Wikipedia:Editor review/Mcr616

mcr616
I've been mulling over an RfA and just wanted to see what people think I can do to improve myself. mcr616 Speak! 22:09, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

 Reviews 
 * Having interacted with this user on multiple occasions, I was curious as to see the full of this user's contributions. I would say you are doing a good job overall with your contributions, you have interacted with users, have fought vandalism, and you also have some article work. You have a nice count in the Wikipedia namespace as well. I also see you have taken some action in helping your low edit summary usage, did you change it to forced in your preferences? If not I suggest that. I believe if you have an RfA now I do not believe it would succeed. You do not have much experience and generally people will look for a couple more thousand edits. You have been editing consistently for about 5 months now, I'd suggest waiting a couple more months then go for another editor review then consider adminiship. I could also suggest you checking out Admin coaching if you have not already. Overall I think you are on the right track and in the future could make a fine administrator.   Or f e n     User Talk |  Contribs 17:58, 31 May 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?
 * I'm really happy with everything I've done for the My Chemical Romance-related articles and WP:MCR. I helped with a major revamp of the project (created the outreach, newsletter and portal sections) and I've also helped with many different issues over at The Black Parade. mcr616 Speak! 22:15, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 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 only really had one bad editing conflict. It was over The Black Parade's neutrality. I tried my best to deal with it, but frankly, the user was a troll, and I told him so. I hope to deal with stuff like that better in the future. mcr616 Speak! 22:15, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I've only really had one bad editing conflict. It was over The Black Parade's neutrality. I tried my best to deal with it, but frankly, the user was a troll, and I told him so. I hope to deal with stuff like that better in the future. mcr616 Speak! 22:15, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Additional Questions from Dfrg.msc:

Borrowed from, I'm sure he wont mind. These should test you editing skills, and show if you have any weaknesses which you can work on. So, just write your answer next to the Question. Good luck.

Speedy Delete or not: 


 * 1) CSD1
 * Though it has little or no content, I would not delete it right away, as the subject appears to be notable. If there were no other edits after the date of the page creation in a couple days, I would delete it under CSDA1. mcr616 Speak! 16:13, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * 1) CSD2
 * Again, I wouldn't add a speedy delete template to the page right away, especially if it was within minutes of the page's creation. As it appears to be a notable company, and not spam, I would check to see if there were notable, NPOV references to the company in the media. If there were not any mentions anywhere, I would delete it under CSD A7. However, if there were reputable 3rd party sources, I would expand the page to include those. mcr616 Speak! 16:13, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * 1) CSD3
 * Same as above, except this time I might be more inclined to to delete it under CSD G11 rather than


 * 1) CSD4
 * 1) CSD5

Vandalism or or not: 


 * 1)
 * 2)
 * 3)
 * 4)
 * 5)
 * 6)

Have fun! Dfrg.msc 07:44, 5 July 2007 (UTC)