Wikipedia:Editor review/Elkman

Elkman
I'm trying to figure out if my edits are still useful here. Since I failed spectacularly at adminship in January, I gave up the tools. I haven't even been contributing much since mid-February when I returned from vacation. Frankly, I'm not sure if the areas I work in are all that important any more, either, based on the popularity of the subject matter.

I've worked mostly on stuff on the National Register of Historic Places within the last several months, mostly on properties within Minnesota. But honestly, I'm not sure how many people care about things like old bridges and old buildings. A house in Minnetonka doesn't bring in the ratings like an up-and-coming wrestler does.

I think I might be burning out.

Elkman (Elkspeak) 17:08, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

 Reviews 


 * I'm very appreciative of your edits. They look very helpful, and I would rather read an article about the Charles H. Burwell House than a wrestler... Anyways, your edits are very strong and informative.  I would recommend maybe working at WP:FAC; you could also nominate one of the articles you're interested in.  Thanks!   -  down  load  |   sign!  21:31, 18 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Review by doncram I also am very appreciative of your edits. I cannot make myself go review your temporary involvement with professional wrestling, but I think your work on Minnesota historic sites is great, and I think you have not ever been properly appreciated for your personal website and programming support for U.S. National Register of Historic Places, which has been awesome.  On the Minnesota sites, I do wish that the Hennepin County list--which is great--would be put forward for FLC consideration.  It would be a leading example for wp:NRHP, which has otherwise floundered in terms of getting FL recognition;  it would be a big help.  In your individual articles about Minnesota sites, I have always found your work to be very good.  I like your judgment in general, including, for example, your choice to combine 5 Minnesota towns' water towers listed on the NRHP into one very nice article.  About your website and programming support on the NRHP system, I am in awe of how big an effect you have had.  I wonder if you follow the hits on your own website, or not.  This involves the disambiguation page creator tool and the "who has" tool, which I have used hundreds or thousands of times.  This involves the individual NRHP infobox generator, which has created/enabled a whole sport of taking pics and creating pages about NRHP sites, nation-wide.  There are about 20,000 articles using the NRHP infobox, I believe;  this could not be achieved without your foresight to create your infobox generator and donate your database programming and your webpage support of that.  The NRHP list-table generator, in particular is a HUGE help.  It shows the way for possible treatments of historic sites in England, where there are 1/2 million sites to cover, and Switzerland, and other countries, just beginning to be addressed in new WikiProject Historic Sites.  I also appreciate the judgment you have shown in further developing, or not, your NRHP-related tools.  It has been a big help that you would simply decide certain things, like to change the generator several times, like to include a warning notice that the infobox generator should not be used to create one sentence articles, and like to decide to stop showing "unknown" or "not available" for the architecture descriptions.  These were decisions that people expressed opinions about at wt:nrhp, on both sides, but your just making the decisions was most helpful, simply a decision needed to be made.  So, your impact in Wikipedia has been really huge, and is only partly reflected in your edits within wikipedia directly.  I like your edits, and I like what you've done to support on NRHP using your dime, via the outside system. doncram (talk) 22:41, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, here are some suggestions: A main suggestion would be to build your userpage. I like to see what barnstars and good/featured/rescued article credits my fellow editors have.  Second, perhaps be a bit more open-minded in AfDs.  We have a diverse group of editors and readers and as such per Editors matter, we need not be too tied down by "notability" as an inclusion criteria, in cases of copy vios, the right approach might be a delete and then rewrite rather than just a delete, and finally if a redirect is possible, go with that rather than a redlink.  I am referring to Articles for deletion/Star Simpson, Articles for deletion/List of single-point urban interchanges, Articles for deletion/Fluid management, Articles for deletion/Family guy episode, Articles for deletion/Chris Albano, and Articles for deletion/Chris Albano.  With that said, I thought you made solid arguments in Articles for deletion/Illuminati in popular culture, Articles for deletion/Coyotes in popular culture, and Articles for deletion/Emily Hagins and a good close at Articles for deletion/Godzilla in popular culture.  Based on these last few, I encourage you to join WikiProject Popular Culture and help us to rescue the articles listed there under deletion discussion and maybe get some good or featured credits out of the articles within the scope of that project as well.  Few experiences on Wikipedia are more rewarding than rescuing articles or bringing them to good or Did you know status!  :)  Anyway, I hope these suggestions help.  Best, --A NobodyMy talk 16:28, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

 Comments 


 * View this user's edit count using X!'s counter


 * I can't find the request for adminship you reference, I can only find a successful one from 2007. Where is the one referenced? &mdash; neuro  (talk) (review) 19:40, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I was an admin from 2007 until January 15, 2009. By failing at adminship, I meant that I was doing such a bad job at it that the community no longer had trust in me, at which point I gave up the tools.  I'm not asking for them back.  --Elkman (Elkspeak) 20:02, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

 Questions


 * 1) Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * I worked on bringing Glacier National Park (U.S.) to featured article status, collaborating with User:MONGO. I also worked on making Minnesota a featured article, along with others at WP:WPMN, and I worked on making History of Minnesota a featured article, putting in a large share of the edits, but with many contributions from others.
 * I also completed National Register of Historic Places listings in Hennepin County, Minnesota fairly recently, having worked on the majority of the articles in the list. I'd submit it for featured list status, but at this point it seems rather self-serving.
 * 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've been in way too many conflicts as an admin. I caused a huge fiasco with the wrestling project in my rather poor attempts to handle a dispute at .  Frankly, it wasn't my business to get involved in that at all.  When I started receiving personal attacks from other editors there, I responded in kind, and quickly found out that what I did was definitely crossing the line.
 * Since that fiasco and since my dead-minning, I haven't done anything admin-like, I've severely limited my involvement in talk space and Wikipedia space, and I've generally tried to mind my own business.
 * Since that fiasco and since my dead-minning, I haven't done anything admin-like, I've severely limited my involvement in talk space and Wikipedia space, and I've generally tried to mind my own business.


 * 1) In the Pro Wrestling alleged fiasco, where is the dispute? I see only 2 entries by Elkman in the article mentioned, setting protection and removing it later, more than 500 edits ago by the way.  In the Talk page archives, there is Talk:List of World Wrestling Entertainment employees/Archive 16 where some opposed protection to the page being applied, but others supported it as very reasonable given previous activity, etc.  I don't find/see any consensus that Elkman's administrator type involvement there was anything but constructive.  E-man, don't be too hard on yourself!  Or, is there something i am missing? doncram (talk) 23:16, 19 March 2009 (UTC)