images I uploaded, and you are right, I tagged them as you suggested.
• I will start right now using edit summarys.
• I have also looked over the vandalism info. I think, while tedious, this may be something I would like to persue. As I am a high school student, I know many people that have nothing better to do than sit around in study halls and blank Misplaced Pages articles.
• I'll try and reference the St. Anne's-Belfield School article soon, as well as take some of my own pictures.

Again, thank you so much, Pcbene 19:08, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

• View this user's edit count using a PHP version of Interiot's tool.

Questions

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

   I recently created an article for my school. While it is still a work in progress, I learned quite a bit about the workings of Misplaced Pages, and I think it is turning into a great article. It is currently, in my opinion, well formatted and structured. I am also proud of my contributions to articles regarding my hobbies, like amateur radio and aviation. I feel a bit of technical expertise can go a long way in refining an 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?

   I have not really been in a conflict with another Wikipedian, although I have viewed my fair share of vandalism. I feel courtesy and clear communication can help to resove conflicts. Should I get myself into a situation I really felt uncomfortable with, I am friends with several admins who I would not be afraid to ask for help.

User:katieh5584

katieh5584 (talk · contribs) I would like a review because when I applied to be an admin, I was told it would be a good idea. Katieh5584 13:14, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Hello there, katieh5584. Hopefully this review will be helpful for you.

  • Although you did your first edit in November 2005, you started contributing regularly in August 2006. As you may have noticed, candidates should have contributed for some months (usually 4-6 at least) before they try to become administrators. You are still contributing regularly, so it should not be a problem in the future.
  • According to mathbot, you use edit summary in 32% for major edits and 99% for minor edits. That is pretty low. The summary is shown in the history of an article, and is pretty useful for others. In example, if you revert vandalism but state nothing, someone else who has the article in his watchlist will see that you have modified the article, but will not know what you have done, so he will check the modification out, spending some seconds in doing that. However, if you state "reverting vandalism" at least, he will say "Hmm... katieh5584 reverted a vandalism, let's see if that is true", and may check what you have done. But after the fifth or sixth time he checks and realizes you have indeed reverted vandalism, the next time he will say "Oh, katieh5584 caught another vandal" but won't check your edit as he will trust you, saving him a couple of seconds. Misplaced Pages is a community where everyone needs to assume good faith and trust the others. The faster others recognize you as a good faithed contributor the better, as it will save everyone time.
  • One thing that really worries me is the fact that you clear your talk page whenever someone writes anything there. Technically, you are free to do that, but the fact that you blank people comments' about your behaviour means you don't like others to see the controversy you may have with your edits. I make mistakes too, and sometimes other editors complain in my talk page. However, I don't delete their comments, but instead keep them there as a reminder of something wrong I did, and what I should have done. In fact, I point to my replies in my talk page, so that anyone can check my replies at all times. Personally, I think high of anyone whose talk page has warnings that had been accepted, with apologies given when necessary, as they are not afraid of showing others they were mistaken.
  • As a full RC patroller, you are bound to make mistake when revertings, to have edit conflicts, to warn people, to get complains in your talk page about mistakes, etc. Such "profession" is very stressful, and bound to give you more headaches than satisfaction. Please, take a break whenever you feel you are being overwhelmed, as there is nothing worse than a stressed patroller.
  • 475 user talk edits, a pretty high number considering you have little over 1600 edits, almost 25% of your edits is in talk pages, warning vandals and replying to inquires. Of course, this is what I would expect since you are a patroller.
  • Now, you have only 4 article talk edits out of 1600 edits in total. Although you have stated in your user page that you are not good at writing articles, remember that this is an encyclopedia before all, and as such, everyone, including candidates for adminship, are expected to know how to create and expand articles. While some users say you need to have a good number of article talk edits and others request that the candidate has written at least one featured article, it is my belief that, unless you take a break from time to time to write and expand articles, you would not get many positive votes in your next request for adminship.
  • I notice that some people complain about some of your reverts. It is good to see you always try to stay cool and civil, respecting the other, giving an apology when necessary. However, I think some of those problems could be prevented if you take a second or two to review the situation before reverting. Remember, the best patroller is not the one who reverts the most, nor the best editor is the one who writes the most. The best patroller is the one who checks everything before reverting an edit and warning a user, as the best editor is the one who supplies reliable sources to verify the inserted information. So, when you decide it was vandalism and need to be warned someone else already did so? Well, just continue with the next article. You are not the only patroller in Misplaced Pages, so don't feel as if all the responsability to keep vandalism away from Misplaced Pages is in your shoulders.
  • I notice 22 edits in the Misplaced Pages namespace. As you plan to become an administrator someday (considering you have already tried once), you should spend some more time in this namespace, contributing with articles, templates and categories for deletion, giving opinion and judging whether an article is notable enough to be inserted in Misplaced Pages. This will allow others to see whether you are an m:inclusionist or m:exclusionist, if you are reliable in your judgement, and especially, if you are consistent. Remember that as an administrator you may one day be speedy deleting articles and closing stuff for deletion, and unless you have tried participating in these tasks, people won't trust you to handle them. Also, spend some time contributing to requests for adminship, see what others ask from candidates, and check whether you would pass their requirements.

  As any patrol, you are likely to need the administrator tools someday. However, people are not going to trust you those tools unless you spend time discussing deletions, checking candidates for adminship, and writing articles. One day you will sit down in front of an article that has been tagged as speedy, and you will have to consider whether the article could be enhanced to fit Misplaced Pages or it is pure trash, or going to close a deletion discussion where half are requesting a deletion and another half is requesting to keep the article. And unless you have written articles, you won't know whether the article has potential or not. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 03:11, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using a PHP version of Interiot's tool.

Questions

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

   Answer No probably not, as I haven't had time to make large edits. I spend most of my time helping out with beating vandalism.

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?

   Answer Yes, I have had conflict and some editors have been very rude to me, but I try to see things from the other person's point of view. If I make a mistake I always apologise to the user.

User:EVula

EVula (talk · contribs) Eventually, I'd like to be an administrator. However, I'd like to get an idea of what I need to adjust in my editing behavior before making the attempt. I think I'm a good editor, but everyone has some room for improvement; I'd just like to know what that room is. :)

Since joining in February of this year, I've gotten a little over 7,000 edits, with about 3,900 of those being mainspace edits. I have a lot of userspace edits (about a twelve hundred) since I've GUSed a few userboxes (and generally try to fix the instances myself, rather than wait for a bot to do them). I've also got a nice little collection of nominated AfDs.

Thanks in advance for any and all feedback. EVula 21:46, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Hello, EVula, pleased to meet you. Here is my review, hopefully it will give you an idea about how you are doing.

