Wikipedia:Editor review/DCI2026

DCI2026
I would like to see how ready I would be to submit an RfA. dci &#124;  TALK   20:57, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

 Questions


 * 1) What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
 * My initial articles were of average quality, but I feel that my later work had improved greatly, and particularly enjoy working in Wikipedia's many processes and also enjoy working on reviews. I am particularly pleased by my work on Lewis Nicola, which I reviewed and helped to revise, and am pleased with my participation in various discussion areas. 1
 * 1) Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
 * I have not been involved in stressful disputes, per say, but have disagreed with other editors. I've responded by reviewing my actions, by apologizing if I've erred, and by explaining what I've done in a civil, calm way if I believe I'm right.  If in an editing dispute, I'd do the same thing, questioning both the criticism and my own actions and making a decision on what is right.
 * I have not been involved in stressful disputes, per say, but have disagreed with other editors. I've responded by reviewing my actions, by apologizing if I've erred, and by explaining what I've done in a civil, calm way if I believe I'm right.  If in an editing dispute, I'd do the same thing, questioning both the criticism and my own actions and making a decision on what is right.

 Reviews 


 * Before attempting RFA you should try out work connected with what administrators do. One important area is deletion. I see that you have nominated your own work for deletion, but nothing else at all.  You can do new page patrol and find things that should be speedy deleted, and tag them appropriately (Of course after reading the policies and guidlines).  You can look at what is in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion and see if there are things there that should be kept, and remove the speedy delete tags.  You have done a little bit at WP:AFD but you could try out more things, such as nomination, arguments to keep, and perhaps non admin closure.
 * You should mark more pages patrolled, I see you have one.
 * For the blocking capability you should prove yourself with reports at WP:AIV, and or comment on reports there.
 * You should at least try the upload capability to upload an image.
 * You can test controversy by getting involved with articles that are controversial in real life, such as abortion, religion, politics, and see if you can be fair and neutral.
 * You should use the edit summary more thoroughly so that people know what you are doing.
 * People will appreciate your content writing and improvement work. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:59, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for your comments; I feared I would get few responses, but I was fortunately wrong.  dci  &#124;  TALK   04:20, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I now see you had a speedy delete declined for being too quick off the mark. Well it is a learning experience for you.  One motto is don't bite the newcomers.  The only real hurry to delete is for harmful material for example vandalism, attacks, outings or genuine copyright violations. RFA voters will check for problematic nominations for deletion, but it is OK to have a few mistakes to start with. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:34, 4 March 2012 (UTC)