Wikipedia:Editor review/Connormah

Connormah
Hey, I've been editing actively for almost 2 years now, and was approached about the idea of running for adminship this summer. I'd like a review regarding where I'm at, and just general comments regarding my editing. Connormah (talk &#124; contribs) 02:27, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

 Questions


 * 1) What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
 * Occasionally, I'll do some vandal fighting, but mostly, I work at WP:RFPP, requesting protection for various pages. I have dipped into WP:UAA in the past, but I just use it to report blatant violations that I may come across while vandal fighting. Normally, I perform gnomeish edits to various pages, usually adding infoboxes, or straightening out templates. I also upload vector versions of images occasionally, and tag the orphaned non-free files for deletion. More recently, I've been updating various articles of municipal Edmonton politicians, and been doing general cleanup to various articles I come across.
 * 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?
 * About a year and a half ago, I got into a dispute with an admin over the insertion of a vector logo to an article (Bungie). I now realize I made a huge mistake in the sense that I edit warred to enforce my change, which really didn't help, but I did initiate a user talk page discussion with the other editor, which didn't help in the sense that the other editor was conversing in an uncivil tone towards me. The comments of the other editor were slightly uncivil, but I remained my composure throughout the dispute. In the future, I would definitely not edit war, but try harder to reach a user talk page consensus.
 * About a year and a half ago, I got into a dispute with an admin over the insertion of a vector logo to an article (Bungie). I now realize I made a huge mistake in the sense that I edit warred to enforce my change, which really didn't help, but I did initiate a user talk page discussion with the other editor, which didn't help in the sense that the other editor was conversing in an uncivil tone towards me. The comments of the other editor were slightly uncivil, but I remained my composure throughout the dispute. In the future, I would definitely not edit war, but try harder to reach a user talk page consensus.

 Reviews 

Review by Nomader
 * This is my first editor review, so feel free to tell me if I say anything odd.
 * Firstly, I think you meant "I've been editing actively for almost 4 years now"-- I was really surprised to see how long you'd contributed to Wikipedia.
 * I checked out your Edit count, and I'm really happy to see the amount of work that you put into the Mainspace. It's refreshing to see someone who isn't obsessed with their Userspace, so cheers on some good work.
 * I'm a huge fan of your article contributions to minor sports teams. If you're considering adminship though, I think it'd be a good idea to get a good article or a featured list or something of the sort under your belt. I've seen RfAs for candidates who are otherwise qualified but lack at least one of those kind of credits get voted down. People have odd requirements for RfAs sometimes. For the record though, I don't think a lack of them will be a deal breaker. Your other contributions show levelheadedness and maturity, which is just as valued.
 * The fact that you can admit your mistake shows your maturity level. I looked up the confrontation that you mentioned-- I happen to have worked with the editor in question that you had your disagreement with. But looking at the discussion, I feel you dealt with the situation admirably and collectively-- you may have lost your cool a little bit, but it was nothing over the top and your behavior was admirable. To be honest, I think you were on the right side of that dispute and you were well within your rights to stand up for what you believed in. Cheers for maturity again.
 * I looked at a random amount of the recent images you've added to Wikipedia lately-- they had quality fair use rationales and looked appropriate. I'm not an expert or anything but you seem to have the hang of it.
 * I glanced over a few of your edits at RFP and I was satisfied that your comments there were timely and thoughtful. If you made a comment on another article it was a pertinent question or comment, and your most recent requests for move or semi-protection were in order. I didn't delve too deep here though so if someone else wants to review it, be my guest.
 * I didn't vote on your previous RfA, but I do remember seeing it-- I tend to lurk quite a bit. I looked it up and noticed that many of your problems were based with CSD knowledge. To be fair, I have probably quite a bit less knowledge in that department than you do, so I can't really comment on it too extensively. Just remember that if you nominate something for Speedy deletion to do a quick google check to see if there's any possibility of notability, especially if you're requesting a speedy based on CSD A7.
 * Connormah, you're an outstanding editor from what I'm able to tell, and Wikipedia would do well to have more editors of your caliber. If you want a foolproof RfA, just remember to check for notability before tagging with CSD A7 and see if you can get an article credit or two (although the latter's not as important). Cheers and good luck! -- Nomader (Talk) 06:20, 16 June 2010 (UTC)