  1. First of all, as you have GUSed some userboxes, I had to take into account your latest 5,000 edits intead of your latest 2,500. This allowed me to notice you have been active since middle July. Administrators are usually expected to have not only a good number of contributions, but also activity in some months prior nomination, and the fact you have been active since July at least is a good advantage.
  2. Administrators should contact users with queries, reply them, and interact with them. Out of your last 5,000 edits, you have around 220 edits in user talk pages. That is a pretty low amount, just around 5% of your total edits. As an administrator, you need to be able to easily converse with users and vandals, explain the situation, warn, give advice, and the fact that just 5% of your edits were done in such circunstances means you still lack some experience in treating them.
  3. I also notice 330 edits article talk pages. Since you consider yourself a WikiGnome, that explains the fairly low rate of communication with others when trying to improve articles, as wikignomes usually spend little time in articles (arrive, do some fixes, put some tags, remove others, and leave). As you are a member of the Mortal Kombat wikiproject (I was invited to join it, but declined as I would be rather innactive), you have contact with users sharing your passion with Mortal Kombat. I suggest you to select an article and coordinate efforts of the WikiProject (or any other WikiProject you are member of) in order to make it at least a good article and, if possible, a featured article. Also, you may consider hitting Special:Random, and try to improve the article you arrive to good status. That should give you some more information about the different Misplaced Pages style guides. Your efforts in The Zombie Survival Guide are pretty good, the article grew quite a lot, but it can still be polished. Try checking the style guide for headings to get an idea about what else can be done. Although nobody expects you to know every style guide, it is good for practice to ask yourself: "Can I do something more?" If you don't know the answer, you can always request feedback or a peer review to get more ideas. Although it would seem an administrator does not need to know about these things, remember that Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia, and every editor and administrator is expected to contribute to Misplaced Pages growth first and foremost.
  4. Nearly 500 edits in the Misplaced Pages namespace may be considered low for someone who wants to become administrator as well, especially when 200 are in the WikiProject Mortal Kombat. You have contributed 12 edits in Requests for adminship and 105 in deletion discussions. However, as an administrator you will be judged not only by your behaviour, but also your ideals. The best way of knowing your criteria is to participate in discussions. People will be able to know if you are an m:inclusionist of an m:exclusionist by checking how you "vote" in XFDs, and will learn what you think a good administrator should have by your participation in RFAs.
  5. Apparently you have a good summary usage, so no problem there. Both editors and administrators are expected to use them well. However, try not to say holy shit. Also try not using rvv as summary, as new users who make good faithed edit may not understand what that means. It is not harder to type reverted vandalism, in example. Also, I don't see what is so destructive about this. This would seem more like a test for me than vandalism, just like this and this. Of course, people consider vandalism to different things, but remember that administrators, as they have the power of blocking users, should be careful with what they call vandalism.
  6. The way you dealt with conflicts is a good precedent. Just remember to keep your head cool, take a break when necessary, stay civil, and remember that most times you will be the more experienced editor in the discussion, and as such you will have to take a "listen and reply" or more defensive approach instead of a "speak and listen" or more offensive approach when the other lacks experience, and a more aggressive approach when he refuses to acknowledge the different policies, guidelines and style guides Misplaced Pages has.

  I believe you have some chances at becoming administrator in a couple of months. I can't give you a more exact "feeling" about a possible nomination, as you haven't stated why you would like admin powers. Unluckily, as you have GUSed userboxes, when reviewing your contributions they "hide" the others (in example, if someone checks your last 1000 contributions only, he will see a lot of infoboxes move, but little about administrator-like tasks). Note that people will ask you to talk more with users through user and article talk pages, so it would be a good idea to begin coordinating efforts to improve an article. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 01:25, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

  Thank you for your feedback (I converted your bullets to an ordered list for ease of reply). And now to respond to you in turn:

  1. I've actually managed to stay fairly active since March or so, though my activity has certainly been higher in the past few months than at the onset of my work on Misplaced Pages. I'll make sure not to do any GUSing for a while before I submit an RfA, though. ;-)
  2. Duly noted. I've started actively warning vandals when I revert their edits, including adding a diff.
  3. Getting the Mortal Kombat articles up to GA (or even FA) status is a long-term goal of mine, and is something that we're making progress towards even now. However, all of them suffer from having few cited sources (aside from the games themselves), which makes any large-scale effort very difficult. For now, I'm helping to develop the style guide for all MK articles, which I think is the most important place to start. Also, most of that co-ordination is being done on the project's talk pages, hence a lower number; however, once the style guide is being used consistently, I have no doubt that I'll get more involved in individual articles to address each article's unique "quirks" within the style guide's base skeleton. As an aside, I actually am familiar with the heading style guide (and never hesitate to drop heading caps as I see them); the ZSG headings break those guidelines, however, because they are named after the book's chapters (which are capitalized as such). I'm not sure which way is "proper", but I erred on the side of the source material. *shrug* Once some of the MK articles have been improved, I'll most certainly submit them for peer reviews.
  4. Also duly noted. I've actually submitted three or four templates for deletion today/yesterday, and I'll try to become more active in both TfD and AfD than I have been in the past.
  5. Heh, yeah, I can see how "holy shit" might not be the most descriptive and helpful edit summary ever. :-) I'll also try to steer clear of "rvv" as my entire edit summary in the future; I got into that habit while taking out vandalism at work, where I needed to make it short and sweet. I define "destructive edit" as any edit that removes more than it adds; while destructive edits are helpful in certain cases (I've done plenty), when an anon editor removes perfectly valid content without providing any rationale at all, I'll just automatically revert (if I had been a bit less familiar with the article, I probably wouldn't have done it as quickly as I did on the MK character article). I'll admit that perhaps the Nashville/cheese edit could have been labeled something other than vandalism. However, the War Stories edit was vandalism (in my eyes); the anon editor was arguing with me about the proper styling of episode names. Even after using their talk page to explain the situation and guidelines, they continued to edit without addressing me (after I've told someone why what they are doing is wrong, if they keep on doing it, I consider it vandalism). Eventually plange came along and backed me up (albeit while simultaneously calling me a girl at the same time, but it's all good).
  6. Yeah, I think I've handled my disputes fairly well on Misplaced Pages. Offline I was mad as hell, with plenty of swearing on my part, but I did my best to do it far away from the computer. :-)

  Well, one of the reasons that I'd like to get my hands on a mop would be to help out with anti-vandalism efforts; right now all I can do is report them, and I'd like it if I could help take them out further. For starters, I'd like to help out with XfDs, as well as review users who are requesting the be un-banned. Once I get my bearings even more, I'd like to start helping with dispute resolution and mediation (I'm comfortable in the rules to do effective editing, but I can't spout it off the top of my head, and I don't have some of the nuances down quite yet).

  Again, thank you so much for your feedback. EVula 02:56, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

• Hello EVula. I am impressed by your excellent work and it is my belief that an RfA at this stage would be overwhelmingly successful. More than half of your contributions are to article space, denoting that you are efficiently helping to build Misplaced Pages. You should append User:EVula/Contributions to your RfA for it provides detailed information about your commendable involvement with the projects stated therein. You already have wide experience with images and templates. That's a big plus, since some users sometimes refrain from supporting for lack of experience in those areas. You have a 100% edit summary usage, so no cons there either. Now, my only minor concern at the moment is that I verify little participation in XfD lately. Perhaps you should join a few discussions before bringing forth your RfA, otherwise some editors may feel like you don't need the admin tools, even if you do seem to revert some vandalism. By the way, I could also suggest that you make a little visit to recent changes in the days before your RfA and spot/revert some vandalism there. That will look good for users who check your recent contributions. As for your conflicts, I suggest that you don't state that you are clinging to WP:IAR on a specific dispute. Sometimes, stubborn users can make us question our own sanity, but resorting to a revert war and feeding trolls is never a good choice. A WP:RFC is usually a better option, for it may attract other users into the dispute and foster consensus building in a peaceful, organized manner. I guess there's not much else I can add. You're doing a superb job and I look forward to see your RfA. Best regards.--Húsönd 23:05, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the fantastic feedback. Your primary concern seems to be my lack of XfD activity, which I agree with. I'm trying to get more involved with both TfD and AfDs, which is one of the reasons that I don't feel particularly comfortable submitting an RfA right now (although I certainly appreciate your faith in its success). As per ReyBrujo's advice above, I've been a lot more hands-on when addressing the vandalism that I come across, what with more verbose edit summaries and warning the users for each infraction; I think between that and XfD activity, it should sufficiently address most concerns about why I would need a mop.
    
    I'd like to get into more RC patrolling, but I generally come late to every party when it comes to reverting such spam; I do quite well spotting stuff as it hits my watchlist (and then stalking their other vandalisms) and catching FA vandals, but I'll certainly take your advice into consideration.
    
    Likewise, I appreciate your advice about clinging to IAR (and edit wars in general). While I'm sure that I'll just never get into another disagreement with an editor (I've got my head up my a-... uh, in the clouds...), in the future I'll try to involve other parties much sooner than I did in the Devastation example (for other Mortal Kombat-related edits, I might head to the WikiProject again for a quick extra set of eyes; for anything else, RFC will be my first stop).
    
    Thanks again for your feedback. You must have had a really good dinner, because you were amazingly positive... ;-) EVula 04:27, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using a PHP version of Interiot's tool.

