Wikipedia:Editor review/DennyColt

DennyColt
I've been actively reading Wikipedia for ages but didn't do much besides the odd IP edit here and there (typos mainly, grammar stuff) from AOL and Roadrunner previously. I logged in on a lark to fix a typo one day and to try making an article (I cheated at first, just copying the layout from another bio article and redoing the shell of the layout into the Tim Kirk article) and some vandal account immediately tagged me for vandalism. I found the ANI boards after googling for admin help to report the guy, and through that ended up finding out about RC/recent changes patrol. RC seemed like a nice way to help out on a site I loved reading, so I started to do that in my spare time. It seemed like a good way to learn the ins and outs as well, and how people did stuff by watching them work at it. I ended up making some more articles, and just tried to do a bit more here and there as I learned more of the site's ebbs and flows. I love reading about the history of Wikipedia as well, and ended up doing work on articles like the Essjay controversy, and also try to help on BLP and policy issues (still learning, there) as well when I see them. I am a firm believer in not enabling disruptive trolls or vandals. I want to make sure I've been helpful so far, and wanted to get some feedback on my work so far, and to where I could go next. Thanks! - Denny 18:54, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

 Reviews 


 * It sucks being accused of what you despise, but then again experiences like that could help you to be less affected by what others purport to think. As long as you're not retaliating in some way other than civil debate (I'm not suggesting you did - no idea since I've strayed away from that debate for the most part.) I know WP:A was a hot issue, but you imply that 9 hours was a long enough time to be satisfied with consensus, which is in reality fragile considering there are so many participants in different time zones. The 'newbies' relative to the discussion shared the reaction of many others in the poll chaos, so it is sort of understandable, and of course so is your reaction to theirs. Clicking on a random edit in your contributions, this one sounds like you're jumpy and offended - doesn't mikipeatter whether you were or not, it doesn't come across in a good way and that's when things are bound to go haywire. Here you proposed an MfD, asking for objections, and then did it 8 minutes later. It was a bold move for sure, but forking a heavy discussion like that sends the wrong message. If you don't want to see Wikipedia be like an oligarchy - after all, hearsay is that many Wikipedia policies are established by the consensus of small groups of editors each - perhaps you will want to participate in as many discussions as possible, without investing too much into any individual one. If you ever feel projectspace discussions get too intense, go ahead and take a break to work on those Back to the Future articles. You say you've planned to do this when time permits, but it appears you already have the time. Hope this helps. –Pomte 14:47, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

 Comments 


 * View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.


 * View this user's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool

 Questions


 * 1) Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?


 * My work on the RegisterFly article which I jumped into after it was made and I heard about it. It seemed like such an interesting story I couldn't resist. I made Template:BttfSidebar, and have been planning when time permits to go back and redo all the major Back to the Future articles... the three film ones, and the timeline one to try for FA status on all four. I also made Template:Wikipediahistory, which I am especially proud of mostly for being the first to think of it. I am also very proud of my efforts overall to help beat back the waves of vandals on RC patrol. Also, for the header on the Watchlist for the WP:ATT poll. Yes, I know its annoying, but it's needed, and for helping to get that horrible thing at least started. Yes, I know voting is very evil, but what could we do? It was going to start no matter what, so go for a neutral starting format I figured.




 * 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 helped out (I don't even know how I got into that mess now) on the Daniel Brandt fiasco. I wanted to see if the guy actually was notable, and found 60+ sources showing he was without trying. Given that heated cesspool of a mess, I think I held my calm very well. There was very moderate wikistress on the ATT poll issue. I'll detail. I had been trying to follow the mess that was the conversation/stalemate/anarchy on the planning talk page. After reading it a long while, it seemed like there was a couple of relative concensus points. So, on a lark, I made a quick straw poll to see what most preferred, which panned out to no one complaining about the idea. Soon there were a couple more ideas on the straw poll and forward progress. Next thing you know... the poll was live. I was super-careful to not ever remove ideas there--I actually integrated about everything suggested, and I got a bit sensitive to even implied accusations of my possiblying "owning" the poll process.


 * As no one ever said they weren't happy with my attempts at concensus building till the 9th hour, when a couple of 'newbies' relative to the work done up to that point sort of jumped on me and a few others over it. I got a bit flustered over that, since I had deliberately tried to *not* OWN the page. Anytime people asked for something or did something, I never tried to fight it, but accused of ownership anyway either outright or indirectly, which felt a bit stinging. In the future I'd like to try to be less averse to getting tagged like that, but I suppose it's bound to happen. I'm not sure why the ownership issue is so particular for me... I think its because I'm a super-firm believer in the ideals of concensus and that no-one ever should have any kind of super authoratative control over a system like this. The idea of an oligarchy terrifies me as an evil thing.


 * 1) Have you edited Wikipedia with another account? I am not asking whether you currently do, only whether you ever have. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grace Note (talk • contribs) 03:51, April 4, 2007
 * I edited anonymously here and there over the past year or two, fixing the odd error, but nothing beyond that, no. Why do you ask? - Denny 05:24, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
 * It is impossible to answer that and remain within the bounds of WP:AGF, so I decline. Grace Note 23:05, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
 * It is impossible to answer that and remain within the bounds of WP:AGF, so I decline. Grace Note 23:05, 4 April 2007 (UTC)