Wikipedia:Editor review/Ankitbhatt

Ankitbhatt
This is Ankitbhatt. I am a dedicated user of Wikipedia, who loves improving articles and expanding them, increasing their aestheticism, quality of formatting, grammar and cohesion. I had recently put up an Rfa, but it was closed because of WP:NOTNOW. I would be enlightened if other editors can tell me what to do so that I can improve myself and be luckier the next time. Also, I want to see how much I have progressed and how much I can progress in the future. Ankitbhatt (talk) 13:31, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

 Questions


 * 1) What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
 * My primary contributions to Wikipedia would be some of the articles I created and was the major contributor (90%+ of the info and editing) - 2003 Afro-Asian Games and 54th Filmfare Awards. Also, I have contributed significantly to the articles List of highest-grossing Bollywood films, My Name Is Khan, 3 Idiots, Prince - It's Showtime and 2010 South Asian Games. My specialty is article improvement, and my focus subjects are Films and Sports.
 * 1) Have you been in any disputes 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 remember, no, I have never been involved in any sort of disputes or wars between multiple editors. Also, I have never felt intimidated or stressed due to the comments or actions of any other editors, except once or twice. I always try to look at the comments of editors positively, and try to extract knowledge from them, but blatant bias and vandalism can make me considerably angry. However, I try not to escalate a minor difference of opinion into a "war".
 * As far as I remember, no, I have never been involved in any sort of disputes or wars between multiple editors. Also, I have never felt intimidated or stressed due to the comments or actions of any other editors, except once or twice. I always try to look at the comments of editors positively, and try to extract knowledge from them, but blatant bias and vandalism can make me considerably angry. However, I try not to escalate a minor difference of opinion into a "war".

 Reviews 

Review by PleaseStand

To start with, read the votes on your unsuccessful RfA. Some things I would like to point out are:
 * It is excellent that you have created a GA.
 * Opt into the edit counting tool, which allows editors to see what articles you have edited the most, and when you have edited the most.
 * You can opt in by clicking this link and saving the page with any text (for example,  or anything else, the box just needs to be filled in).
 * Because you had not opted in, I had to outside tool to analyze your edits; others felt that you are not in touch with the community.
 * Your edit summary usage is low. You should make it a point to always fill in the edit summary box, since that is one of the main things RfA voters look for.
 * Consider combining multiple smaller edits into one big edit. Unnecessary edits clutter article histories, making it hard to locate previous edits.
 * You can do so, editing the entire page at once, by using the "edit this page" tab at the top of the page.
 * When you are done, use the "Show changes" and "Preview" buttons to check your edits before you save the page.
 * As User:Edgarde pointed out, you should try to avoid behaviors that could be seen as combative.
 * Do not "attack" other editors. Comment on the actual content, not on contributors. For example, do not call an editor a "biased editor".
 * Do not delete entire discussions either.
 * Recent changes patrol and New pages patrol are OK if you want to demonstrate anti-vandalism experience (expected of all admins), but if you do so, be careful and do not bite the newcomers.
 * If you would like to do RC patrol, leave a message on my talk page and I can help you get started on that. You do not need to be an admin to "fight vandals".
 * If you would like to do NP patrol, follow the instructions on WP:NPP. Be careful not to overuse speedy deletion though, as cautioned on that page. If you can salvage a new article, do so.
 * Do not use "automated" tools such as Twinkle, Friendly, or Huggle (except for RC patrol). In particular, Friendly is a slippery slope to drive-by tagging (another link), and in my opinion, it should never be used. Huggle is not good to use either: see User:Dlohcierekim/On RfA for the reason why.
 * Do not base your entire Wikipedia efforts on anti-vandalism though. Content creation is the primary goal of Wikipedia, so continue with that.
 * You are said to have a "lack of experience in the Wikipedia namespace". Participating in WP:AFD discussions to help reach consensus is one way to gain this experience.
 * Read policies such as the deletion policy carefully, thinking about how they apply to your actions, and you will understand them better. (Lack of policy understanding was one thing cited as opposition to your RfA.)

In short: for the content creation work you have been doing and the anti-vandalism work you are interested in doing, there is no need to be an admin. Show some more thought in your edits, avoid "vigilante" behavior, and demonstrate knowledge of the policies and guidelines and administrators' reading list through experience first. If you do so, I and others might be able to support you in running for admin in the future, possibly in a year. But not now. PleaseStand (talk) 22:59, 19 April 2010 (UTC)


 * You began an article on an non-notable film, Five Good Years, without any reliable sources. You should wait until actual reliable sources (see WP:IRS) have covered a film (WP:CRYSTAL). Fences  &amp;  Windows  21:33, 18 November 2010 (UTC)