Questions

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

   Well, my (rather verbose) commentary of my contributions can be found at User:EVula/Contributions, but I have to say that I am particularly pleased with my involvement in the Mortal Kombat WikiProject. Aside from designing their absolutely fantastic logo, I've worked hard to remove unsourced fancruft from across numerous articles (see The Khameleon Konundrum), and created a specific style guide for the project to standardize information across all the character articles (still a work in progress, though, and with the new MK game being released this week, a lot of "unprocessed" additions have been made). I like to think that all my changes helped to spark more interest in the project, but that could just be wishful thinking on my part. :-)

   As far as my actual article edits go, I'm much more of a WikiGnome, so instead I involve myself in various Manual of Style changes to subtly improve the overall quality of the encyclopedia. I am particularly proud of my rewrite of The Zombie Survival Guide, which expanded it greatly (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?

   Yeah, I've had negative run-ins with three different people:

   1. My first experience with the "pleasure" of wiki-disagreement came in the form of DreamGuy (talk · contribs). To this day, I believe he is an abusive obnoxious editor, who bullies others and violates rules willy-nilly whenever he feels like it. My particular problem came from attempts at adding the aforementioned Zombie Survival Guide to Zombie#Zombies in literature and fiction. His argument was that it was merely spam (and felt comfortable labeling me a spammer). Eventually, he started railing against the ZSG article, labeling it as non-notable (and refusing to use the article's talk page to discuss the issue); it was actually DreamGuy's negative attitude towards the article that prompted me to overhaul it (seriously, just to shut him up). The ultimate solution was just to let the Zombie matter drop for a while.
   2. My second editor conflict was with Justinpwilsonadvocate (talk · contribs), an (in my opinion) off-kilter editor who I first tussled with over at Talk:Vanderbilt University Law School. After our disagreements (for some crazy reason, I kept removing his unsourced/unverifiable claims. Silly me!), I suspected (and caught) him stalking me. He then proceeded to constantly pester me on my talk page; so much, in fact, that I asked him to leave me alone (albeit a, *cough*, bit stronger/). The solution to this issue was... well, to tell him to leave me the hell alone and to restrict all communication to just content discussion. I'd like to note that I was quite cordial to him after I'd told him point-blank that he shouldn't talk to me about anything other than content discussion. He seems to have lost interest in Misplaced Pages, and I'm perfectly happy about that. :-) (as an aside, his userpage is a 99% reproduction of mine at the time, right down to using my name).
   3. My third (and, to date, last) foray into the world of unpleasant dealings was with Wesborland (talk · contribs). The fledgling Mortal Kombat: Devastation article had suffered from loads and loads of what can only be described as concentrated drivel. I worked very hard to trim out all the BS and institute an aggressive source citation system. However, Wesborland came in and started removing sources and adding unsourced (and poorly worded/formatted) information. The resultant edit war saw both of us violate WP:3RR, although I didn't report him; instead, I used his talk page to try to address the myriad issues I had with his edits (last version before he severely pruned the discussion). For this edit war, I'm clinging desperately to WP:IAR; this wasn't just a content dispute, he was adding unverifiable information, some of it original research, and was removing perfectly valid content without explanation (which constitutes vandalism, in my opinion). With every revert I performed, I tried to tweak the copy in an attempt to guess at what his problem was. I even asked for help from a fellow Mortal Kombat WikiProject member, who backed me up in my assessment of the article. In the end, he finally gave up adding bad information, and we were able to call a truce. Don't ya just love happy endings?

   So, that covers the "how did you deal with it?" portion. Future debates would really all depend on the situation; it has been more than once that I've gotten extremely worked up over a situation (at least once or twice with all three situations mentioned above), in which case I simply try to divert my editing attentions (in the case of Justinpwilson's persistent use of my talk page, it made it highly difficult for me to just ignore him, so I walked away from Misplaced Pages entirely for a few hours each time he started pissing me off).

User:Brian Boru is awesome

Brian Boru is awesome (talk · contribs) See how I'm doing Brian Boru is awesome 02:17, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• You've been doing quite well, I'm particularly impressed with the high amount of contributions to the article mainspace. Repetitive tasks indicate that you are patient and perfectionist. You're a fine editor, but if you would like to become an administrator I suggest that you start getting involved in admin-oriented tasks. These include countervandalism and XfD. Anyway you're doing a good job. Best regards.--Húsönd 19:01, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

• Hello there. Here is my review, hopefully you will find it useful.

  • First of all, reviewing your last 2,500 edits I notice a lack of edit summary usage. Please, try to use them, as they save a lot of time for users both in reviewing your contributions to articles and in quickly finding out versions through a page history.
  • So, you have had a problem in the past? Well, I have had so many I almost lost count. However, one thing I learned is that there are several types of users, some may get offended only with a personal attack, and others with insinuations. Thus, it is better to prevent any type of contact that may be considered aggressive, like sarcasm and irony.
  • Just 60 user talk edits in 2500 is very low. It means you don't talk with others, either to ask or to answer inquiries. 250 article talk edits add 300 talk edits, a little over 12%. Apparently, this means you participate in discussions to improve articles, but maybe not enough.
  • As you only have 223 edits in Misplaced Pages, Category and Template, it is clear you focus on the article namespace, working with them at an editor level. Out of those last 2500 edits, little over 2100 have been marked as minor, a strangely high amount. This makes me think you are mostly a wikignome, someone who likes to pounce articles, doing small corrections here and there before moving to the next one. Don't take offense, I am a wikignome myself!

  In conclusion, you are doing pretty well as a wikignome. I suggest stopping in an article of a topic you like and that needs some improvement, and begin working on it until you make it achieve good article status. That should allow you to learn some more about the available style guides. Also, I suggest finding an article with several other active contributors, and working with them in order to polish the article to featured status. As your talk page has a lot of discussion and misunderstandings/complains about your behaviour, getting to know how others contribute, sharing time with them and trying to achieve a single goal between you all will help you improve your relationship with them. Remember, most people do what they do because they think it is right, and sometimes the best way to show them it is wrong is by spending time with them. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 23:39, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using a PHP version of Interiot's tool.

Questions

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

   Answer

Comics articles because I get my info from the web and books.

1. 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?

   Answer

User:CovenantD thought I was attacking when I wrote down "What's with the hate?" when I was really just being sarcastic.

Also I just put in the little stuff. Brian Boru is awesome 02:19, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

User:I'll_bring_the_food

I'll_bring_the_food (talk · contribs) My time here always feels heated and frictiony (not sure that's even a word). Please suggest improvements for me. Also check out the additions i made to the human voice article. I'm chuffed how well i did there. I have a lot of problems with fan-boys and girls as i edit all the articles on singing. You might want to bear that in mind somewhat. I'll bring the food 00:24, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• First of all, I suggest you to reply the answers below, even if that means repeating what you have posted above. Now, for a review.

  • Your edit usage is just fine, around 60% for major edits and 75% for minor edits. You should consider improving your edit summary usage, though, as you are doing recently, as they are extremely useful for other editors. It allows people to quickly find a revision by looking at the history of a page, and it allows others to spend less time checking your modifications in articles.
  • Now, you say you have problems with fanboys. While I have had problems with people as well, I try to remain civil as much as possible, as that improves the Misplaced Pages community. While vandalism is always bad, edits summaries like rvv - i've no idea who deleted all that text but a ban is clearly in order., yeah, but that isn't sourced so i'm assuming some nut job made it up., and 60 million in your wildest dreams, in reality, 51 million. by the way DO NOT PUT CRAP IN THE ARTICLE USING THE MINOR EDIT TICK SO PEOPLE DON'T SEE IT. are highly uncivil and, if you continue, you may be blocked for uncivility and personal attacks.
  • Even worse, your attacks also cover good faithed edits (rm crap. Pop singers do NOT fit the weight categories given for them.,). If while trying to contribute they get back summaries like those, they may leave Misplaced Pages, and while you may be happy because that may mean "less fanboys to handle", the community will be losing a potential contributor.
  • With 170 edits in user talk pages and around 100 in article talk pages, they would usually be good numbers. However, as most of your summaries are highly controversial, I suggest you to spend more time discussing in talk pages, to learn that some editors try to contribute in good faith, and even if they are wrong, there are other ways of telling them they are mistaken.

  You have potential of being a good user, but your behaviour will bring you more stress and problems than satisfaction. Remember, this is a community-driven place, and unless you understand that we don't want to expel people but instead educate them, you will end up being blocked or even banned. I suggest you to take a break, think if you can educate instead of alienate, and return once you have decided if you will continue with this way, or you will change. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 21:46, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using a PHP version of Interiot's tool.

