Wikipedia:Editor review/Dan D. Ric

Dan D. Ric
For most of the time I've been editing I did not really think much about being an administrator. recently though, I've been looking at User creation logs, new pages and things like that and I can see how having "the tools" might be useful. Over the last several days I've reported about 30 usernames to Usernames for administrator attention, all but two or three have been blocked including some I would not have blocked so quickly, (reporting them is one thing, blocking is another). I'm still not certain about seeking adminship but I'm testing the waters. Most of my 5,000+ edits have been vandal fighting but I've created a few articles as well as 'rescuing' a couple more. I've also uploaded several images to Wikimedia Commons where I have the same username. Dan D. Ric (talk) 19:06, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

 Reviews 

I've archived this review. Please see the reason listed above. If you wish to be reviewed, please file a new request and remember to transclude it onto the main Editor review page. Netalarm  talk  06:29, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

 Questions


 * 1) What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
 * I'm most happy with Innis P. Swift, an article which thus far I have been the only contributor to. It isn't a great article, but I think it's decent. An article I rescued from two lines or so is James G. Carter and another rescue effort was Fitzpatrick's Herbal Health, merged into Temperance bar.

Actually, the entire question was not visible so what I am actually most pleased with is my vandal fighting and that is because I simply have to revert all obvious vandalism I see. Dan D. Ric (talk) 22:24, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * 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?
 * Unless you count today's Jason Charles goings on, I've not really been involved in any significant disputes.
 * Unless you count today's Jason Charles goings on, I've not really been involved in any significant disputes.

After reverting a new editor's first edit, which removed content on the Jason Charles article, I noticed that he/she kept removing the same content and another editor was reverting it. I warned Lunchtime666 about the three revert rule and when he kept reverting I reported him and he was blocked for 12 hours. While he was being blocked I found some positive information to balance the negative he was removing and added that to the article. When his block expires, I'll see what goes. Dan D. Ric (talk) 22:32, 19 April 2009 (UTC)