Elektrik Shoos
Elektrik Shoos ( talk · contribs · count) I have been on Wikipedia for two years. I am a rollbacker (and a reviewer, if that still exists) on Wikipedia with roughly 8,500 edits to my name. I'm a current web design college student and I'm heavily involved in my college's student paper, so I don't edit as much as I used to. I have been considering adminship for a while, but I'm not sure I want to do it just yet for two reasons: one, because I'm not yet sure I want to dedicate that much time to the project; and two, because I'm not sure I'd pass the absurdly strict requirements I've seen so far at RfA. Anyway, I've been thinking for a while that I want an editor review, as I would like feedback on where I could use improvement. elektrik SHOOS 03:16, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Questions
- What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
- My contributions to the project have largely consisted of Wikignoming and vandalism reversion. For a period over the summer, due to being out of work, I performed vandalism work via Huggle and Twinkle almost obsessively. This is largely the reason for my high edit count. I've also seen rounds at XfD, threads at AN/I (as a helpful commenter, not a subject), new changes patrol, recent changes patrol, and reviewing during the pending changes trial. I dabble with helping out the Welcome Committee. I can't think of any substantial article work I've performed at the moment. This is something I hope to eventually get involved in, when I have the time.
- 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. Because of the work I typically do on the project, I've had two major incidents of recent memory. The first involved a scuffle with a sockpuppet which rapidly dragged off-wiki and led to numerous legal threats. For various reasons, I won't elaborate any further. The second was an AfD discussion a few months back, in which I argued closely with another user over the notability of the subject. In retrospect, I regret this debate, as I didn't assume good faith, was way too WP:BITE-y and likely scared off a valuable contributor to the project. I've learned from this incident and I won't repeat it.
Reviews
- Review by OlEnglish
- From what I've seen so far I think you're doing really well. You've got plenty of clue and I sense your heart is in the right place when it comes to this project overall. Your anti-vandalism work is very valuable, and I commend you for your important work with the Welcome Committee. Your maintenance and gnome-work keeps the gears moving behind the scenes and I hope you continue with it well into the future. The best ways I can suggest for you to improve is to do some content work, even if it's just to add a paragraph or two to an existing article, you don't have to be a brilliant prose writer, just find a tidbit of information that's missing or a news item that recently came up and add it to an article. Or even pick a subject and start your own article from scratch, you don't have to start dozens of articles, just put in a lot of effort into the one, make it your 'baby', it will become a source of pride for you and you will have picked up a lot of editing experience along the way. Plus knowing you've helped lay down a foundation for future editors inspires you to continue contributing even more content. Also try to involve yourself in more discussions if you can. Give some third opinions or just pick an RfC at random (there's PLENTY). You'll find that your reputation will grow and you will have made some wiki-friends and potential 'allies'. Another thing I've found that helped me alot is to read lots of essays, including user essays.. many editors overlook this thinking it's unimportant because "they're just essays" but you'll find there's a wealth of hidden knowledge there about Wikipedia and its customs.. you will learn a lot, even I am still learning new things! You mention you're not sure if you want to dedicate that much time to the project, this is worrisome, if you want to be an admin it does take commitment (csd backlogs are continuous!). I think Wikipedia really shines when editors display their enthusiasm and drive to push things forward. This is how new policies are set and FAs are developed.. but just watch out that you don't get burnt out! Setting some small daily goals may help, like at least one afd or delrev comment daily for instance. Don't be so fearful of RfA.. if you think you're ready then give it a shot, if it's your first and it fails then it's the best opportunity to pass the second time because of all the feedback you get. Of course getting some feedback first via this editor review is definitely a wise move too, and itself is a big plus towards that goal. Your edit stats per namespace show an unbalanced percentage of edits to the user talk namespace (45.30%) vs. article mainspace (31.09%). Before you go through RfA you'll definitely want to increase that percentage on the article side. Even though it is to your own user talk page they'll still jump all over that at rfa.. you'll probably want at least 50% edits to mainspace. Hmm, don't know what else I can say.. I think I'm already starting to ramble.. keep up the good work. ;) -- œ ™ 12:23, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Elektrik Shoos
Elektrik Shoos ( talk · contribs · count) I have been on Wikipedia for two years. I am a rollbacker (and a reviewer, if that still exists) on Wikipedia with roughly 8,500 edits to my name. I'm a current web design college student and I'm heavily involved in my college's student paper, so I don't edit as much as I used to. I have been considering adminship for a while, but I'm not sure I want to do it just yet for two reasons: one, because I'm not yet sure I want to dedicate that much time to the project; and two, because I'm not sure I'd pass the absurdly strict requirements I've seen so far at RfA. Anyway, I've been thinking for a while that I want an editor review, as I would like feedback on where I could use improvement. elektrik SHOOS 03:16, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Questions
- What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
- My contributions to the project have largely consisted of Wikignoming and vandalism reversion. For a period over the summer, due to being out of work, I performed vandalism work via Huggle and Twinkle almost obsessively. This is largely the reason for my high edit count. I've also seen rounds at XfD, threads at AN/I (as a helpful commenter, not a subject), new changes patrol, recent changes patrol, and reviewing during the pending changes trial. I dabble with helping out the Welcome Committee. I can't think of any substantial article work I've performed at the moment. This is something I hope to eventually get involved in, when I have the time.