Questions

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

   Answer

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?

   Answer

User:Kaobear

Kaobear (talk · contribs) I just want to make sure that i am doing the right thing. I have been doing a great many small edits as of late, both for tweaks and vandal fighting and I want to see what I can do to help more. KaoBear 19:51, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Hellow, Kaobear. Here is my review, hopefully you will be able to get some good ideas and comments.

  • First of all, some editors may consider your signature a little too long, see the guideline to learn more about that.
  • When uploading images, consider adding a fair use rationale to justify its usage, you have gotten one image deleted because of lack of copyright information, source or fair use rationale.
  • Regarding Image:CardinalDarmaatmadja.jpg, is it truly licensed that way? Who took the picture? From where it was taken? Was it cropped from a bigger image? Which license had the original image? I would tag it with {{PUIdisputed}}, as I don't think it is a free image. Please review its license and source information.
  • I noticed User:Kaobear/Watchlists/MiddleEarth Realted was a typo which you corrected. When this happens, you may consider deleting pages you don't need in your userspace with {{db-owner}}.
  • Most of your contributions are marked as minor. When you mark a change as minor, some users won't see it in their watchlist, as there is an option that allows user to hide minor modifications. Please consider not marking reverts and talk warnings as minor, as they are usually serious and should always been visible.
  • Almost a third of your edits is in talk pages (58 user talk edits, and over 570 in article talk pages). It is good to see you spend so much time talking with others in article talk pages, most editors don't do that. Hopefully you have learned to interact with them and lead efforts in order to build a better Misplaced Pages.

  With 60 edits in Misplaced Pages namespace, it seems you are beginning to test what is happening "above" the article level. As you spend time in Misplaced Pages, you will learn one must share time between the article, the user and the Misplaced Pages namespace. I see you still focus on improving articles, what about trying to give a hand Featured article review. There are articles that are featured, but with time may lose their condition. In a review, editors decide whether the article is having problem, if they can be solved, and if they can retain their featured article. If you want to focus your clean up edits, you could give a hand there, as many of those articles have been featured one or two years ago and lack now an active editor to clean them up. You can also consider participating in some articles for deletion, as sending some articles there can save time from other editors into trying to wikify and clean up them. Overall, you are a pretty good user, however try not to mark your edits as minor unless they are really minor. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 21:01, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using a PHP version of Interiot's tool.

Questions

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

   I have put forth a great deal of time and effort into making the Faramir article in a candidate for FA status. I love Tolkien and am honored to help improve the pages involved with him and his great works.

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?

   As far as I know I have not been in any conflicts. I have made mistakes, been corrected and thanked the editor for the guidance.

KaoBear 19:57, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Editor review/Metros232

User:TehKewl1

TehKewl1 (talk · contribs) I try, but I still fail, what do you think of me as an editor? TehKewl1 06:30, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• You always seem like a good person on IRC so I assume you're a good editor, too. Without checking your edits too much, it looks like you spend most of your time reverting, which is fake edits. So your editing is vandal fighting. Anomo 08:13, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
• You seem to be, overall, contributing to Misplaced Pages in a good standard. However I notice you have recently made a personal attack on User:220.245.141.50 _{I think I've got those numbers right!} which is not the standard of a good Wikipedian.

Otherwise, however, your editing is of high standard and you participate in lots of anti-vandal duties. Keep it up, and watch what you say!

--Anthonycfc (Talk to Me) 00:38 29 Dec 2024 (UTC)

• Hello, TehKewl1, here is my review, hopefully it is useful for you.

  • Out of your little over 1000 contributions to Misplaced Pages, you have around 340 edits in user talk pages. That is well over 1/3 of your total contributions, quite a lot! It means you like to communicate with others individually, to question or reply to their inquiries or warn vandalism, and that you are a very straightforward person. It is obvious that you are a full patroller, as most of your edits are reverts and warnings.
  • This is something to worry about personally, you have only 4 edits in article talk pages, much less than 1% of your total edits. When you edit articles in Misplaced Pages, some other editors may not agree with your latest additions or removal. To express their opinion, they usually use the talk page. As the talk page is used by all the editors of the article, conversations there are public. Of course, when you spend a lot of time fighting vandals, you are likely to have less time to edit articles and converse with others about how to improve articles. But note that Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia before all, and while patrollers are good, they are also expected to contribute to the encyclopedia.

  Apparently, you are happy fighting vandals, something that is stressful as sometimes you are tired and end fighing fire with fire (as you have been warned in your talk page). That is why vandal fighters are encouraged to spend some time editing articles to relax themselves. You may consider that option to prevent future problems. Most vandals are newbies trying to have fun. You should also meet the newbies that are trying to become good editors. A visit to the New contributors' help page may help you meet newbies that are willing to learn. Also, consider giving a hand at Requests for adminship, there you may have the chance to see that, although appreciated, vandal fighters are also expected to contribute with articles. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 18:07, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using a PHP version of Interiot's tool.
• {{subst:constructive-criticism}} well.. you asked for it. :-) Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 06:40, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Questions

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

   Not Especially... some of my edit summaries crack me up though.

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?

   Yeah, I just recently made an immature remark on a users talk page after he made an immature edit to Nintendo. and now I have a warning, now I've learned my mistake and I promise to follow Don't be a dick in the future.

User:Imoeng

Imoeng (talk · contribs) Hello people! I have been here for around, umm, July, August, September, October, yeah, about 4 months. One thing about me, I do not like to contribute to AfD and other deletion stuff, I just don't like to do it, ahahaha. Probably because I really respect other's work, although some articles are just rubbish (jokes articles). So I am here go ask for feedback on things I have been doing around here. My contributions are around WP:INA, WP:PID, WP:RFF and improving Indonesia-related articles. Cheers -- Imoeng 11:06, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

My review:

I have been worked with Imoeng for a several months on WIkiproject Indonesia, and particularly closely over the last few weeks on an intensive collaboration drive to improve the Indonesia article. Imoeng as been at Wikiepdia since Jul 2006. There are many fine qualities of Imoeng that deserve mentioning which I have no hesitation in mentioning as a look through his contribs back up my views.

General comendations

* On Misplaced Pages, Imoeng is a ‘’’Leader’’’. He is a great motivator and inspires people to do great work. For example, some weeks ago I tried to gently play down some of his admirable but lofty ambitions fearing he was aiming too high for himself, the Indonesia-related articles and its editors, and he would be disappointed. However he has proven me wrong and achieved a number of his ambitious goals already. The most impressive aspect was that this was not done alone, but by cobbling together a disparate group of editors, bringing them with him, and setting us to work willingly!! See Wikiproject Indonesia

* Imoeng shows great initiative and enthusiasm, which allow him to achieve highly. This enthusiasm rubs off on others. He often has little projects going – this week a new one has been a barnstar for great work on Indonesian related articles. He also has wikipedia’s growth of good info foremost at heart and concentrates on adding info rather than monitoring others.

* In my opinion, Imoeng has outstanding people skills. Apart from his afore-mentioned leadership abilities, he is extremely polite and patient even with people less gifted in getting along. He never looses his cool (at least not that I have seen) and always works collaboratively, and rather than finding the compromise, finds the superior “win-win”.

* Imoeng is well-aware of his weaknesses and knows how to improve himself in these areas. If not, he can manage and/or compensate well for these weaknesses. This is partly why my recommendations for improvement (below) are so few – they are hard to find!

Specific commendations

* Imoeng, after only a few months on Misplaced Pages, took it upon himself to create a portal for Indonesia. Portal:Indonesia. It achieved featured portal status based almost entirely on his work. Superb work.

* He is the instigator and main driver behind the Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Indonesia. He carries out this role enthusiastically and diplomatically. That he is only one of a large number of editors is in (a large) part due to his enthusiasm rubbing off on others.

* He is an extremely diligent in finding references. The Indonesia article is a case in point. From memory, it had no references only 1 month ago – it is now getting close to 80.

Recommendations for improvement

* As noted above, Imoeng is an extremely diligent reference provider. He should continue this. I would encourage him though to go that extra step and – where necessary – find that better quality, say more scholarly citation. Of course, an OK cite is better than none, but working to find that even better one is one of the best ways to boost wikipedia’s credibility. This is an important recommendation for improvement, but is made upon already great work in this area – and he is a much better referencer than me!!!

