Wikipedia:Editor review/Arnzy

User:Arnzy
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 Wikipedia 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. --User: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and helpful, however I am concerned about your nomination to DELETE the London Bus Routes article (though it was later withdrawn) and your nomination to KEEP the Sydney Bus Routes article.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 Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia. 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 Articles for deletion/Elermore Vale, New South Wales, you changed your opinion based in the modification of the article. At 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 "Wikipedia'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 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 Wikipedia, 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 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 Wikipedia 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
 * 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?
 * 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 Wikipedia'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.
 * 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 Wikipedia'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.