Wikipedia:Editor review/Esskater11

Esskater11
I want to be reviews to see where i stand as an editor, my future hope is to become an admin but before i go thorugh coaching i want to see where i stand Jack The Pumpkin King 23:20, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

 Reviews 


 * Your edits are generally pretty good, although I would recommend that you be sure to check your spelling and capitalization, especially of lone Is.--LWF 23:42, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Review by Hdt83
Hi there, reviewing your contribs, you are a pretty good contributer and are involved in things like vandal-fighting and speedy deletions and such. I also noticed that you expressed interest in becoming an admin. Some suggestions for you to improve include:
 * Try to improve an article to Good Article status. While vandal-fighting is good, article writing is also important and can help boost support at RFA.
 * I noticed that you haven't been using edit summaries for every edit. Its good to get in the habit of writing at least something so other editors can tell what you were doing. If you feel like you can't remember to write an edit summary, you can go in to your preferences to prompt for edit summaries.

Overall, you seem to be a good and helpful editor. :) -- Hdt 83     Chat 00:34, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

 Comments 


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

 Questions


 * 1) Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * I feel that any edit that did any sort of good are ones i am pleased of
 * 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 have been in a edit conflict with in the "common ww2 infantry weapons" page. We had a dissagremnet over the content of some section but worked it out peacfully. Also i hope many other conlficts i hope not to have go like this
 * 1) Could you please explain this report to WP:AIV and how you came to the conclusion that this is a "vandalism only account"? Caknuck 06:46, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Could you please explain this report to WP:AIV and how you came to the conclusion that this is a "vandalism only account"? Caknuck 06:46, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Could you please explain this report to WP:AIV and how you came to the conclusion that this is a "vandalism only account"? Caknuck 06:46, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

I cant seem to know why i did it. Either i acidently cliked on the wrong name or at the time his contro at the time Jack THE Pumpkin KING 03:48, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletions
You seem to be rather trigger-happy with your speedy deletion requests (I hope you're not the same with your guns!). For example from the last 3 days:

John Bataller - tagged 1 minute after creation

Gabriela Madalosso - 1 minute

MATH (band) - 6 minutes

I'm Not Gonna Teach Your Boyfriend How To Dance With You - 7 minutes

Chrome (satellite radio) - 0 minutes!

Vatican Publishing House - 4 minutes

Please see WP:NPP for guidance.

In the last example above, which I created, you nominated under WP:CSD even though there was a very clear assertion of importance/significance. This caused me to then spend my time contesting deletion rather than working on the article.

Also you should not be marking requests for speedy deletion as minor edits. Nothing could be more major. Phil Bridger 09:25, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. Eskater 11 16:14, 12 November 2007 (UTC)