User:RJaguar3/RFA

Hello, everyone. I am RJaguar3, and I have been editing Wikipedia under this username since April 2007. Since then, I have made more than 15,000 edits to the English Wikipedia. The edits initially involved simple vandalism reverts and the like, but I have later grown into content contribution, which has helped me understand and internalize the Wikipedia content guidelines such as WP:NOR, WP:IRS, and WP:NPOV. I do admit that, as a game show fan who wanted to see Wikipedia be the most comprehensive resource on game shows, I have made some questionable contributions in the past to Masters of the Maze (doing original research based on a single phrase in a newspaper article), Legends of the Hidden Temple (citing fansites), and Nickelodeon All-Star Challenge (citing a fan's statement on a tape-trading website). With my current understanding of Wikipedia's policies, I have been working to indeed make Wikipedia a comprehensive resource on game shows, but with reliable sources instead of original fan and Wikipedian research. Knowing these policies, I believe myself to be well prepared to resolve content disputes as well as (administratively) deciding whether subjects could ever merit an encyclopedia article in the context of Articles for Deletion.

I also have an interest in copyright law as well (as I have had since 2010). Although I am not a lawyer, I believe myself to be very well equipped to handle copyright issues, especially for images. I know that my positions may seem a bit extreme (finding copyright in spam e-mails and malware, for example) but I intend, in any administrative roles involving copyright, to respect both consensus as well as U.S. and international copyright law and the policies established by WMF for compliance with those statutes.


 * 1) What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
 * I would like to work with copyright-based file deletions at WP:FFD and WP:PUF. Additionally, I do plan to do some WP:CSD deletions for pages that merit it, and I might consider closing AFDs in the future.
 * 1) What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
 * My best (and most voluminous) contributions would have to be to the articles on Legends of the Hidden Temple and Zynga. In the former case, I was able to research contemporary newspaper articles about the show using ProQuest and incorporate those articles into sourcing the Wikipedia article.  Although it has failed its third good article nomination, I am planning out how to find additional sources about the show (such as a radio interview with the host as well as other newspaper or magazine articles I may have missed along the way) to prepare for a fourth nomination.  Regardless, I think that the article has come a long way since my first edit to it.  As to Zynga, I have worked at writing sections that incorporate notable events about the company, including events that reflect negatively on the company.  I have been finding sources for the sections I write, too.  I do have other contributions to various pages as well that include (1) tagging non-free files for deletion, (2) writing non-free use rationales, (3) removing fancruft and other unencyclopedic material from articles prone to it, such as articles about Zynga's games or about game shows, and (4) reverting vandalism and non-constructive edits to assorted articles.
 * 1) Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
 * Certainly, although my interests (which dictate the pages I edit) generally keep me away from massive editorial conflicts and edit wars. Since the articles I frequently edit are not that widely edited, most of the time, when I undo or revise another author's edit, that author never returns to challenge the edit.  Of course, I frequently get a lot of questions about edits I have made, so the approach I take is to (1) recheck the policies under which I justify my edits in the conflict, to help ensure that I am not mistaken, (2) carefully consider any explanation given by the other editor, and (3) having read the policies in question, either concede that the other editor is right and say so, or explain, calmly and clearly, my position in the matter to the user involved.