Wikipedia:Editor review/Katarighe

Katarighe
STATEMENT Mohamed Aden Ighe (talk) 20:54, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

 Questions


 * 1) What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
 * My primary contributions to Wikipedia is on most articles. I always patrol on new pages. I'm tying my best effort to change well, and I do some maintenance such as tagging articles, that need maintenance or deletion process. Sometimes I revert vandalism and warning/reporting users for vandalism. I always Assume Good Faith on other user but I'm looking forward to seek admin ship in June 2012 if I can. I've won some barn-stars for my best efforts and AGF on users. I contribute many articles relating to terrorism or other conflicts such as Europe, Asia and Africa.
 * 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.
 * No, I haven't been ever been involved in any major conflicts in Wikipedia, If there is a problem I have or there is, I may solve it step by step finding out.
 * No, I haven't been ever been involved in any major conflicts in Wikipedia, If there is a problem I have or there is, I may solve it step by step finding out.

 Reviews 
 * As I mentioned at your talk page, the majority of your reports to WP:RFPP are declined. The main reason is that you jump the gun and ask for protection of articles that have only been vandalized or disrupted a few times. Since you have indicated an interest in becoming an admin I must tell you that such reports show a lack of understanding of the relevant policy, and continuing to make them will severely damage your chances. That is not to say you should stop making reports, but rather that you should be more thorough in checking to see if protection is warranted first.
 * I would also note that the first question here is similar to one of the standard questions at RFA, and your answer to that question is not satisfactory. In fact "My primary contributions to Wikipedia is on most articles." is just nonsense. Admins are expected to be able to communicate clearly with other users. If a user wants to know why you blocked them, or deleted an article, you need to be able to explain it to them in a meaningful way.


 * I would advise you to not get too hung up on pursuing adminship. It looks like you selected June because you first began editing in June of this year. Some people are ready after a year, and some are not. It is not just a matter of time but a matter of demonstrating the qualities expected of an administrator. As I've mentioned already, the ability to interpret policies governing admin actions such as protection, blocking, deletion, etc is one of those qualities and communication is another. You need a good bit of work in both those areas. Again, not trying to discourage you, but rather to prevent you from rushing into a situation you are not fully prepared for. On the whole I see a user who is motivated by a sincere desire to improve Wikipedia, which is exactly what we need. You just need to slow it down and take the time to understand the intent behind the policies when patrolling new pages and taking other actions that can effect others' work. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:16, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notice, I will try hard. Mohamed Aden Ighe (talk) 22:19, 8 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment from  Kudpung
 * I understand your enthusiasm, but  if  you are pursuing  adminship, you  would need to  read WP:Advice for RfA  candidates,  You  may  also wish to make your own set of criteria for voting - there are no  rules about  taking  content  from  other editors'  user pages, but  it would be nice to  let  them  know you  appreciate their work. My  criteria are very  strict, but  I  do  a lot  of research  before voting, and sometimes it  takes me as much  as one hour to  be sure of my  vote. I'm  not  sure that  you  are fully  aware of the importance of the RfA  system. If you  wish  to  learn more about  it, don't  hesitate to  ask me on  my  talk page.  I'll  also  add, that  blanking  constructive comments from  your talk  page is not  something  that  demonstrates a good will  to  communicate with  others. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:54, 8 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment from Vibhijain
 * You have done good work regarding new articles. You seems to be very enthusiastic, which is a very good thing. I think you can be a good admin in future. As Kudpung said, RfA system is highly important, you should set your own criteria. Also, blanking comments like advises or criticism of your edits is a serious thing, and you should strongly refrain from doing so. :) ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛  Talk Email 10:36, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

I do like your editing on Wikipedia, but I did find some things, so first of all, I respect your decision of blanking this editor review. But you should do it sparingly, and ER is not to show off to other users that others like you. So I actually removed a comment from my first ER. It was since the user (without naming) was un-constructive, and was going into criticizing personal things like my userpage.
 * Comment from

So, about user rights: User rights are a privilege, not rights as in the name. You can lose them, as I did (well not for abusing them, for a week's wikibreak). I know that you want to gain adminship. It's not a trophy, or a level-up. It's just some tools cluttering up space. I know as a sysop on different projects. Don't plan having a RfA, since you should go with your guts, so 1 day, where you get a surge of boldness, so to RfA! But do some maintenance work with what you got already! You may request sysops for every task.

Now this is more of a other wikis affairs, but asking a bureaucrat if you can be a sysop since he (she) is a bureaucrat will almost always be denied as it is like circumventing a block, but for getting permission. Do the request on the appropriate page.

This has been alot, and I hope it's okay. Your editing is good, but here's just things to be better for. It may be a bit much, but I'm sure you ca stomach it! Ebe 123  (+) $talk Contribs$ 14:59, 23 October 2011 (UTC)