Keep up the good work. --Merbabu 13:43, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Review from Hildanknight

Imoeng has done some excellent work on Misplaced Pages, particularly improving Indonesia-related articles and responding to feedback requests posted at Requests for feedback, a Misplaced Pages process I created. For this, he has received barnstars from several users, including two Exceptional Newcomer barnstars. For some time, I have been considering nominating him for adminship. The only area in which I feel he needs improvement is...his English. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 14:20, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

His English is the "weakness" I alluded to in my post above but he is well-aware of this and requests people to check his English in articles. In fact he has told people in the past he sees Wikiepedia as a way to improve his English. He is studying outside his native Indonesia in part to do just this. --Merbabu 00:37, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

• Hello Imoeng. Here are some thoughts.

  • First of all, a critic: your signature is pretty long, almost 300 characters. Note that a 200 characters signature is considered too long.
  • Now, reviewing your last 2500 edits, you have around 500 in user talk pages other than your own. That is a pretty good amount! Almost 20% of your edits are talking with others, and since Misplaced Pages is a community-driven site, interaction is always welcomed. Around 200 edits are done in article talk pages, so around 30% of your edits have been done in order to communicate with others.
  • Around 300 edits were done in the Misplaced Pages namespace, most of them in "feedback" places (peer review, requests for feedback, help desk, proposals, etc). This implies you care about helping others. It is always good to see a user caring about others!
  • Now, the fact that you are contributing with articles in your location is very welcomed. It is easy to write about games, books and fantasy in general, but when you contribute with topics of your location that may not be very known, you are doing a favour to us all.
  • I notice you have VP approval, but don't really spend time chasing vandals. As you focus in articles, that is understandable. However, it is good to see you have had experience interacting with others, so you may be cool enough to handle vandals once you decide to go after them.

  Overall, you are a pretty good user. If you don't like discussing in AFDs because you respect the works of others, you may consider giving a hand at Articles for creation, eliminating articles that would not fit Misplaced Pages before they are included. Also, you can check Featured article review, where people review featured articles to see if they should be removed. Either work may fit you, as you prefer helping people building good articles than in deleting them. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 21:10, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Review from Indon

it's a bit messy of indentation here, I hope you can read my review.

I know Imoeng since I joined Wikiproject Indonesia. He is a very good communicator. Wikiproject Indonesia was his idea, he built it and has made a lot of progress. One big achievement is the Portal Indonesia. He created the portal and the portal reached feature status in about 20 days!! (I counted it myself). I noticed also when he had to be away for his real-life exam, the project seemed lost its engine.

Imoeng also joined WP:RFF, a good place to help newbies editing an article. I've used that place to ask my first main contribution, and it is such a good project. This shows how Imoeng is a person who can easily give his hands helping others.

In terms of editing an article, I'm very impressed on how he could get missing references. He may have lack of English skill, so do I. However it does not mean that he is not a good contributor in WP. I prefer to work with a not-so-good-English-skill person to improve an article, as long as we can collaborate each other, than a native English speaker who does not want to contribute in copyediting (well, I have met such a person in WP, a native English as it is said in his userbox, but he only contributes only by putting any kinds of WP:TC tags, and worse that he didn't put any explanation in the talk page).

So for Imoeng, good luck. You are a very good wikipedian that I know. Cheers. — Indon (reply) — 09:12, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

• As promised, here's my review. I don't want to repeat others above, so I will abstain from commenting on your commendable article building record and rather focus on an administrative perspective of your contributions, as you express that you desire to become an administrator.

  • Countervandalism: Good. I see that you are using VP2, although not for a long time. Perhaps you should keep up your VP vandal fight a few more weeks before attempting an RfA on the grounds that you need the admin tools in order to enhance your countervandalism performance.
  • XfD: No participation, and this is quite a concern. Administrators are expected to carry out other tasks than just countervandalism, such as closing AfDs and deleting pages that were deemed not suitable for inclusion. Although you state that you don't like to participate in XfD discussions because you don't like to have others' work deleted, it is important that you understand that many articles compromise Misplaced Pages's status as an accurate and useful encyclopedia. There's a constant flow of trash/spam/unencyclopedic stuff trying to infest Misplaced Pages, and it's of great importance for an administrator to be able to discern what merits a place on WP, and what doesn't. You should really participate on XfD and become accustomed to the policies for deletion/speedy deletion.
  • Overall, you're on the right path. As of this moment, my stance on your RfA would be neutral, or even weak support. Give it a few more weeks with increased participation on administrative oriented tasks and I'll definitely support you. Till then, happy editing! Regards.--Húsönd 18:22, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using a PHP version of Interiot's tool.

Questions

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

   In the earlier period of my contribution, I joined WikiProject Guitarists and created a number of Indonesian guitarists articles. Then I realised many Indonesia-related articles are under-developed. That is why I created WikiProject Indonesia and Indonesian Portal, which is a featured portal now (and updating the content with other project members). I really pleased with the portal because I made that in a night. I have also created the Indonesian collaboration. The articles I am pleased with are Religion in Indonesia and Tourism in Indonesia. Oh, and finding citations for Indonesia :P.

1. 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?

   Hmm, well, I can think of one and the most stressing problem, with User:SatuSuro. It happened during Tourism in Indonesia collaboration that he did not put any citation whatsoever. Although I realised I should have let him do his work, the reason why I took that seriously was because it was our first collaboration and I want the best for it. The conflict was pretty serious, but its okay now. In the future, I reckon respect and civility are the most important things, beside communication. Okay that is enough, ahahaha. Thanks.

1. What would you do where you found an article has no citations at all - now? SatuSuro 14:27, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

   Well I will look at some aspects, such as my mood at that time, the importance of the article, and whether I enjoy expanding it. For example, Indonesian collaboration articles are highly important (that is why its nominated), so I usually focusing on these kind of articles. However, for some articles, that I do not really know the subject matter, I'd rather skip it so I will not make silly mistake. Thanks for asking! Imoeng 09:11, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

1. The Indonesian language wikipedia has less than 100,000 articles have you translated/transfered any articles between projects? Gnangarra 15:35, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

   Actually yes, but those were in my earlier period, when I wrote some guitarists article. I do not really remember which articles, but I reckon, umm, Abdee Negara, Ridho, and Dewa Budjana. Probably there is more, or less :P. Thanks for asking! Imoeng 09:11, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

1. Imoeng, what does "ahahaha" mean? You use it frequently and I'm not sure if your laughing at people or just being happy or maybe something else altogether. I find it a bit annoying I have to say. -- I@n 01:14, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

   Oh sorry mate, I didn't mean to. I've never meant to. I am not laughing at people, I am just being happy all the time. I dont know why, maybe its because I am Taurus. Taken from the article, "practical, reliable, patient, sensuous, affectionate, competent, ambitious, and determined character, but one which is also prone to laziness, jealousy, inflexibility, greediness, and stubborness.". I also always use it for chatting, :D. Oh well, if it annoys people, I will stop. Cheers -- Imoeng 02:44, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

You don't have to stop on my behalf. You can do whatever you want. -- I@n 02:56, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Well I don't want to annoy people, but sometimes I cannot avoid it (I almost type that again now). Cheers -- Imoeng 02:59, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

1. You dont use the same user ID on the Indonesian wikipedia why, also your User page here doesn't link to your Indonesian WP account? Gnangarra forgot to sign Gnangarra 06:18, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

   Hello again Gnangarra. My first account on Indonesian wikipedia was Imoeng, but then I forgot the password (and I didn't enter my email address). So, if I am not mistaken, I created ImoengID. Actually when I created the account, my only intention is to check something (which I forgot what that was), and I was not thinking about editing on Indonesian Misplaced Pages. Maybe in the future I will, if my contribution is no longer needed here, which I already feel its no longer needed. Thanks for asking -- Imoeng 08:27, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

1. I am a bit boring today, going nowhere in WP, finally found this page. Well, why don't I ask something to Imoeng ;-). Imoeng, I'm impressed with your "googling" power to find references. I noted that you like to put citations from any website. How do you check the reliability of the source that you included in an article from a website? — Indon (reply) — 09:00, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

   Hello Indon! There are some things I need to consider to select an appropriate website. And I believe, most (not all, of course) of my citations were from notable websites. So, firstly I need to see the writer and the publisher. If its a government or notable organisations, such as ecology conservation stuff, then I do not need to worry. The other thing is to find pdf files, which are likely to be a report or research paper. Another method, is to select which ones are not notable rather than which ones are. Of course, blogs are nowhere near notable, as well as random comments from random people. Probably that is much about it. Please ask this again in more on my talk page if you want. Thanks for asking! Imoeng 15:08, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

User:AQu01rius

AQu01rius (talk · contribs) Just want to know how well I am doing. AQu01rius (User | Talk | Websites)  05:18, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• I think you're doing pretty well. Nothing about your edits strike me as particularly controversial; in fact, they're all very good additions. Speaking of which, the link you have provided in Q1 shows up as a redlink, you may want to fix that!

