Wikipedia:Editor review/Ceres3

Ceres3
I heard of Wikipedia in July 2005 and registered in late 2005 but for a long time I stopped editing, or at least wikifing the Giant Dipper article. I learned the simple wiki code in March 2006 or so when my article was wikified. I learned those boxes and things I made in WP:MSDOS just recently. I made my stubby userpage in last February, and slowly added userboxes,and just recently (and I mean recently) redid my userpage and started anti-vandal patrol. Anyways, I'm here because I felt I was causing trouble, and wasting others' time to clean up after my edits. I feel the only good edits I made were my anti-vandalism edits, creating this article, adding the list of releases on this article, and entertaining Extremecircuitz with this article. But out of the 986 edits I've made, many were pointless. I left very shortly but I couldn't resist. And then I ran into this place. -- Coaster  geekperson  04  15:25, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

 Reviews 

Review by delldot: Hi, Coastergeekperson04, some thoughts:
 * It's troubling to hear you say you thought some of your edits were useless, why would you think that? Maybe the feedback from the failed RfA's was discouraging.  The Giant Dipper (roller coaster) article is very good, maybe you should focus on making more edits like those?  And vandal patrol is of course always very needed.  Good job reverting vandalism and leaving appropriate warning messages. You have IRC, don't you?  You could join #cvn-wp-en on freenode if you haven't already.


 * Interactions with other users - I noticed you reverted this edit with popups. Is there some history there I don't know about?  Normally it's considered very rude to use automatic revert functions on a good faith edit.  If you want to remove something, I'd recommend leaving a descriptive edit summary about why.  You may be failing to be cautious enough with automatic revert buttons, as evidenced by this edit - you reverted someone's edit to their own talk page, removing a post they added.  And then you warned them, also automatically.  You should be very careful with automatic revert buttons, not just because it has the potential to offend people, but also if you're interested in adminship - it will weigh heavily against an argument that you'd use admin tools responsibly if you're abusing or being careless with tools that are similar.


 * Other aspects of interaction seem fine. For example, someone left you a kind of curt message asking you to change a template in your signature and you dealt with it quite civilly.


 * Familiarity with policy - You lack familiarity with some aspects of policy, which is certainly understandable since there's such a vast amount of it. However, before running for adminship again, I'd strongly recommend becoming more familiar with the basics at least (e.g. WP:CSD, note that you can't use article criteria outside the article space).


 * Article content contribution - You have a lot more userpage edits than mainspace edits. In part, this is because you do a lot with user subpages.  However, I'd recommend increasing your article improving efforts.  Not that number of edits is a very useful way to tell about quality of contributions! I noticed from looking at a few edits that you add references to articles - extremely useful!  Verifiability is of utmost importance and lacking references is a big weakness a lot of articles have.


 * Thoughts on RFA - As you're probably aware now, it's too soon. Try waiting another 6 months and a few thousand edits at least, and be sure you've read all the major policies and have a basic familiarity with how they work.  Also maybe try lurking around the RfA page to get a feel for what kind of users pass and how you compare.


 * Other - Edit summary usage could improve. I'd recommend changing it in your preferences to prompt you when you go to save without one.  Edit summaries are useful for communicating to other users what you're doing.


 * I agree with others that it's confusing for you to have a different signature and username. For example, it broke the editor review template on this page!  (see history) And the link to your contribs too.  Can you change it in your preferences to bypass the redirects?


 * Overall contribution - Contrary to my focus on areas for improvement in this review, I think you're doing fine. I definitely think it would be great if you would focus more on article improvement, as those edits you've done have been very good.  Your anti-vandalism work is also appreciated.  I hope you'll consider my suggestions to read up on policies and exercise caution when using automatic functions.  Anyways, keep up the good work!   delldot   talk  01:18, 23 November 2007 (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?
 * I just listed them.
 * 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 felt like I was causing stress, and I'll deal with it with a wikibreak.
 * I felt like I was causing stress, and I'll deal with it with a wikibreak.