Wikipedia:Editor review/Philip Gronowski

User:Philip Gronowski
Well I was going to go for a RFA soon and thought that it would be better to get an Editor Review before doing so. Feel free to say anything you want about me, I'll try to improve upon it. Philip  Gronowski  Contribs  00:30, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

 Reviews 

You have god all round edits to wikipedia and contribute to Afd which is good for an Rfa candidate. You also have a high ratio of mainspace edits as well which is also good. You are a good vandal fighter, however I have a couple of pointers on this
 * At the time of my review, you have 1820 edits and 800+ mainspace edits. This is bar minimum- but I appreciate your vandalism fighting and good edit summary usage. Although your experience as a Wikipedian has been a little over six months, your edits seem to be unsteady...a good months to two months time of solid editing should make you eligible for RfA. Feel free to edit and improve on places you may be lacking. Sr13 (T|C) Editor review 05:04, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
 * When reverting vandilism, be more precise with your edit summaries, you seam to just type RV, but which version have you reverted to? I like to see 'reverted version by x to version byy, it is just more informative.
 * You could also pay more attention to other warnings on users talk space. With IP 167.86.1.223, less than an hour previously he had been given a final warning and an only wanring. At this point he should have been reported to AIV for a block but you preceeded to give him yet another warning. Vandals won't take things seriously if we don't do what we say we're going to do.

Other comments I have are; Anyway, good look with Rfa if you decide to go for it! Ryan Postlethwaite See the mess I've created or let's have banter 22:40, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Don't feed the troll! You seam to have done this below in your editor review!!
 * Try and keep a steady count of 300 edits a month if you are thinking of going for Rfa, this is the bare minimum.
 * The reason I did not report the vandal to AIV was because it was a school IP. I generally have a personal preference of not getting school accounts blocked and perhaps discouraging future editors. For the RV part, I find that it really doesn't suit me. I usually do have better summaries on speedy deletion pages and AFDs . I'll try to take it into consideration though. I am going into exams (high schooler... heh) so I won't be able the 300 per month for January. Oh, I really got carried away with the other user.  Philip   Gronowski  Contribs  23:56, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * fair crack, I guess a lot of my comments are my personal preferences! Anyway, good luck with Rfa if you decide to go for it Ryan Postlethwaite See the mess I've created or let's have banter 00:06, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

 Comments 

RE Blog Attack- the fact that user Gronowski was WRONG, and did not know what he was talking about is what led to him being questioned by members of the site who DID know what he was talking about. This is a junior high school student from a second rate education system acting like he is an Encyclopedia researcher. And then he runs around like a truant complaining to stoners that he is under attack. Fact- Junior edits articles without knowledge and education. Fact- Junior has no life experience. Fact- Junior is a tattletale. Of course, as we have learned, the system is more important than the truth so I for one expect this nimrod to be the head of Wkipedia within a year. Former Wikipedian Believer 207.6.209.233 03:49, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I for one, expect a person who is obviously above me in every way not to resort to petty name calling. But as a "junior high school student" (In Canada Grade 11 is considered senior, eh) with no life experience in my past 16 years of living, what am I to say? Philip   Gronowski  Contribs  04:27, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

YOu can say you are sorry and give it up. There are no names here- you are my Junior, you are a tattletale and you are not very bright. Eh, indeed. 207.6.209.233 04:30, 11 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Ooooh... that cut me deep. Next you are going to tell me I am a bad boy that should go sit in the corner. Philip   Gronowski  Contribs  04:36, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, the corner is full of waste products. You can stay at the kiddie table where you belong. 207.6.209.233 20:01, 11 January 2007 (UTC)


 * 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 am particularly pleased about my contributions to New Pages Patrolling and general vandal fighting. Though people who base their entire Wikipedia outputs on such things are generally frowned upon, I believe it to be a very important task within Wikipedia. Without the removal of vandalism and pages which meet A7 criteria then Wikipedia as a project would not be respected or used. I am also very, very opposed to spam on Wikipedia and I try my hardest to see it all removed.
 * 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?
 * Most definitely. Most recently I removed a spam link to a blog fromSusan Atkins and related people (Charles Manson, Abigail Folger, Sharon Tate, Wojciech Frykowski, Bobby Beausoleil etc.) and triggered a mass spamming attack by readers of that blog. I received many personal attacks and was ridiculed (along with another user) on that blog. I just ignored the personal attacks and went on with my editing, focusing mainly on removing the mass spamming by the readers of that blog. I received support from several members of the Wikipedia community and followed policy. I really cannot see anything I need to improve upon in regards to that conflict.
 * Most definitely. Most recently I removed a spam link to a blog fromSusan Atkins and related people (Charles Manson, Abigail Folger, Sharon Tate, Wojciech Frykowski, Bobby Beausoleil etc.) and triggered a mass spamming attack by readers of that blog. I received many personal attacks and was ridiculed (along with another user) on that blog. I just ignored the personal attacks and went on with my editing, focusing mainly on removing the mass spamming by the readers of that blog. I received support from several members of the Wikipedia community and followed policy. I really cannot see anything I need to improve upon in regards to that conflict.


 * In another area I tagged an article for Speedy Deletion and the tag was removed. It was then nominated for deletion by a different user. I received a few personal attacks from a user and some criticism which I did not entirely agree with. I warned the user about policy about personal attacks and very briefly explained my reasoning behind my Speedy Deletion nomination. The user continued with personal attacks and made a few more criticisms. I responded again on their talk page and in detail explained the criticisms. They never responded and I decided not to pursue anything with the user. I continue to think I was right about that article.


 * I also got caught up in a large spam/external links problem at Verónica Castro (which is mostly solved for that matter), but that is it for the most part.