You seem to be a level-headed sort of guy, and it would be nice to see your around XfD discussions – really helps to get a handle on policy, and it's good to see sensible people there.

If that isn't your cup of tea (although I have noticed you !voting on RfAs lately), you may want to check out peer review and featured article candidates, where you can help out with quality reviews. Basically, it would be nice to see you up your WP-space edits – learning about the internal workings of the 'pedia is pretty important.

Your user talk count is also quite low – remember that this is a collaborative project, and people love getting feedback on their actions, so be bold and give out a barnstar or two!

On a second and boring note, you should probably find out whether your signature violates WP:SIG – I know that images aren't allowed in signatures, but I'm not sure what the policy is on using your own image in your own signature. I'm bringing this up because signatures can be a contentious point in RfAs, should you ever consider running for adminship in the future – and even just to avoid problems in your habitual activities on talkspace.

But all in all, you're doing a good job. I look forward to seeing you around! Regards, — riana_dzasta _{wreak havoc-damage report} 02:04, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you! I wasn't sure of the signature policy as I never used it here before. Sorry about that. And I agree I should be more interactive. AQu01rius (User | Talk | Websites)  05:22, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

• Since essjay's tool is down, I will do it manually, so forgive for some mistakes when counting.

  • Around 95 user talk edits, with around 49 in your own talk page. I notice some of these remove things. However, you are not archiving. Removing information from your talk page may be considered vandalism if you delete valid warnings. I suggest not deleting unless archiving. See How to archive a talk page to know how to do it.
  • Around 58 edits in article talk pages. In total, you have around 100 edits in talk pages (user and article), out of just over 1000 edits. That is a pretty low percentage (around 5% of user talk and article talk pages). My own interpretation (which may differ from others', of course) is that you have little interaction with editors, both personally (when you talk to a user talk page you are talking only to him) and in group (when discussing articles in talk pages, you are giving an opinion that will be considered by the editors of the article, developing consensus for a determined target). Although you have many Tips of the days, which implies you have created a good number of articles, and that these articles have been expanded to be pretty useful, the low amount of article talk pages also indicates that you are a kind of "lonely wolf", writing (very useful) articles but with little interaction with others to improve others. I see you are a member of the Chinese military history task force, that should allow you to discuss with others about those topics.
  • An interesting fact that you don't really talk with others is shown in talk pages like Talk:Battle of Wuhan and Talk:Central Plains War. You don't indent your talks as specified by the formatting, thus conversations in talk pages are hard to read. I suggest you begin doing that.
  • Please, use edit summaries. Edits summaries are extremely useful for everyone. Others who are watching pages you are editing will know what you did (they may check what you did to see it matches your summary, however after some times, they will trust you and stop checking your edits everytime you do one, saving them some time). It also helps to quickly locate in a history page a determined version.
  • It is good to see you are lately warning vandals and reverting their edits. Remember to use the edit summary to mark them so that it is easier to check how many times one was warned by looking at the history of the page.
  • I see some contributions in AFDs and RFAs. That is usually considered a "second step" for an editor, passing from editing articles to participating in important decisions in Misplaced Pages. With time, you will "create" yourself a standard for selecting an administrator. Just be sure that standard is just and acceptable by the community.

  I believe that is all I can say for now. Good to see you have changed your signature, and believe me when I said your contributions are extremely useful for Misplaced Pages. Keep going, and one day you may be writing a featured article per month. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 18:52, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using a PHP version of Interiot's tool.

Questions

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

I spent quite amount of time on translating Chinese materials (generally military) into English. For my works, please see this page. I'm pretty pleased with my production since I only started editing in the midst of July.

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 don't engage in talk page very often, and that's something I need to work on. I did solve an dispute in Nanking Massacre however.

User:The Bread

The Bread (talk · contribs) I've been doing the whole Misplaced Pages thing for a while now, and I'd like to see if anyone's got any thoughts on how I could improve my edits, self, and any other stuff †he Bread 01:06, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Why, a Kiwi! :-) You're doing pretty well recently. Although your first edit dates back to February, your edit count is still too low. But I presume that you only started contributing actively in the last month or so. So if you keep up that pace you're in the right path for adminship in a few months. I see that you've contributed in many different areas and that's good. But you must increase your participation in AfD, RfA, etc, if you pretend to become an administrator. Other users will have to recognize your work before they agree to entrust you with the admin tools. I can't see any recent vandal fight, I would recommend that you start patrolling recent changes. Start with a manual patrol until you've learned the wonders of vandal fight and then you may try installing Vandalproof for a more efficient patrol. About conflicts, I suggest that you avoid warring with other editors, especially administrators. Sometimes it's better to ignore a stubborn position by another user rather than to foster a useless war and be deemed a troll. Above all, do never resort to uncivil behavior, that would be catastrophic to your future RfA. Anyway you're doing a good job. Keep up the good work and feel free to ask for advice whenever you need it. Regards.--Húsönd 16:29, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

• Thanks, I was pretty inexperienced back when I was arguing with MIB on a regular basis, and I have decided to exactly what you said, just ignore a stubborn user. I do not believe in letting admins get away with whatever they want just because they are admins though. I am also gonna start looking through the recent changes which I have been waying up doing recently. Cheers for the review †he Bread 02:50, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

• Hello there, The Bread. Again, essjay's tool is down, so some of my numbers may be off, but hopefully not much.

  • It is good to see you use summaries so often, although some may not be "novice friendly", like M Quotes Rp W/ References. I am guilty there, as I like using regexp patterns when replacing ;-) I don't like these "dammit", though, as nobody likes a "dammit" appearing in their watchlist ;-) Since you did not state you are wanting to be an administrator, and reviewing the work you do at GA (where I would will try to participate after getting 5 GA!), you could also do that work at Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates. You obviously know enough about style guides to participate there. Instead of suggesting improving an article to featured status, I believe you could instead help articles to retain their featured status at Misplaced Pages:Featured article review. On the contrary, if you want to become administrator, you should follow Husond's advice and begin participating in XFD discussions more regularly, recent changes and new pages patrolling, and reporting vandals to the administrators. Personally, I think these tasks may not fit you, as I already said, you are good examining articles.
  • Now, for a cold statistical review, around 21% in article talk pages. This is understandable, as you mainly work with articles, either polishing or analyzing them to award a GA status. Around 6% of your total edits are in user talk pages, which can be considered low for a vandal fighter, but not for you.
  • Closing this comment, every wikipedian decides how to spend his or her time here. It is clear that you are confortable spending more time with articles than with users, and because of that you have obtained a good knowledge about style guides. Now, you can either continue this way, add new related tasks (participating in FAC and FAR), add somewhat-related tasks (participating in XFDs, as you will be able to apply or learn about notability concepts) or try a new path (which could very well be vandal fighting). Note that, in this last case, you will find yourself in situations like the one you have described in question 2 very, very often, and unless you are able to keep a really cool behaviour, you should do it with moderation, maybe 10 or 15 minutes per day until you feel comfortable. While you may be used to thanks or good faithed questions (depending on whether you have passed or not a GA candidate), and civil conversations in talk pages, fighting vandals will attract them to your user and talk pages, and articles related to you. The fact that you work in MGS pages (which usually attract a number of fans) may prepare you for discussing with "extremists", but the first time you see your user or talk page with a big penis image may shock you nevertheless :-) Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 04:50, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

• • Cheers, I am aware of the fact that I will (and do) come into contact with "extremeists" at the MGS pages and usually just keep away from them as It is usually easier to revert their POV edits and they are easy to identify (Their username will be very similar to a characters' name). I am intending to do some vandal fighting in the future, but will continue to focus on the sort of work I do now, as I do have moments where can't remain 100% civil. "Dammit" appears often as my edit summary as I make a lot of mistakes in my editing, but I will drop it since it isn't really appropriate, again thanks †he Bread 02:56, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using a PHP version of Interiot's tool.

