Wikipedia:Editor review/MMS2013

MMS2013
I've been a Wikipedian since November 2009, and I want to see how I'm doing.  MMS  2013  22:13, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

 Questions


 * 1) What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
 * Mostly reverting vandalism, patrolling new pages, welcoming new users, and contributing to Motto of the Day.
 * 1) Have you been in any disputes 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 distinctly remember a particularly persistent IP who vandalized an large amount of text and links on one particular article. They edited and saved multiple times, so one rollback could not have removed all the changes. Since I had to manually remove the vandalism, the IP had vandalized the page again immensely by the time I had reverted his or her changes. After I reverted him or her several times, the IP began taunting me, using my username in their new edits. I  dealt with the vandal by reporting them to AIV. If this happened again, I would remove the vandalism manually, give them a 4im on their talk page, and report them to AIV as quickly as possible.
 * 1) I'm impressed with your vandalism-fighting and MOTD contribs, but have you done any content creation (creating/expanding)?  Kayau  Voting  IS   evil 03:06, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) I'm impressed with your vandalism-fighting and MOTD contribs, but have you done any content creation (creating/expanding)?  Kayau  Voting  IS   evil 03:06, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

 Reviews 

My review of your work
Hello MMS2013,

At Editor review's page, I founded your request. Doing a lot of vandalism recovery myself, I'm happy to answer your call.

In brief, you are doing great. I searched a lot in your last days before finding anything not already perfect. Congratulation.

Of course, no body is perfect, so here is what I founded and my suggestion for improving your already good job.

First is [| this]. See around line 53. It has not been clean yet and I let you do it.

Once vandalism is hidden under anti-vandalism recovery and / or good faith edits, it becomes more and more difficult to find. When doing a recovery, it is important to go back long enough for finding all of it. My trick is to compare my edit and the history twice. The first time, I compare it against 3 - 5 unreverted edits. Sometime, you can have to go down 20 edits before finding 3 unreverted actions. After that, I go deeper and look for what looks like 3 - 5 good faith edits. These people doing edits in good faith have more chance to leave a clean article behind them.

Fortunately, you are already doing great here and this example is the only vandalism I founded remaining in your edits of the last few days.

My second suggestion is about this warning. The guy already received 2 warnings for the very same article. You could have gave him an L2 or even L3 warning. You are assuming good faith, as required by Wikipedia, and this is good. But when the same guy is doing damage over and over again in the same article, you can be more persuasive.

Again, this is really not a major point.

Oops... my 3rd example is not good : it was fixed by someone else earlier... Let me see if I find another one :-)

Ok, here is one : []. It's another case where you left something behind you. But again, I insist that your cleaning is already very good, better than the one done by most.

Overall, your work is very good : The cleaning you do is complete, You warn the user when you found them, You report them to the admin after their final warning.

That's how effective counter-vandalism has to be done.

Congratulation,

Heracles31 (talk) 23:26, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

I have read Roanoke High School and found that it had no evidence of its notability. Roanoke High School is a Public School in Martin County, North Carolina. It is one of four high schools in the Martin County School district. Because of consolidation, the school's student population will be merged with Bear Grass High School in 2010-2011. So... what? Please consider expanding the article to include things that make it notable.

The refs are OK, being third-party and reliable. However, I might be better if you include the title, publisher, author and other info about the ref. That way, people will know that your reef is reliable without clicking on the URL.

Thanks for taking you time to read this comment.  Kayau  Voting  IS   evil 05:49, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, I think high schools are inherently notable (they would generally survive AfD/prod if nominated, etc.)

MMS2013, I think you're off to a great start, and all I can suggest is more content work, and involvement in places like AfD, AN, etc. But overall, keep up the good work!  fetch  comms  ☛ 00:49, 19 February 2010 (UTC)  fetch  comms  ☛ 00:49, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Inherited isn't the word I would use for the notability of high schools, since that would suggest that no one should bother with sources; "assumed" isn't a bad term, however. See WP:HS/N.--~TPW 16:06, 11 March 2010 (UTC)