Wikipedia:Editor review/The Thing That Should Not Be 2

The Thing That Should Not Be
Hi there. The vandalism is slowing down for the summer, and my 3rd year of editing Wikipedia is approaching, so I figured I would ask for some input regarding my editing. I particularly would like input regarding my CSD nominations and my UAA reports. The Thing //  Talk  //  Contribs  17:08, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

 Questions


 * 1) What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
 * I primarily engage in vandal-fighting, CSD tagging, and UAA reporting. Every once in a while I'll venture into more discussion-related places like WP:ANI or WT:RFA.
 * 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?
 * Other than the vandals that attack me for reverting their edits, the only disputes have been from the rare occasion where I revert something that was in good faith. When those happen I usually fix my error and apologize. I rarely become confrontational. I also notice that I seem to get a lot less complaints, vandalistic or otherwise, than other people who do vandal-fighting.
 * Other than the vandals that attack me for reverting their edits, the only disputes have been from the rare occasion where I revert something that was in good faith. When those happen I usually fix my error and apologize. I rarely become confrontational. I also notice that I seem to get a lot less complaints, vandalistic or otherwise, than other people who do vandal-fighting.

 Reviews 
 * More article work, please. There's not much else to comment on other than that you're one of the most speedy users to revert that I've seen active on Wikipedia, and I've also seen you quite a bit on UAA, as I used to be active in that area.  IShadowed  ✰  20:06, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Well I'm more of a Wikignome than a writer, so to speak. The Thing  //  Talk  //  Contribs  18:33, 14 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Same as IShadowed. Writing's not that bad, really ;) Maybe slow down a bit sometimes on Huggle, but it's not bad overall. Also, you could consider participating more at places like RfA, AfD, etc.  — fetch ·  comms   02:20, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Is there anything problematic with my Huggling that needs to be addressed at all? And I do vote in RfA's occasionally. As a side note, I started a thread on WT:RFA once that, as far as I'm concerned, saved an RfA from diving into the ground. The Thing  //  Talk  //  Contribs  18:33, 14 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Not really too much to say (well, maybe quite some things), except you are doing a great job keeping up the Huggling (for almost two years!). One comment I would like to make is regarding XFDs - your speedy deletions are pretty good, and it seems that you are developing experience as you nominate pages for speedy deletions. I think that it would be great to see you participate at deletion discussions just for you to kind of get a start at discussing whether an article/category/file/etc should be deleted. I don't know if you have already, but I thought it'd be cool to see some comments there. :-) I also wonder about your times of using Huggle - you often appear to make one or two revert & warns, then stop for a while, then revert again after an hour. It's like an intermittent schedule that you stick to. So, those are my comments. Keep up the great work! Schfifty  3  02:53, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
 * For my Huggling, yes, that's true. Mainly because the vandalism has slowed down for the summer. And I have participated in an AFD now and then, and I think I nominated one article for deletion a while back... I'll have to look. The Thing  //  Talk  //  Contribs  18:33, 14 July 2010 (UTC)


 * RfA is getting too picky, but in my opinion you should be very proud that, as a wikignome, you were able to achieve a majority of supports in your most recent one. Very few candidates with a similar background would have been able to do that, and that's testament to the quality of your work. If you still wish to become an admin, the best advice that I can give you is to write a good article on a living person. In doing so, you will demonstrate your understanding of WP:N, WP:V and WP:BLP. And if the review is a tough one, you will also give some insight into how you handle conflict.


 * If on the other hand you do not want to be an admin anymore, my advice is not to change a thing. You are a massive benefit to this project. As an aside, one of the links on your userpage actually made me laugh out loud, which does not happen everyday. Regards--WFC-- (talk) 04:26, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'm not planning on becoming an admin any longer. Thanks for the input. And yes, RfA is getting too picky, but it seems more or less like the trend is beginning to change. Tide rolls passing is probably a good example. The Thing  //  Talk  //  Contribs  19:31, 22 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Maybe you could try to work with other editors for content creation. Also, you would be a good adopter. Why not try to adopt a newbie? Pilif12p : Yo  22:24, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Eh, I'm not that great of a teacher to be honest. The Thing  //  Talk  //  Contribs  19:31, 22 July 2010 (UTC)