Wikipedia:Editor review/Shapiros10 2

Shapiros10
I want to know how I'm doing, and what to improve on. Shapiros10  contact me My work 19:33, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

 Reviews 
 * 1) Review by Gears of War.I have already searched your edits thouroly, and Im am quite pleased. You kick vandalism ass(forgive my language), you are always helpful with articles under heavy vandalism, and you have a good sense of humor and have earned a place not to be seen as a 12 year old but as a good wholesome editor. I will have a friendly conversation with User:RMHED, and I would like for you to join me when I start the discussion...because you have the makings of a great admin. BUT i would like to see you working more with images.Gears Of War  21:02, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * 2) Most of the edits seem good quality, and I appreciate the high number of userpage edits is most likely due to your principal task (reverting vandalism) which involves warning vandal-tastic users. I would recommend you go to your preferences and check the button which lets wikipedia remind you if you leave a blank edit summary box; it makes it a lot easier for other users. If you're looking at this from a "should I apply for admin again" angle, i'd have to say no as an answer. Firstly, the age is kind of an issue, not in itself but because admins need to be mature. Age has an influence on that (although it's obviously not the only one) and, on failing an RfA creating a load of sockpuppets to disrupt the site kind of proves the doubters points; it reads as if you're going "waah, it isn't fair!". Wikipedia likes mature people for admins, and that isn't the action of a mature person. In addition, you should probably spread out more; create some articles, contribute to AfD and MfD discussions and take part in RfA's as a voter yourself. Admins need to be spread out in terms of what they've contributed, and doing that would help your case a lot. Finally, time. Give it maybe a couple of years (long time, I know) before you apply again; it will shut up a lot of the people criticising your age and 2 years sticking to the straight and narrow more than makes up for the sockpuppetry. Sorry if this isn't what you were looking for in editor review, or if you think i've been a bit too damning, but I do hope you find this useful :). Feel free to contact me on my talk page with any follow up questions/comments/whatnot. Ironholds 22:05, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * 3) Review by Editorofthewiki Don't get too upset about the ageism issue--its followers with eventually die out in a battle from the defenders of the wiki. :) On a more serious note, your contribs seem to be of the top caliber, but please don't view adminship as the end-all of everything. At WT:RFA, you stated that you are a lousy article writer; that's fine, but I still think you need more writing experiance. At least, that's my main focus here, and if you need help finding an article to write/expand just ask me, as I have a boatload of work in front of me. I rarely revert vandalism, mostly because users like yourself beat me to it! Great job anyway, and remember, those at RFA do not love every contribution of yours to be twinkle/huggle/etc. I'm an Editorofthewiki[citation needed] 03:52, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * 4) A lot of vandalism reversion, which is awesome, but I would move more into mainspace editing and such. Try taking up an article that interests you and add to it, that's always fun. I never see you around AfD, or RfA, or XfD, or any of that stuff. I would suggest branching out in that way too. Leonard( Bloom ) 21:38, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 5) Review by Ecoleetage Okay, I changed my mind about reviewing you after seeing your article contributions today about The High Scene -- great job! There is absolutely nothing wrong with your article creation skills, and I would love to see more power pop articles online.  I am very happy to see you creating content.  I know you are a fine anti-vandal fighter, as you've knocked off a miscreant who was mucking up my user page.  I would echo Leonard Bloom's advice and ask that you participate more in the AfD section -- nominating articles, commenting on the articles' value to Wikipedia (your opinion is valued) and doing non-admin closures (which is my favourite part of AfD).  You actually meet a lot of great people in the AfD pages -- the best Wikipedians I know can be found contributing to those discussions. I would also stress that you please NOT take Wikipedia too seriously.  There is a surplus of individuals who get carried away here, and too often people get very emotional if something irks them.  Don't take all of this too seriously.  I might stress a bit less social networking, though I have to admit that Keeper's talk page can be fun (I loved your imagined version of me!).  Otherwise, I am enjoying your contributions and I hope to see more fine things from you! Ecoleetage (talk) 16:04, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 6) Review by RyanLupin I have you on my watchlist, I have been monitoring your activity these past few weeks, I've thoroughly assessed your contribs and I can safely say, you have the makings of a fine contributor. Forget everything that has happened in the past, your sockpuppetry case is an unfortunate start to your wikipedia career but like I've said many times, everyone deserves the right to a second chance; a clean slate. With that in mind, I promise to work closely with you, to guide you through all aspects of wikipedia, you have such a clearcut desire to help the project and I promise to help you gain a foothold on your standing here as a member. You've proven to be a fine vandalism reverter, you've shown interest in WP:ACC, WP:RFA and I'm sure LaraLove‎ will agree with me that you are a lot more maturer than most 12 year olds. ——RyanLupin • (talk) 00:57, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 7) Review by Diligent Terrier - Shapiros10 is a good editor, who is trying very hard. It's a good thing he was unblocked, or Wikipedia would have missed out on a great contributor.  You're diligent in many areas of Wikipedia, including XfD, RfA, vandal fighting, and more.  Keep on creating more articles, too.  I've enjoyed working with you in the past, and I'm looking forward to working with you in the future.  Cheers, «  Diligent Terrier    (talk)  17:08, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 8) Review by Ryan - Sam is a good friend of mine. I know he is honestly doing his best. I'm sorry that some others are focusing on his age so much that they don't see that.
 * More experience will do you good, Sam, but other than that, the only thing I have to say is work on your temper a bit. You're not too bad, but you seem to overreact often. That being said, You're doing a great job! - Ryan (my desk) 17:19, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