Questions

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

   Mainly my work on getting Rocky to GA standard in recent weeks and also my contributions for Wikiproject Blackadder in creating (most of the) forth series of Blackadder articles and the first series of Blackadder articles as it allowed us to complete our first goal, other than those two major ones I also spend most of my time cruising round the Metal Gear articles and have recently been adding info to the character lists

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?

   Ha ha ha, This is a good question. I admit that I have been in more than one discussion that got a bit out of hand, It was over the picture of Solid Snake on the Solid Snake page, I wanted Old Snake and pretty stubbornly refused to use another picture thanscripts of that arguement can be found here and here. My second one was at List of recurring Metal Gear characters over whether Gray Fox should have his own article, this was a curiopus one, despite have an overwhelming majority in favour of Gray Fox being a standalone the opposing user refused to listen to our well thought out and organised (initially) arguement using various WP guidelines and insited we listen to his own interpretation of WP:FICT and in the end went running to the CVG project to find someone else who agreed with him. I claim to have one that arguement despite the opposing user ignoring us and merging Gray Fox into a list. Recently I had an arguement over a user removing an anon's comments form the talk Solid Snake page, I took the high road and sought a thrid party to resolve the dispute wich resulted in the anon's comments staying. All three of my arguments were with the same user A Man In Black (talk · contribs)

User:Seadog.M.S

Seadog.M.S (talk · contribs) Comment, I am still looking for reveiws and here is a new summary. I would love to be an administrator and now I am trying to get some opinions on this statement. I have recently installed Lupins Popups into my MonoBook and Now it is so much eaiser to fight vandalism. My edit summerys have gone up as well as my mainspace edits 1500+ in total. The main reason I would want administrator ship is to have the ability to block. I have been a regular at the AIV for a while and yes I have accidently listed a couple of IPs who shouldn't have been there but I am getting better. As a vandal fighter I would so much love, to have this ability. Thanks in advance, all comments are welcomed.--Seadog 22:15, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• There's no reason why not, but I suspect not for a while. Don't forget that Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia first and foremost: you should spend a few months helping build articles, and start to get involved in maintenance activity like vandal-fighting and AfD, and then think about being an admin. The Land 17:29, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
• Hello there, Seadog.M.S. Since you have requested an abstract opinion, I will give you an abstract answer. First of all, remember that Adminship is not considered a reward, but just another "level" of edition. While as a user you are likely to spend more time writing articles, as an admin you are likely to spend more time with administrative tasks. While it may be great to be one, you must understand that you will be under many more eyes than as a common user. If you understand this, you will be able to become an administrator someday. As for feeling below average, it depends where you put the average. If you are comparing yourself with SimonP (talk · contribs) then yes, you, me, and everyone who has posted in this page since it was created is below average. If you are comparing yourself with an anonymous vandal, then no, you, we, and all the ones who have posted here are above average. Every editor is unique, thus every editor is expected to contribute in their own way to improve Misplaced Pages. Similar editors bunch together (in example, in a WikiProject), but that just means they work similarly. You need to find what makes you happy at Misplaced Pages. If you are happy editing articles, and discussing with others in order to improve articles, you will be a fearsome writer. If you like reverting vandalism as soon as it happens, reporting users and adding clean up tags to articles, you will become an excellent patroller. If you listening to people complain, reviewing the situation and giving alternatives to end the discussion, you will be a great mediator. If you like discussing deletions, applying Misplaced Pages policies and interacting with users personally, you will be a great administrator. If you like adding some clean up tags here and there, formatting random articles, removing spam and giving small pieces of advices, you will be a great wikignome (just like me). Think what you like the most about Misplaced Pages, and do it, not mattering if you are an editor, patroller, administrator, bureaucrat, arbitrator or wikignome. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 04:31, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
• You could probably be a great administrator, but with a few more months' experience. One thing I'd suggest is improving your edit summary usage; it's improved over time, but it's generally expected of experienced Wikipedians to include an edit summary with every edit they make. You have a high edit count for just a little over a month's experience, and you're also very polite and courteous and give out awards often. If you want to make vandalfighting easier, you can simply put {{subst:navpop}} in your monobook to install popups, which is what many vandalfighters use. Overall, you're a very kind user and are experienced in a lot of different levels of editing. --The Great Llama 01:04, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
• It crossed my mind to nominate you for adminship, but I think that you should get a couple of more months of experience first. However, I think that you are an exceptional editor and an asset to the community, and I really appreciate your kindness towards other users, myself included. I'm sure that some day you will make a fine admin. Perhaps in a few months? - Mike | Trick or Treat 03:33, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
• You're off to a great start! Though fairly new, and RfA voters look for lots of time and edits, I'm sure you'll be experienced enough to get many support votes in, perhaps, January or February. Until then, let me know if you've any questions. It's been great working with you so far, as you're very civil and an exceptional contributor! --Gray Porpoise 01:03, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using a PHP version of Interiot's tool.

Questions

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

   I have worked very hard on the Hinduism article and I have nominated it for FA and so far as of now it was more Support votes than Oppose. The most pleasing work I have done is fighting vandalism, most of my edits latly have been RC patroling vandalism revertals. I give out Barnstars to those who I feel deserve it and This makes me happy when others when people are appreciative of me.--Seadog 22:19, 27 October 2006 (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?

   No, I try to keep a cool head, and most people on Misplaced Pages that I have met are very helpful and kind in showing me my mistakes. I don't get stressed in dealing with vandalism.

User:People Powered

People Powered (talk · contribs) Hi, I was wondering if it would be possible for me to become an admin by December, and what i'd have to do in order to do that if i'm not on the right track. People Powered 04:19, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Great user, so willing to learn. I'm very impressed. More thorough review on your talkpage, as you already know. I think you will make a good admin... when the time comes. — riana_dzasta _{wreak havoc-damage report} 05:46, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
• Hello there, People Powered. Since you have asked directly, giving an exact date, I will tell you my opinion. You have been contributing since last August. Note that many editors request a good amount of months of continous participation. So far, you have been active just over two months, so if you continue actively working until December, that should not be an issue. Regarding your edits, you have participated in 13 AFD discussions since you joined, and you have done 21 edits in 15 different RFAs. You have done no reports to Misplaced Pages:Administrator intervention against vandalism, and around 50 or so edits in the Misplaced Pages namespace in total (may be off, since essjay's tool is down). While you have good things (as Riana dzasta said, you are willing to learn), your edit summary usage is very good, and you are willing to learn, the amount of interaction you have had with others is pretty low. In example, you have done only 7 edits in article talk pages. I consider this serious, since you are supposed to interact with other users through article talk pages in order to improve articles. Also, you have done around 50 edits in user talk pages. As an administrator you will have to deal with a lot of people, and experience in contacting them, how to treat them, etc, is indicated through the amount of times you have talked with others. This talk is strange, as a future administrator you should keep your head as cool as possible. Good to see you quickly rectified that. This incident, along with the low amount of edits in article talk pages, make me think you may learn something by reading about the ownership of articles. In all, you are a good editor who is learning his way through Misplaced Pages. However, I think December may be too early still to nominate yourself for adminship. You need to spend more time talking with other users, cooperatively working with other users to improve articles, and at the Misplaced Pages namespace with XFD (templates, categories and articles for deletion), requests for adminship, etc. Also, administrators are expected to fight vandalism, so you may consider the recent changes patrol in order to work with other people reverting vandalism, reporting vandals who are not willing to stop, and learning to recognize different types of vandalism. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 04:00, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using a PHP version of Interiot's tool.

