Wikipedia:Editor review/Porchcrop (2)

Porchcrop
Are my edits good enough? And are they good enough for me to become an administrator now? -Porchcrop (talk 08:25, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

 Questions


 * 1) What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
 * Vandal fighting, welcoming newcomers, answering questions to help pages, etc.
 * 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 used to, when Wikipedians were violating the Etiquette and Assume Good Faith guidelines. But I'm not encountering it as much now as I used to.
 * I used to, when Wikipedians were violating the Etiquette and Assume Good Faith guidelines. But I'm not encountering it as much now as I used to.

 Reviews 

Review by PrincessofLlyr

Here are a few things I noticed about your contributions:

1. Your vandal-fighting seems good. That's very helpful to the encyclopedia.

2. I suggest you review the criteria for speedy deletion. I noted that many of your nominations have been turned down or changed to proposed deletion. CSD is hard (I've messed it up a few times), but read up on the ones that have been changed and then keep trying!

3. Develop a thicker skin. I know this is hard, but you seem to have a tendency to argue with any criticism of yourself. It hurts, but you're going to do things wrong and people are going to tell you when you mess up. Say "thanks" and learn from it.

In conclusion, I do not think you are ready for adminship. That doesn't mean that you aren't a good editor - quite the contrary. Try to keep improving the things mentioned in your last RfA, be patient, and seek the advice of an experienced editor (or several!). Also, try to do some article building. The contrast between your article edits and userspace edits is staggering. Try to focus on improving articles and I think that will help in a future RfA. You can't learn policy from reading about it. Sometimes you have to go out and get your (virtual) hands dirty. Also, more edits. Most voters in an RfA are not going to be impressed by just ~2,500 edits. I hope this helps! Feel free to contact me here or on my talk page with any questions. PrincessofLlyr royal court 01:59, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the advice Princess. :) -Porchcrop (talk 09:11, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Additional (Short) Review by Mono
 * 1) I'm sorry, however, you do not have enough edits to become an admin. Usually, 3000 edits are required (more is better) with article building (WP:DYK, WP:GA, etc.) experience.  Vandal fighting is good, however, automated edits (with WP:HG, WP:IG, WP:TW, etc.) are worth about ⅛ an edit to me. Check out some criteria like User:Airplaneman/RFA and see how you stack up.  I have 8,000+ edits and am not an admin, so work on more article building.
 * For more info, see WP:NOTYET.


 * 1) Think about admin coaching where an admin prepares you for adminship and a WP:RFA.
 * 2) When you are criticized, think how you can impress that user. Some users are not interested in you and your mistakes (viewing them as a nuisance and even WP:VANDALISM), so try to hang around positive editors that will help you learn from your mistakes.
 * 3) Later down the road, come back to WP:ER and we'll review then.
 * ), m o ɳ o  01:27, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Also, check out User:Mono/RFA voting, as my page is deleted (I requested it - I don't use it. I'm flattered that others do :D). Airplaneman  ✈  00:10, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Review from Airplaneman
 * I didn't even know I had that!  m o ɳ o  00:11, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It's great that you are helping new users. That is a crucial part of keeping Wikipedia alive. Vandal-whacking is great too. When you're an admin, you'll be blocking them, so read up on the blocking policy!
 * Could you create User:Porchcrop/EditCounterOptIn.js (put anything you want in it - it just has to exist) so I can view your in-depth edit count? Right now, it looks like lots of edits are in the userspace; why? Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a social networking site. At RFA, if a bulk of your edits are to your userspace, voters will often question your maturity and actual content knowledge/contributions. I would look for some more article creation and or work. I know not everyone's the best writer, but working on articles to, say, make them featured or good will introduce you to a plethora of policies and guidelines, not to mention the gigantic manual of style. Also, may you elaborate on your answer to question one (the one which you ended with "etc.")? What else do you do? What are you most proud of? I would suggest reading up on deletion policies and participating in deletion discussions. Also, it'd be good to look at WP:FILE and other file policies, such as fair use. Thorough understanding of the BLP policy is also a must for adminship. In short, you aren't ready for adminship quite yet. I'll try to give a more in-depth review soon (please enable the in-depth edit counter!). Airplaneman   ✈  00:18, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I just ran into Requests for adminship/Porchcrop 3. Well, I'd say listen to the opposes. They are a valuable resource. Also, your activity level should be higher if you'd like to consider adminship, IMO (make sure school comes first, though!) And why does it say "please give this user praises" on your userpage? Praise shouldn't be asked for; it should be earned. It's like saying, "Hey, look, I did something right! Reward me!" Doing good things goes without saying... I don't know how else to put it. People might see that as being immature. To respond to your RFA statement about creating Category:Editors who are not getting feedback from their good edits and used it as a backlog, and Template:Unappreciated... well... editing Wikipedia is pretty thankless. You should do it for your own enjoyment. If you don't enjoy it, this isn't the place for you.
 * Oh really? Well it's correct that Wikipedia is a place to enjoy, but you are doing work on it and if you do good work, then you deserve praises, especially if you do hard work. And if you have been doing good work for years or months, then you deserve praises as well. It is unfair to not get praises when you deserve any. Not giving praises to any user that has been helpful to the project is against the Etiquette guideline at the point Give praises when due. Hoping you can understand this. -Porchcrop (talk 00:38, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, really. My point was that Wikipedia is a pretty thankless job. I do it for fun and self-gratification (that I have helped enrich basically the largest knowledge base on the planet &mdash; I learn, too!) barnstars and nice messages are left occasionally, but your comments make you sound like you edit for praise. This seals the deal - I don't think you're the admin type. Being an admin is even more thankless, with more people getting upset at you for your decisions. I hope you understand. Thanks, Airplaneman   ✈  02:55, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Do you have any idea why the Wikipedians are thankless, rude, and even ignore questions? It's against the Etiquette guideline. -Porchcrop (talk 04:58, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * In general, because Wikipedians are people, and people are that way. Not that they should be, but that's the way it is here and in RL. As much as I understand your desire for praise, contributing to Wikipedia is hard and many times thankless, like most things in life. Keep working, make quality contributions, and eventually someone will notice. PrincessofLlyr  royal court 17:45, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Vandal fighting can be quite depressing, I have found, as it makes it look like this encyclopedia is falling apart. That's another reason to venture more into content work, which I have begun to do recently (I used to new page patrol a ton. I now do it around once a week. Same with vandal-whacking). Airplaneman   ✈  00:30, 3 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Just to pick up on a couple of points Airplaneman made. a) "it looks like lots of edits are in the userspace": that isn't necessarily a bad thing (and, of course, he wasn't saying that it was unless you are just WP:MYSPACEing) since the edits might reflect a concern to discuss issues with other users in full before committing to actually changing or otherwise editing the content of articles; for example, most of my recent edits are actually in Wikipedia space and especially WP talk space rather than in article space because I am helping to review the Policies and Guidelines (and I am coordinator of a WikiProject). b) "Praise shouldn't be asked for; it should be earned": I 100% agree with that; I have had praise (barnstars and even emails of thanks from members of the public) but I am always surprised by it since I do not think of anything other than the attempt to help build an encyclopedia and I certainly don't expect praise, less still request it, since basically everything I have done has been in collaboration with other editors in one way or another (even where the evidence appears to contradict that statement).  Essentially, work the way you feel most comfortable working (which might involve a lot of talkpage edits for whatever reason) but don't expect any praise for what is, ultimately, one of the most thankless hobbies in the world (topped, probably, only by the elevated responsibilities of being a Sysop, a job I'm certainly in no rush to ask for)  --Jubilee♫ clipman  21:16, 8 May 2010 (UTC)