O
O ( talk · contribs) Hello, I am User:O and have been here since 12 May 2006, but have been actively editing since 18 or 17 September 2006 (depends on how one looks at the time zones). I usually edit articles relating to roads & highways, aviation, computing, China, occasionally minor fixes to songs, fight vandalism, and participate in essential Wikipedia processes, including all forms of discussion. I want to get some feedback on how I am doing on those fronts, and always want suggestions on how I can improve. From the feedback that I will soon receive, I may run for RFA, and additionally, I am a Commons administrator. 哦， 是吗？( User:O) 04:45, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Reviews
- For the most part, you are a good editor. However, I have noticed that you do not get along well with other editors (i.e. those at USRD and BAG), and getting along well with other editors is key to being an administrator. I feel that you need to work on being civil and having skills relating to building consensus. In addition, you need to work on building relationships with a few other editors rather than acting only in your own interests. I say this not to be mean but to show you areas in which you can improve. Admin coaching may be beneficial as well. An impulsive and self-centered administrator is not what Wikipedia needs; however, these are areas in which you can easily improve. -- Rschen7754 ( T C) 20:59, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- I find this FA review deplorable. Of the half-dozen points here, one is valid; one identifies a slight tendency to overlink by citing the link to million, which is a perfectly sensible avoidance of Anglo-American ambiguity. The others are trivialities; one contradicts the guideline to which it pretends to appeal. This is, on the whole, a display of very poor judgment. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:19, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Comments
- View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool
- First review
- Second
- Third
- Fourth
- Fifth
- Sixth
Questions
- Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
- My best single contribution would have to be my sole DYK, U.S. Route 322 in New Jersey, since it is a race of time, energy, and content to get a quality article posted to mainspace for it to qualify. Besides that, I have contributed to two GAs so far (list is on my userpage), and aspire to improve more, particularly ones that have lots of secondary sources.
- 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?
- I have been involved in way too many conflicts and infighting to sufficiently mention them here. However, that in itself gives me a unique experience in dealing with them and how to better improve the methods on how to resolve conflicts. Not one conflict is the same, but for a typical content mash up, I almost always utilise BRD, since it is a solid model of how consensus works, and that it almost always works. I would always keep in mind to make sure that my comments are not too terse, assume good faith, and keep the discussion and/or myself from getting heated up.
O
O ( talk · contribs) Hello, I am User:O and have been here since 12 May 2006, but have been actively editing since 18 or 17 September 2006 (depends on how one looks at the time zones). I usually edit articles relating to roads & highways, aviation, computing, China, occasionally minor fixes to songs, fight vandalism, and participate in essential Wikipedia processes, including all forms of discussion. I want to get some feedback on how I am doing on those fronts, and always want suggestions on how I can improve. From the feedback that I will soon receive, I may run for RFA, and additionally, I am a Commons administrator. 哦， 是吗？( User:O) 04:45, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Reviews
- For the most part, you are a good editor. However, I have noticed that you do not get along well with other editors (i.e. those at USRD and BAG), and getting along well with other editors is key to being an administrator. I feel that you need to work on being civil and having skills relating to building consensus. In addition, you need to work on building relationships with a few other editors rather than acting only in your own interests. I say this not to be mean but to show you areas in which you can improve. Admin coaching may be beneficial as well. An impulsive and self-centered administrator is not what Wikipedia needs; however, these are areas in which you can easily improve. -- Rschen7754 ( T C) 20:59, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- I find this FA review deplorable. Of the half-dozen points here, one is valid; one identifies a slight tendency to overlink by citing the link to million, which is a perfectly sensible avoidance of Anglo-American ambiguity. The others are trivialities; one contradicts the guideline to which it pretends to appeal. This is, on the whole, a display of very poor judgment. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:19, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Comments
- View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool
- First review
- Second
- Third
- Fourth
- Fifth
- Sixth
Questions
- Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
- My best single contribution would have to be my sole DYK, U.S. Route 322 in New Jersey, since it is a race of time, energy, and content to get a quality article posted to mainspace for it to qualify. Besides that, I have contributed to two GAs so far (list is on my userpage), and aspire to improve more, particularly ones that have lots of secondary sources.
- 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?
- I have been involved in way too many conflicts and infighting to sufficiently mention them here. However, that in itself gives me a unique experience in dealing with them and how to better improve the methods on how to resolve conflicts. Not one conflict is the same, but for a typical content mash up, I almost always utilise BRD, since it is a solid model of how consensus works, and that it almost always works. I would always keep in mind to make sure that my comments are not too terse, assume good faith, and keep the discussion and/or myself from getting heated up.