Questions

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

   Answer New Hampshire State House of Representatives Election, 2006, I put alot of work into those tables, i'm still trying to figure out how to make it more managable and editable.

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?

   Answer Not particularly, there was an RFA once where I disagreed with Cyde, but otherwise, I don't take many things on Misplaced Pages that deeply to heart, so there isn't alot of stress.

=== User:Wikipediarules2221 ===

Wikipediarules2221 (talk · contribs) Hello. I have been editing on Misplaced Pages for a couple of months I believe and was just looking for some feedback on how I am doing. I have been involved in counter vandalism and speedy page deletions as well as contributing facts to articles. I have also just completed my first article, which is on the kabosy and I plan on continuing to create articles on African instruments and music. Let me know what you think of me as a contributor so far. Thanks a lot. Wikipediarules2221 22:01, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

Comments

• See this user's edit history with Interiot's tool and edit summary usage (Warning:Both tools have stopped updating and the edit counts are way off. Please consider using Flcelloguy's Tool or Interiot's Tool 2)

Questions

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

   Well I am pleased with my work on cutting down vandalism seeing as there is so much of it but I am also pleased with my article on the kabosy (although it is short) I have a profound interest in African music and am looking to increase the amount of African music articles on Misplaced Pages.

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?

   Well there is an apparent vandal who shares my IP adress and that has caused me some frustration because I find myself blocked for his handy work. Even as recent as today, my IP was blocked; however, one of the admins blocked the IP while letting my username to contribute, which I appreciate greatly.

User:NE2

NE2 (talk · contribs) I joined about three months ago, and found a topic to do heavy work on about a month later. Since then, I've been doing almost all my work on improving and writing articles about state highways in Virginia. I would like to know if there is anything I can improve on. I would also like to know if it would be possible to bring any of these to featured status, as I only have access to one major source on these roads. To that end, I may do best with a major road like the Capital Beltway or the Norfolk-Portsmouth Bridge-Tunnel, for which I can find other sources, and which others may be interested in. --NE2 00:33, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Hello there. This page is for editor review, if you want a review about an article you are working on, see Misplaced Pages:Peer review.

  • Your edit summary is good enough, although you could use them when editing other user's talk pages, as that informs them about what are you talking about before they check the edit.
  • As for your edit work, since you concentrate in those topics, I can only suggest you to learn about inline references (see m:Cite/Cite.php), and add as many references as possible, since featured article should be well documented.

  Continue this way, and you should have no problem improving articles to get them to good or featured status. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 00:02, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

  Thanks for the review. Are you saying that when you get the orange "new messages" bar, it shows the edit summary? I have not seen this. I have in fact been using inline references (see State Route 337), but at the present time I am concentrating on starting articles with general information about the roads. --NE2 00:14, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

  No, but most times we click the "last edit" link to see what has been added. Also, it is helpful to quickly locate a determined revision in a talk page. I did not check that article for references, as I interpreted you considered Interstate 495 (Capital Beltway) your best work, sorry for the misunderstanding. You should consider wrapping references tags with a div of class "references-small" to minimize the size, like here. Also, consider using {{cite web}} and {{cite book}} when creating them, as they accept more parameters that will help the article show in a cleaner way (including page number, url, access date, etc). Thanks for correcting me, though! -- ReyBrujo 01:05, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

• Your diligence at WP:VASH is to be commended. However, we have had some concerns with your not supporting and adhering to consensus. It is perfectly okay to disagree with consensus, but Misplaced Pages operates by consensus. Without consensus we cannot get anything done. Thus, your following consensus would be appreciated, even when you disagree. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 21:50, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using a PHP version of Interiot's tool.

Questions

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

   I am pleased by the "completionist" method in which I am tackling Virginia's state highways. I hope that when I am done, every current or former primary state highway will have either its own article or a redirect to another, as well as details on its history. Thanks to VDOT's placement of all of its meeting minutes since 1920 online, this is an achievable task. --NE2 00:40, 6 October 2006 (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?

   I have not been in any major conflicts, though I seem to have come in at the end of a somewhat bloody naming conventions war. Though I do not agree with its outcome, I nevertheless believe that intra-state consistency (rather than inter-state consistency, which is the reason given for the current convention) is a good thing, and so I moved all the articles to the new convention. Since then, I have had to inform others of the linking considerations of WP:USSH, but have never gotten in any conflicts there. --NE2 00:40, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

User:AdamWeeden

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

AdamWeeden (talk · contribs) I would like to be reviewed to verify that I am contributing properly to WikiPedia and making a positive impact overall. AdamWeeden 11:45, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Hello! A few comments you may find useful. I must say, before I continue, that you are making a very positive impact!

  • First of all, it is good to see you are using edit summaries so often. Usually, people with few contributions have to be told to use them, so this is a welcomed change.
  • In a similar way, new users don't begin creating articles, but instead work with small contributions until gaining confidence (as I did, in example). However, your contributions to USS Weeden (DE-797) are a great example of an editor willing to improve Misplaced Pages, and rightly you are proud of it.
  • Remember to sign posts you do in talk pages, especially if you are warning someone (here and here too). Also, when using a warn template, remember to substitute it (instead of {{blatantvandal}} use {{subst:blatantvandal}}).
  • I also suggest people not to use "rv" as summary. It is not harder to write "reverted", and may help new or anonymous contributors to know what happened with their change. This does not really seem a vandalism, just a test, but that is a point of view. For these cases, you could use the {{test}} templates.

  Overall, you are a very good contributor. You still have a lot to learn and room for improvement. Just remember to sign when using talk pages, especially when warning, as you need to take responsability for the comments you do in them. Also, spend some time in article talk pages, giving ideas and opinions about how to improve it, etc. Communication between community members is useful, and starting that early will prevent isolation (in example, working alone in articles). Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 20:41, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

• I checked out your article on the USS Weeden. Let me begin by saying I am impressed with your work. You mentioned that you spent time researching it, and I am curious as to why you did not cite your references in the creation of the article. While the article is good without it, should other editors be unable to verify facts in the article in the future, they may delete your work thinking it false. You might want to check out the good article criteria to get an idea of what you should be aiming for when creating an article.Pepsi2786 06:47, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
  • A lot of the information came directly from the USS Weeden entry in the and is noted as such in the references section.AdamWeeden 12:15, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using a PHP version of Interiot's tool.

Questions

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

   I am particularly pleased with my article on the USS Weeden. When doing research on my geneology I discovered this warship with my last name and felt it warranted its own article, as some other ships in her class had received articles. After research and reference I was able to create a concise, informative article from scratch.

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?

   Only in the repair of vandalism. In dealing with it I tried to maintain the Misplaced Pages standards of reverting, warning the user after the next vandalism, and then informing the administrators of the vandalism if it continued.

AdamWeeden 11:51, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

User:Triona

Triona (talk · contribs) Been here a while, just looking for suggestions for improvement. - Stephanie Daugherty (Triona) - Talk - Comment - 10:37, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• Hello there. I see you are a pretty solid editor, with a good amount of edits in the different namespaces, participating in different Misplaced Pages discussions including AFDs and RFAs, although the article talk edits are somewhat low. Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Instruction Creep sounds interesting, but it is a pretty complex issue which is likely to give headaches, as most times instruction creep is accepted between the community as a natural maturation of the system. Your edit summary usage is pretty good. I would point that, when reducing the size of a fair use image as in Image:1024wallpaper9.jpg, you need to tag the page with {{fair use reduced}}, with ~~~~~ as argument, so that an administrator can delete the old versions after some days. I realize that it has been a lot of time since you did that reduction, but I thought it would be good to mention that, in case you find a similar situation. My only real suggestion is spending some more time in articles as an editor and not a patroller. As most of your edits are reverts and maintenance, maybe you should consider finding a random article to improve from a topic you like. Not to featured status, mind you, but maybe good status is enough. Remember that, beforehand, Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 19:24, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using a PHP version of Interiot's tool.

Questions

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

   Really nothing in particular - my contributions have generally been small and sporadic.

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?

   Nothing major, generally, I just back off and let things cool down. If a conflict can't be avoided, I try to remain civil and work the issue out. - Stephanie Daugherty (Triona) - Talk - Comment - 10:40, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Archives

• Archive of previous reviews