GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Skyeking ( talk · contribs) 08:57, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Note 5 ( refer link): "[...]Nominations for articles that are unstable because of constructive editing should be placed on hold."
Current "unstable" situation is explained at Skyeking's User Talk Page (
refer here).
Skyeking (
talk)
08:57, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Opinion - Hi all, just happened to see this page, so I thought I'd chime in. I'm an admin, not that it matters. Anyway, I feel that is is absolutely inapropriate for Skyeking to take on this review. Skyeking, you claim not to be the/a primary editor of the article, but the edit count clearly shows otherwise- you are the most frequent editor of the page by almost a factor of 4, and you have almost 8 times the edits to the page of Nuujinn, who you above claim to be the primary editor. You also have been complaining on the talk page ever since Mark Arsten began changing the article that you dislike his changes- you are certainly not a "neutral reviewer". Thirdly, you say that your illness prevents you from putting in the time to say what, precisely, you take issue with in Arsten's changes- how then do you have the time to review the entire article and say what needs to be changed? Note that you haven't actually reviewed the article yet, which is what you are supposed to do before placing it "on hold" - you just said it was unstable, and instead of failing it tried to keep it "under your control" by remaining the reviewer.
I suggest that you put the article back in the queue, or that y'all get another reviewer. I'm willing to do it, if you want (I don't do enough reviews outside of my usual interests), though if so I plan to wait a few days- while the article was certainly stable from the 17th until this review was started, since then there have been a lot of wording and phrasing changes that I would like to see diminished in order to review the text for grammar issues as well as substance. In any case- Mark Arsten, if you're not aware, note that while it oversteps propriety for another reviewer to "steal" this review without Skyeking's permission, that you can always escalate to WT:GAN if you feel that a reviewer is not conducting a proper review. -- Pres N 19:01, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
Counter-Opinion (Clarification by Skyeking regarding the above "Opinion" by PresN)
S>(PresN)”...inappropriate for Skyeking to take on this review.”-------Skyeking's response to:
S>(PresN)”Skyeking, you claim not to be the/a primary editor of the article.....”-------Skyeking's response to:
S>(PresN)”...but the edit count clearly shows otherwise, you are the most frequent editor of the page...”-------Skyeking's response to:
S>(PresN)”...Nuujinn, who you above claim to be the primary editor.”-------Skyeking's response to:
S>(PresN)“You also have been complaining on the [Article] talk page ever since Mark Arsten began changing the article that you dislike his changes – you are certainly not a ‘neutral reviewer’.”-------Skyeking's response to:
S>(PresN)“Thirdly, you say that your illness prevents you from putting in the time to say what, precisely, you take issue with in Arsten’s changes – how then do you have the time to review the entire article and say what needs to be changed?”-------Skyeking's response to:
S>(PresN)“Note that you haven’t actually reviewed the article yet, which is what you are supposed to do before placing it ‘on hold’ – you just said it was unstable, and instead of failing it tried to keep it ‘under your control’ by remaining the reviewer.”-------Skyeking's response to:
S>(PresN)"I suggest that you put the article back in the queue, or that y'all get another reviewer.
"-------Skyeking's response to:
S>“I'm willing to do it, if you want [...], though if so I plan to wait a few days...”
AND
S>“...it oversteps propriety for another reviewer to ‘steal’ this review without Skyeking's permission...”-------Skyeking's response to:
Also, Mitch Ames (core Editor) is actively editing the VHEMT Article.
Wiki Regards,
Skyeking (
talk)
12:41, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Skyeking ( talk · contribs) 08:57, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Note 5 ( refer link): "[...]Nominations for articles that are unstable because of constructive editing should be placed on hold."
Current "unstable" situation is explained at Skyeking's User Talk Page (
refer here).
Skyeking (
talk)
08:57, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Opinion - Hi all, just happened to see this page, so I thought I'd chime in. I'm an admin, not that it matters. Anyway, I feel that is is absolutely inapropriate for Skyeking to take on this review. Skyeking, you claim not to be the/a primary editor of the article, but the edit count clearly shows otherwise- you are the most frequent editor of the page by almost a factor of 4, and you have almost 8 times the edits to the page of Nuujinn, who you above claim to be the primary editor. You also have been complaining on the talk page ever since Mark Arsten began changing the article that you dislike his changes- you are certainly not a "neutral reviewer". Thirdly, you say that your illness prevents you from putting in the time to say what, precisely, you take issue with in Arsten's changes- how then do you have the time to review the entire article and say what needs to be changed? Note that you haven't actually reviewed the article yet, which is what you are supposed to do before placing it "on hold" - you just said it was unstable, and instead of failing it tried to keep it "under your control" by remaining the reviewer.
I suggest that you put the article back in the queue, or that y'all get another reviewer. I'm willing to do it, if you want (I don't do enough reviews outside of my usual interests), though if so I plan to wait a few days- while the article was certainly stable from the 17th until this review was started, since then there have been a lot of wording and phrasing changes that I would like to see diminished in order to review the text for grammar issues as well as substance. In any case- Mark Arsten, if you're not aware, note that while it oversteps propriety for another reviewer to "steal" this review without Skyeking's permission, that you can always escalate to WT:GAN if you feel that a reviewer is not conducting a proper review. -- Pres N 19:01, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
Counter-Opinion (Clarification by Skyeking regarding the above "Opinion" by PresN)
S>(PresN)”...inappropriate for Skyeking to take on this review.”-------Skyeking's response to:
S>(PresN)”Skyeking, you claim not to be the/a primary editor of the article.....”-------Skyeking's response to:
S>(PresN)”...but the edit count clearly shows otherwise, you are the most frequent editor of the page...”-------Skyeking's response to:
S>(PresN)”...Nuujinn, who you above claim to be the primary editor.”-------Skyeking's response to:
S>(PresN)“You also have been complaining on the [Article] talk page ever since Mark Arsten began changing the article that you dislike his changes – you are certainly not a ‘neutral reviewer’.”-------Skyeking's response to:
S>(PresN)“Thirdly, you say that your illness prevents you from putting in the time to say what, precisely, you take issue with in Arsten’s changes – how then do you have the time to review the entire article and say what needs to be changed?”-------Skyeking's response to:
S>(PresN)“Note that you haven’t actually reviewed the article yet, which is what you are supposed to do before placing it ‘on hold’ – you just said it was unstable, and instead of failing it tried to keep it ‘under your control’ by remaining the reviewer.”-------Skyeking's response to:
S>(PresN)"I suggest that you put the article back in the queue, or that y'all get another reviewer.
"-------Skyeking's response to:
S>“I'm willing to do it, if you want [...], though if so I plan to wait a few days...”
AND
S>“...it oversteps propriety for another reviewer to ‘steal’ this review without Skyeking's permission...”-------Skyeking's response to:
Also, Mitch Ames (core Editor) is actively editing the VHEMT Article.
Wiki Regards,
Skyeking (
talk)
12:41, 24 January 2012 (UTC)