- 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. Because of the work I typically do on the project, I've had two major incidents of recent memory. The first involved a scuffle with a sockpuppet which rapidly dragged off-wiki and led to numerous legal threats. For various reasons, I won't elaborate any further. The second was an AfD discussion a few months back, in which I argued closely with another user over the notability of the subject. In retrospect, I regret this debate, as I didn't assume good faith, was way too WP:BITE-y and likely scared off a valuable contributor to the project. I've learned from this incident and I won't repeat it.
Reviews
- Review by OlEnglish
- From what I've seen so far I think you're doing really well. You've got plenty of clue and I sense your heart is in the right place when it comes to this project overall. Your anti-vandalism work is very valuable, and I commend you for your important work with the Welcome Committee. Your maintenance and gnome-work keeps the gears moving behind the scenes and I hope you continue with it well into the future. The best ways I can suggest for you to improve is to do some content work, even if it's just to add a paragraph or two to an existing article, you don't have to be a brilliant prose writer, just find a tidbit of information that's missing or a news item that recently came up and add it to an article. Or even pick a subject and start your own article from scratch, you don't have to start dozens of articles, just put in a lot of effort into the one, make it your 'baby', it will become a source of pride for you and you will have picked up a lot of editing experience along the way. Plus knowing you've helped lay down a foundation for future editors inspires you to continue contributing even more content. Also try to involve yourself in more discussions if you can. Give some third opinions or just pick an RfC at random (there's PLENTY). You'll find that your reputation will grow and you will have made some wiki-friends and potential 'allies'. Another thing I've found that helped me alot is to read lots of essays, including user essays.. many editors overlook this thinking it's unimportant because "they're just essays" but you'll find there's a wealth of hidden knowledge there about Wikipedia and its customs.. you will learn a lot, even I am still learning new things! You mention you're not sure if you want to dedicate that much time to the project, this is worrisome, if you want to be an admin it does take commitment (csd backlogs are continuous!). I think Wikipedia really shines when editors display their enthusiasm and drive to push things forward. This is how new policies are set and FAs are developed.. but just watch out that you don't get burnt out! Setting some small daily goals may help, like at least one afd or delrev comment daily for instance. Don't be so fearful of RfA.. if you think you're ready then give it a shot, if it's your first and it fails then it's the best opportunity to pass the second time because of all the feedback you get. Of course getting some feedback first via this editor review is definitely a wise move too, and itself is a big plus towards that goal. Your edit stats per namespace show an unbalanced percentage of edits to the user talk namespace (45.30%) vs. article mainspace (31.09%). Before you go through RfA you'll definitely want to increase that percentage on the article side. Even though it is to your own user talk page they'll still jump all over that at rfa.. you'll probably want at least 50% edits to mainspace. Hmm, don't know what else I can say.. I think I'm already starting to ramble.. keep up the good work. ;) -- œ ™ 12:23, 29 December 2010 (UTC)