Wikipedia:Editor review/Urdna

Urdna
I started editing Wikipedia last May (13 months now) and have gotten more active starting in October. I'm asking for this review so that I can improve my editing style and make my future edits more beneficial to this project. I plan on running for adminship once I have approximately 1250 edits. I currently have about 350, but I am enjoying putting my time into Wikipedia and an aiming to have 1000 edits by the end of July. I appreciate your time reviewing me and helping me to help Wikipedia, Urdna 21:47, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

 Reviews 

Well, you are doing quite well. Unfortunately, I don't think 1250 edits is enough for adminship (usually, nothing below 2000 passes, below 3000 might pass, but quality really matters. You need three consistent months of editing. Also, get involved in speedy deletion and XfD's (deletion debates), report usernames, maybe opine at RfA's or and help out at the Help Desk. Also, try to write at the least a good article, or preferable a feature one. Otherwise, you're doing a good job, and keep it up. Maybe someone will nominate your in a few months, even. Cheers! Evilclown93 19:49, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

 Comments 


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


 * View this user's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool

 Questions

Thank you for having taken the time to read this, I appreciate your constrictive criticism, time and giving me advise, Urdna 22:21, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * I would say that I am most pleased with my Anti-Vandal/ Recent Change patrolling work and my work on the stubsensor cleanup project.
 * 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?
 * The only conflicts I have been in over editing were new users confused about WP:CSD and who got angry when I put their articles up for speedy deletion. I explained the situation to these users on their talk pages or the articles talk page. If they have deleted the db-bio notice I have contacted them, reverted the page or if they have expressed a good reason that the article should be kept, replaced the template and added hangon. I try to be as courteous as possible to new users in an attempt to get them to become more active contributors. When an experienced user does something extremely incorrect or totally against policy this causes me a great deal more stress. The only example I can think of at the moment is when a user was running a bot in the beta stage with no disclaimer that they were running it and the bot warned me and told me not to vandalize an article it said it reverted it (it never even reverted the page in the end) it also told me to stop vandalizing Wikipedia. Due to fact I believed this user was a human, I was upset with their experience that they did something as careless as reverting and warning without looking at the difference or edit summary. The user and I had a conversation that ended with him removing my warning and posting a disclaimer on his talk page.
 * The only conflicts I have been in over editing were new users confused about WP:CSD and who got angry when I put their articles up for speedy deletion. I explained the situation to these users on their talk pages or the articles talk page. If they have deleted the db-bio notice I have contacted them, reverted the page or if they have expressed a good reason that the article should be kept, replaced the template and added hangon. I try to be as courteous as possible to new users in an attempt to get them to become more active contributors. When an experienced user does something extremely incorrect or totally against policy this causes me a great deal more stress. The only example I can think of at the moment is when a user was running a bot in the beta stage with no disclaimer that they were running it and the bot warned me and told me not to vandalize an article it said it reverted it (it never even reverted the page in the end) it also told me to stop vandalizing Wikipedia. Due to fact I believed this user was a human, I was upset with their experience that they did something as careless as reverting and warning without looking at the difference or edit summary. The user and I had a conversation that ended with him removing my warning and posting a disclaimer on his talk page.

Additionals from Dfrg.msc:

Borrowed from, I'm sure he wont mind. These should test you editing skills, and show if you have any weaknesses which you can work on. So, just write your answer next to the Question. Good luck.

Speedy Delete or not: 


 * 1) CSD1
 * 2) CSD2
 * 3) CSD3
 * 4) CSD4
 * 5) CSD5

Vandalism or or not: 


 * 1)
 * 2)
 * 3)
 * 4)
 * 5)
 * 6)

Have fun! Dfrg.msc 07:34, 5 July 2007 (UTC)