 * 1) Review by  – Well, you asked me to be brutally honest, so I will be. I am not at all impressed with how you handled the recent dispute over Radio Wikipedia and WikiUpdate. This is not directed solely at you, and I know the others had their part to play, but your behaviour also helped to exacerbate the situation further than it needed to go. Your conduct on StewieGriffin!'s talk page, here, is certainly not appropriate. Despite Stewie telling you to leave it be, you didn't; you carried on with the provocations. None of us are perfect, but you stirred up drama when there was no need for it. It came to a point at which threatened to block any party for more disruption. You're a good user, so I'm sure you'll have no problems letting this go now – no more edits to Stewie's talk page about WikiUpdate or Radio Wikipedia, no more intimidation or provocation. I know the other parties are also at fault in this, and I know things got heated: however, I think your time would be better spent working on your own projects rather than focussing on others. If anyone tries to disrupt something you're working on, ignore it; Wikipedia gets thousands of non-constructive edits daily, but we confronting the perpetrator head-on just wastes time. Apart from this, you've been doing some good work, so I hope you keep it up! Just bear this in mind as constructive criticism (aimed to help, not chastise). All the best, PeterSymonds  (talk)  18:44, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 2) Review by Xp54321- Sorry it took me so long to get here but I've been busy. Okay I'm going to be brutal. Sorry Sam. First off that Radio Wikipedia and WikiUpdate dispute was absolutely ridiculous. I feel you could have done a much better job handling that. I feel you need to get you temper under control. Quite a few editors have expressed the opinion that you over react too much. I'd like for you to try to avoid areas of drama, especially WP:RFA. I agree with Leo, try expanding what you do around here. You'll find great joy in improving an article. But vandal-fighting is great for whenever you get bored.:)--Xp54321 (<font color="4CBB17">Hello! • <font color="4CBB17">Contribs ) 02:00, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

 Comments 


 * View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool


 * 1) This Editor Review was spammed into one of the WP IRC channels - not exactly a glowing sign of maturity, I'd say. Nick (talk) 17:00, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 2) I just wanted a review.  I know now that what i did was wrong Mr. Nick.  Shapiros10  <sup style="color:chocolate;">contact me <sub style="color:#3D2B1F;">My work  17:01, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

 Questions


 * 1) Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * Reverting vandalism, newpage patrolling, creating stubs.
 * 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?
 * yes. I may have come off a bit harsh, but the user I conflicted with was acting extremely childish and dramatic, more so than needed.  I have also had a conflict with the admin user:Metros, accusing him of assuming bad faith. Needless to say, nobody's perfect, and i'm not one to break the mold.
 * 1) Why did you create a sockpuppet account for the single purpose of AfDing Pear? Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 17:10, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 2) because I was feeling mad at wikipedia, and felt i was being unfairly treated. Being immature, I made the horrible decision of taking it out on Wikipedia.  And the same goes for all of the other accounts I have used to vandalize.  I hope this answer satisfies whoever is reading this, because it's the best i can do.  Shapiros10  <sup style="color:chocolate;">contact me <sub style="color:#3D2B1F;">My work  17:14, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 3) Why do you edit on Wikipedia? This is a very interesting question as most of my friends will use Wikipedia for information but regard contributing as something only nerds do. Obviously they are wrong but why you contribute?--<font color="0070FF">Xp54321 (<font color="4CBB17">Hello! • <font color="4CBB17">Contribs ) 02:03, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 4) Tough question :).  Well, I edit because i think it's a fun thing to do, creating a free encyclopedia.  I think the concept is extremely interesting, and want to be a part of it.  Shapiros10  <sup style="color:chocolate;">contact me <sub style="color:#3D2B1F;">My work  12:09, 25 August 2008 (UTC)


 * 1) Looking back on the past, what action on Wikipedia do you most regret (besides the trolls)? From Tagi to Bottom, My  Survivor Partay (Wobbuffet!. Dats right) 23:23, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * 2) There's no one time that I regret.  But i have had three conflicts during my time here with certain users (StewieGriffin!, Metros and MBisanz, once again many apologies), and I regret being a part of those conflicts.  Sam  Blab 01:10, 18 October 2008 (UTC)