Wikipedia:Editor review/The C of E (2)

The C of E (2)
I have been on Wikipedia for a number of years and I have been working mainly on sports articles and lists. I am requesting this as I would like to see what feedback I get as I am planning to go for adminship again and I would like to use this to see if it would be worthwile currently. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 20:42, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

 Questions


 * 1) What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
 * I've mostly been involved in vandal fighting with rollback. I've mainly been pleased with the lists I created and assisted. I also was involved in helping promote Razer (robot) to good article status and I also have DYK credits for The Avenue and Follow On (hymn) both of which I wrote. (with 1 pending on Follow Follow from a 5x expansion)
 * 1) Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
 * Yes, I had a couple of disputes over certain issues in the past but now I take issues to the Admin's Noticeboard and policy pages opposed to arguing in fruitless debates or I just leave it if I think it will just degenerate into unessecary bickering.
 * Yes, I had a couple of disputes over certain issues in the past but now I take issues to the Admin's Noticeboard and policy pages opposed to arguing in fruitless debates or I just leave it if I think it will just degenerate into unessecary bickering.

 Reviews 

Review by Jebus989
Firstly, I think you should take on board the opposes from the only currently open RfA and consider toning down your userboxes. While some opposers note this is not a strong oppose reason, I think the single-mindedness and overwhelmingly patriotic userboxes will attract opposes. Some of the most damning would probably be the British Hong Kong userbox and the 'politically incorrect' one. Note: I am English too and have nothing against patriotism in general

Your block log will undoubtedly be brought up, though 18 months is a more than fair time to excuse wrongdoings. I had a look over some of the comments which lead to the personal attacks block (e.g. this) and haven't found anything too shocking. I realise that these blocks were brought up at your first RfA and it has likely reached the time where it would be unfair to oppose because of them.

SoxRed's tool shows a very low number of automated edits, which I found surprising - I assumed you used Huggle to rollback. As you are not, I notice that when you revert vandalism (e.g. 1, 2) you are not warning the vandals. If you use an automated tool with rollback (such as Huggle) or use the Twinkle faux rollback they can automate the warn process.

Your long-running conflict with User: O Fenian doesn't reflect too well on you. I see the user has had recent blocks and other user complaints at WP:Wikiquette alerts, but it would probably be helpful to distance yourself from further interaction with this user.

As a last point of negativity Sorry! your username and signature, as have previously been discussed at AN/I would undoubtedly come under scrutiny at a future RfA and could be considered unsuitable for an admin. Woah also was alerted to this which I find particularly shocking... Not sure what else I can say about it other than it was some time ago.

On a positive note, in your recent contributions I couldn't find a misuse of rollback and the DYKs are great work! I found a couple of AfD votes which seemed sound and logical, though you didn't necessarily quote policies.

With the above in mind, I recommend you wait 6-9 months before considering attempting a second RfA. I would say continue the great content work, if you intend to work against vandalism as an admin, be sure to warn the vandals after you revert, and report to AIV if necessary. If you plan to do any deletion work, get more involved with CSD tagging and AfD to show you have a good understanding of policy.  Je b us 9 8 9  ✰ 16:37, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Right. I can explain the reason why theres a low number of automated edits, they were made when my computer was down and I had to borrow a friend's one which was on Google Chrome and had it whereas my normal computer is on Internet Explorer and lacks it. I assumed because my sig had been passed on ANI, that it was alright. Personally, I try not to quote policy so much as I think it does make you seem a bit like a wikilawyer. Thanks for the feedback though. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 06:10, 11 April 2011 (UTC)