Wikipedia:Editor review/Paul2387 (3)

Paul2387
I am requesting this review as I feel I am almost ready for the mop and need other editors opinions on wether I'm ready or not Paul 2387  chat  16:03, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

 Questions


 * 1) What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
 * My primary contributions must be those related to Coronation Street as I am helping develop those pages and adding more historical info
 * 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 have had a few disputes over editing but they haven't caused me stress, If there's any problems I discuss them first and try to resolve them as much as possible.
 * I have had a few disputes over editing but they haven't caused me stress, If there's any problems I discuss them first and try to resolve them as much as possible.

 Reviews 

After reviewing a bit of your edit history and seeing your user page, I'm going to alter my usual format I use for editor reviews. Pay close attention to the sentence after this one because it's very important... The community is not likely to give the tools to someone who is too eager to have them. Honestly, the only thing missing from your userpage is a banner at the top which says "Paul2387 for Admin '10!!!" I'm not trying to be mean, just trying to be blunt and maybe you'll finally understand since you've already had a few editor reviews you've ignored and have been through at least 3 failed RfA's... If you really want the mop, you're going about it the wrong way and honestly, for the wrong reasons. The community sees it not as a trophy or brass ring to give out, but a responsibility given to those we trust. If the perception is that you are here only to become admin or bureaucrat, you will only become frustrated because you will never get it. Now that I have gotten that out of the way, I'll start my usual review:
 * Review by VictorianMutant:
 * Civility towards the community: No huge problems here, other than applying for admin so many times so quickly...
 * Article contributions: Your contribution isn't very prolific, but when you do edit you do a pretty good job. I would try to branch out from TV articles because they are heavy traffic areas which lots of people edit. Find an article or two which interest you which need major work in an area which interests you, but are lightly edited. Those are the type of articles which are enjoyable to write because you can "create a masterpiece" and turn those articles into GA's or even FA's. Article building should occupy 90% of your time at this point in time.
 * Edit count analysis: Your graph doesn't look bad. 40% of edits in article space is better than most nowadays. Your edits to user space are a little heavy (due to the "Party Manifesto" you've put on your user page). You should try to get some more experience with files and categories.
 * RfA-worthiness: Forget about it right now! I'm serious- the more you aim for admin, the more unlikely it will be to ever happen. Don't even think about it for at least a year.
 * Final thoughts: Specific suggestions- (1) Redo your user page. Remove any and all references to wanting to be an admin or 'crat. Keep the goal section, but change it. Your goals are to write x number of GA's, x number of FA's, etc. (2) Become a grunt interested in building the encyclopedia first and foremost. Go to the community portal and look in the Collaborations and Help out sections. Pick a couple of tasks which sound interesting and become active in those. That's how you will become known to others in the community in a positive way. (3) Don't even think of an RfA for at least a year. Stay away from areas one would normally be seen as "springboards" to admin (xfD's, RfA's etc.) Focus on article building and then after a year branch out a little further and maybe the community will have the trust in you to make you an admin. I know you're likely to see this review as negative, but you shouldn't. I think your contributions to the community are great, but your view of the "way things are" is far off from reality. Thanks, VictorianMutant (talk) 17:48, 21 September 2010 (UTC)