Wikipedia:Editor review/Cynical
Cynical (talk · contribs) I've been a Wikipedian since May 2004, and was thinking about requesting adminship at some point. However I would like to find out what people think I can improve on (and make the improvements) before any future RFA.
Reviews
- You look quite good, and your balance with edits is pretty impressive. However, I'd aim to get a few more Talk: edits, boosting you above 200! Computerjoe's talk 15:47, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
- I've been inspired by your username, so I'll review you as cynically as I can. I'm a frequent RfA voter, so I'll tell you what I would be looking for, and hopefully it'll help you know what to improve : )
- [1] In this instance, you went from a test1 to a test3, and I'm not sure why. RfA people might question your familiarity with the rules, willingness to follow the process, or attitude towards newbies.
- Your talk edits are low, so you might consider getting involved in a few discussions, and maybe getting the number up above 250.
- Your Wikipedia space edits are average, but I haven't seen any AfD involvement since December. You might want to consider getting at least 100 in that area.
- Your edit summaries look good, and barring any unforseen incidents in the past that others might bring up, you should pass without issue if you boost your talk and wikispace edits. Good luck! AdamBiswanger1 14:00, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
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)
- Stats from Flcelloguy's tool:
- (Permissions: N/A)
- - Total: 4516 -
- Main: 2293
- Talk: 124
- User: 359
- User talk: 933
- Wikipedia: 604
- Wikipedia talk: 82
- Image: 26
- Image talk: 1
- MediaWiki talk: 1
- Template: 8
- Template talk: 2
- Category: 82
- Portal: 1
- Total edits: 4516
- w/ edit summary: 4396 (97.34%*)
- w/ manual edit summary: 3745 (82.92%*)
- Minor edits: 158 (3.49%*)
- First known edit: 22-May-2004
- * - percentages are rounded down to the nearest hundredth.
Questions
- Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
- I haven't got any to GA or FA status or anything like that, but I am please about Braehead. The original version was so bad that I actually nominated it as a speedy (this was when I wasn't as familiar with alternatives, like cleanup, as I am now). From a suggestion on the talkpage, I managed to turn the article into a respectable stub, and it has since grown into a decent article. Nothing hugely significant in the grand scheme of things, but it was the first article on WP that I made such changes to.
- 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 in a dispute with Squeakbox a couple of months back - I nominated several of the images on his userpage for deletion (not noticing that they were actually used on articles), and he responded by accusing me of vandalism, trolling, stalking, harassment, and acting in bad faith (these can all be read on my talkpage archives). I responded by acknowledging my mistake (once it was pointed out to me) and asking Squeakbox to stop making unfounded accusations against me. I also submitted some of it as evidence in an Arbcom case in which Squeakbox was accused of similar behaviour. If something like that were to happen, then I hope that I would respond in the same way - acknowledging my mistake without resorting to namecalling.