Steve Crossin ( talk · contribs) Well, I've been on Wikipedia for about 2 and a half months, and I feel in that time, I've managed to do a lot. I contribute quite a lot to the 24 Wikiproject, which I recently resurrected, and I'm actively co-ordinating the efforts to re-write articles and fair use rationales for our images. I also help out at the Mediation Cabal, and I look over AIV quite a bit. I also have done some template work. I feel it's time for outside opinion as to how I am going on Wikipedia, and the areas I can improve in. Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 00:40, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Reviews
Your enthusiasm is excellent and should be applauded—there is no question of that. You've gotten involved in quite a few areas, which looks good. So yeah, looking at edit counts and page titles, it looks good on paper.
Now, a few things I have found. First of all, I would suggest you slow down a fair bit. For instance, look at the response to you here ( perma)—wait a bit longer, and you'll be able to make much more productive/insightful comments. In another case, see this—if you had slowed down a bit before creating, it might not have gone to deletion (as it might not have been created)...it's little things like this that you can work on.
Incidentally, comments such as "I co-ordinate the 24 Wikiproject" are sometimes frowned upon. Look at the comments here (re this), for instance. Just be careful, that's all.
Most of our interactions are on IRC, which is obviously unlogged and off-wiki. Without your permission, I won't comment on anything related to that. On that note, be careful when citing off-wiki stuff like you did here, as it can easily be taken the wrong way.
dihydrogen monoxide ( H2O) 05:17, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Comments
Comments from iMatthew I'd just like to say that you're adoption program is excellent. It really seems to work, and help users get back on track and ready for the next step in their wiki-careers. iMat thew 20 08 10:48, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Questions
I have never been involved in an editor review before, so I apologize if I am doing this incorrectly. I am very impressed at how much Steve Crossin has become involved with in such a short time on WP. At 2 or 3 months, he is a lot farther along than I was at the 2 or 3 month mark. I think it is great he is working as a mediator.
One thing gives me pause is that I do not think Steve has really dug in deep on a controversy himself yet. I have noticed that many editors have limited experience on controversial articles, and could benefit from more exposure. The way I judge serious experience on a controversial article is to be involved in the dispute, not just as a mediator, and have racked up at least 400 or 500 edits to the talk page of a controversial article, defending some position or other. To help gain more insight into controversial article editing, I would suggest Steve try the AGF Challenge exercises. The first 8 exercises are available for essay answer and multiple choice answers. Soon, the 2nd batch of 8 exercises will be released for consideration.-- Filll ( talk) 15:21, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
Steve Crossin ( talk · contribs) Well, I've been on Wikipedia for about 2 and a half months, and I feel in that time, I've managed to do a lot. I contribute quite a lot to the 24 Wikiproject, which I recently resurrected, and I'm actively co-ordinating the efforts to re-write articles and fair use rationales for our images. I also help out at the Mediation Cabal, and I look over AIV quite a bit. I also have done some template work. I feel it's time for outside opinion as to how I am going on Wikipedia, and the areas I can improve in. Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 00:40, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Reviews
Your enthusiasm is excellent and should be applauded—there is no question of that. You've gotten involved in quite a few areas, which looks good. So yeah, looking at edit counts and page titles, it looks good on paper.
Now, a few things I have found. First of all, I would suggest you slow down a fair bit. For instance, look at the response to you here ( perma)—wait a bit longer, and you'll be able to make much more productive/insightful comments. In another case, see this—if you had slowed down a bit before creating, it might not have gone to deletion (as it might not have been created)...it's little things like this that you can work on.
Incidentally, comments such as "I co-ordinate the 24 Wikiproject" are sometimes frowned upon. Look at the comments here (re this), for instance. Just be careful, that's all.
Most of our interactions are on IRC, which is obviously unlogged and off-wiki. Without your permission, I won't comment on anything related to that. On that note, be careful when citing off-wiki stuff like you did here, as it can easily be taken the wrong way.
dihydrogen monoxide ( H2O) 05:17, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Comments
Comments from iMatthew I'd just like to say that you're adoption program is excellent. It really seems to work, and help users get back on track and ready for the next step in their wiki-careers. iMat thew 20 08 10:48, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Questions
I have never been involved in an editor review before, so I apologize if I am doing this incorrectly. I am very impressed at how much Steve Crossin has become involved with in such a short time on WP. At 2 or 3 months, he is a lot farther along than I was at the 2 or 3 month mark. I think it is great he is working as a mediator.
One thing gives me pause is that I do not think Steve has really dug in deep on a controversy himself yet. I have noticed that many editors have limited experience on controversial articles, and could benefit from more exposure. The way I judge serious experience on a controversial article is to be involved in the dispute, not just as a mediator, and have racked up at least 400 or 500 edits to the talk page of a controversial article, defending some position or other. To help gain more insight into controversial article editing, I would suggest Steve try the AGF Challenge exercises. The first 8 exercises are available for essay answer and multiple choice answers. Soon, the 2nd batch of 8 exercises will be released for consideration.-- Filll ( talk) 15:21, 4 May 2008 (UTC)