Gazimoff ( talk · contribs) I've been editing for about four months now. I would like some feedback on my performance so far, as well as guidance on areas to work in that may interest me. Many thanks for any input you can offer. Gazimoff Write Read 14:10, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
Giggy
Krator
Hey there Gazimoff,
I think you've done a great job on Wikipedia so far, and I wish all new editors would come with the same attitude and skills as you did when you first joined. Our encyclopaedia would be a much better place then. With that said, and you know you're doing a good job yourself too, I'll mostly focus on the things I think could use further improvement. I won't use any diffs or so, as I think you know what I mean most of the time.
When I 'adopted' you a few months ago, you wrote several times that the area you wished to know more about was Wikipedia policy and guidelines. I think I can safely say that you are well versed in policy now, judging by some of your contributions to AFD which show a good understanding of it. Sometimes it was very entertaining to watch your reading of Wikipedia policy. I follow WP:VG/D, and sometimes you cited the same thing you apparently read recently a couple of times in a row, and then a different essay, etc (for example, WP:SCRABBLE three times in a row). There's two things I think you could work on here. First, particularly before June, a lot of your contributions to AFD contained a lot of jargon and references to capitalised Wikipedia things. It is generally a good habit to use the least amount possible WP: shortcuts in your AFD contributions, particularly the contentious ones. Secondly, I'd like to see some more WP:IAR in there. As in, doing what is best instead of doing what fits policy. Not that I think you've been wrong consistently in any way, but doing something contra-policy will give you a better understanding of them. Don't seek this out, too, you'll find something along your path soon enough probably.
Then there's a clear suggestion, following up on the question directly above this review. I think that some dispute resolution experience would do you good, via WP:3O or WP:RFC or something. The antagonism you speak of happens quite often, and the dispute on the WoW page was quite timid in comparison to other things that happen around here. Because of the areas you're editing in (namely RFA and WP:VG, as far as I know), you're bound to be in the middle of a huge fight you didn't want to be in some time.
Hope this helps!
User:Krator ( t c) 08:57, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles
Gazimoff is a fine editor who has made my list of wise wikipedians. I'll focus my comments on AfDs in which we both participated: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brawl Characters' Final Smashes (while I disagree with the sentiment that the article should be deleted, I like that Gazimoff is being conisderate and thinking of how to not "bite the newbies"), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr. Eggman's flying fortresses (thoughtful comment in an AfD that clearly had no consensus to delete), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Earthworm Jim items (reasonable compromise rationale), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Nintendo Power Covers (even though material exists elsewhere, it does not mean we should not also cover it), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Soul Reaver (again, reasonable rationale for compromise that ended up being consistent with the close), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Best of Sonic the Hedgehog (we were both in agreement here, but the important thing is that you also looked for sources), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Titans (Crash of the Titans) (obviously disagree per reasons stated throughout discussion, but my main suggestion is that while I went back and forth with a number of editors over the various improvements, I don't believe you acknowledged one war or the other whether the improvements changed your mind and I believe returning to discussions is important), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ultima Online timeline (again, just because content is covered elsewhere does not mean we can't also cover it), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Video games notable for negative reception (2nd nomination) (good final comment for the regular discussion), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WayForward Technologies (while I disagree with the argument, I do like that you worked on the article), and finally reasonable comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Xena: Warrior Princess: The Talisman of Fate, which were consistent with the close. I hope that helps! --Happy editing! Sincerely, Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles Tally-ho! 18:28, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
Gazimoff ( talk · contribs) I've been editing for about four months now. I would like some feedback on my performance so far, as well as guidance on areas to work in that may interest me. Many thanks for any input you can offer. Gazimoff Write Read 14:10, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
Giggy
Krator
Hey there Gazimoff,
I think you've done a great job on Wikipedia so far, and I wish all new editors would come with the same attitude and skills as you did when you first joined. Our encyclopaedia would be a much better place then. With that said, and you know you're doing a good job yourself too, I'll mostly focus on the things I think could use further improvement. I won't use any diffs or so, as I think you know what I mean most of the time.
When I 'adopted' you a few months ago, you wrote several times that the area you wished to know more about was Wikipedia policy and guidelines. I think I can safely say that you are well versed in policy now, judging by some of your contributions to AFD which show a good understanding of it. Sometimes it was very entertaining to watch your reading of Wikipedia policy. I follow WP:VG/D, and sometimes you cited the same thing you apparently read recently a couple of times in a row, and then a different essay, etc (for example, WP:SCRABBLE three times in a row). There's two things I think you could work on here. First, particularly before June, a lot of your contributions to AFD contained a lot of jargon and references to capitalised Wikipedia things. It is generally a good habit to use the least amount possible WP: shortcuts in your AFD contributions, particularly the contentious ones. Secondly, I'd like to see some more WP:IAR in there. As in, doing what is best instead of doing what fits policy. Not that I think you've been wrong consistently in any way, but doing something contra-policy will give you a better understanding of them. Don't seek this out, too, you'll find something along your path soon enough probably.
Then there's a clear suggestion, following up on the question directly above this review. I think that some dispute resolution experience would do you good, via WP:3O or WP:RFC or something. The antagonism you speak of happens quite often, and the dispute on the WoW page was quite timid in comparison to other things that happen around here. Because of the areas you're editing in (namely RFA and WP:VG, as far as I know), you're bound to be in the middle of a huge fight you didn't want to be in some time.
Hope this helps!
User:Krator ( t c) 08:57, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles
Gazimoff is a fine editor who has made my list of wise wikipedians. I'll focus my comments on AfDs in which we both participated: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brawl Characters' Final Smashes (while I disagree with the sentiment that the article should be deleted, I like that Gazimoff is being conisderate and thinking of how to not "bite the newbies"), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr. Eggman's flying fortresses (thoughtful comment in an AfD that clearly had no consensus to delete), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Earthworm Jim items (reasonable compromise rationale), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Nintendo Power Covers (even though material exists elsewhere, it does not mean we should not also cover it), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Soul Reaver (again, reasonable rationale for compromise that ended up being consistent with the close), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Best of Sonic the Hedgehog (we were both in agreement here, but the important thing is that you also looked for sources), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Titans (Crash of the Titans) (obviously disagree per reasons stated throughout discussion, but my main suggestion is that while I went back and forth with a number of editors over the various improvements, I don't believe you acknowledged one war or the other whether the improvements changed your mind and I believe returning to discussions is important), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ultima Online timeline (again, just because content is covered elsewhere does not mean we can't also cover it), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Video games notable for negative reception (2nd nomination) (good final comment for the regular discussion), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WayForward Technologies (while I disagree with the argument, I do like that you worked on the article), and finally reasonable comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Xena: Warrior Princess: The Talisman of Fate, which were consistent with the close. I hope that helps! --Happy editing! Sincerely, Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles Tally-ho! 18:28, 17 July 2008 (UTC)