Thehelpfulone ( talk · contribs) I have been on Wikipedia for only a couple of months now, but would like to know how to better myself as an editor and as a general Wikipedian. It is far too early to go for an RFA, but I would like to become an admin, so am requesting this review to see how I can become better just as an editor. The Helpful One (Talk) (Contributions) 21:40, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Reviews
Review by
delldot:
Review by User:MKoltnow --I just wanted to say that I think you're still too quick to make submissions to WP:UAA. You nominated Xxxallyballyxxx ( talk · contribs) for username block as profane, and previously nominated Joan de arc1412 ( talk · contribs) for being the name of a living or recently-deceased person. I don't think you're taking much care in specifying reasons for an immediate block of a username. The latter was blocked briefly before being unblocked as not a vio. You even scolded me for putting a uw-uaa on your talk page, yet the damage was done. That user might not return. I think that nominating non-blatant usernames is careless at best, and WP:BITEy at worst. I don't want this to seem like piling-on, but I continue to see some of the same editing style. MKolt now 20:27, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Review by Kathleenslamon01 -- Thank you Helpful one for all your great comments! Kathleenslamon01 ( talk) 20:06, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Review by Pensil Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism. Even harmful edits that are not explicitly made in bad faith are not considered vandalism. For example, adding a personal opinion to an article once is not vandalism — it's just not helpful, and should be removed or restated. Not all vandalism is obvious, nor are all massive or controversial changes vandalism; careful attention needs to be given to whether changes made are beneficial, detrimental but well intended, or outright vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pensil ( talk • contribs)
Review by
MindstormsKid
Well, I haven't known Thehelpfulone for very long, but I will say he seems like a nice guy. I will say, however, that after reading the other reviews, I think maybe Thehelpfulone should take a break from reporting username policy violations. Otherwise, He seems like a good editor.
P.S. As probably most editor would tell you, I would wait about a year to try for RFA.
≈
MindstormsKid 18:46, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Review by Reallysmartgrammarwiz As a new wikipedia user I have had a lot of questions. Few users stopped to answer them for me, The HelpfulOne did after all his name is The HelpfulOne. I don't know enough about the workings of Wikipedia t say weather or not the above claims are true but I will say that if he is not anything else, TheHelpfulOne is very helpful;) Smart Guy ( talk) ( Sign) 14:12, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Review by Britishrailclass91 I think that you are always on the ball and good at what you do. I notice that you notify users quickly if they have made a mistake and I value that in wikipedians. All in all, I think you are very capable. (Sorry it's such a short review) Britishrailclass91 ( talk) 15:50, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Review by
Editorofthewiki
This user seems to be a fine all around user, though I would suggest contributing to the mainspace more beside vandalism reverting. Try to work on a DYK?
Editor
of
the
wiki
review my edits here! 19:57, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Comments
Questions
Thehelpfulone ( talk · contribs) I have been on Wikipedia for only a couple of months now, but would like to know how to better myself as an editor and as a general Wikipedian. It is far too early to go for an RFA, but I would like to become an admin, so am requesting this review to see how I can become better just as an editor. The Helpful One (Talk) (Contributions) 21:40, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Reviews
Review by
delldot:
Review by User:MKoltnow --I just wanted to say that I think you're still too quick to make submissions to WP:UAA. You nominated Xxxallyballyxxx ( talk · contribs) for username block as profane, and previously nominated Joan de arc1412 ( talk · contribs) for being the name of a living or recently-deceased person. I don't think you're taking much care in specifying reasons for an immediate block of a username. The latter was blocked briefly before being unblocked as not a vio. You even scolded me for putting a uw-uaa on your talk page, yet the damage was done. That user might not return. I think that nominating non-blatant usernames is careless at best, and WP:BITEy at worst. I don't want this to seem like piling-on, but I continue to see some of the same editing style. MKolt now 20:27, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Review by Kathleenslamon01 -- Thank you Helpful one for all your great comments! Kathleenslamon01 ( talk) 20:06, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Review by Pensil Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism. Even harmful edits that are not explicitly made in bad faith are not considered vandalism. For example, adding a personal opinion to an article once is not vandalism — it's just not helpful, and should be removed or restated. Not all vandalism is obvious, nor are all massive or controversial changes vandalism; careful attention needs to be given to whether changes made are beneficial, detrimental but well intended, or outright vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pensil ( talk • contribs)
Review by
MindstormsKid
Well, I haven't known Thehelpfulone for very long, but I will say he seems like a nice guy. I will say, however, that after reading the other reviews, I think maybe Thehelpfulone should take a break from reporting username policy violations. Otherwise, He seems like a good editor.
P.S. As probably most editor would tell you, I would wait about a year to try for RFA.
≈
MindstormsKid 18:46, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Review by Reallysmartgrammarwiz As a new wikipedia user I have had a lot of questions. Few users stopped to answer them for me, The HelpfulOne did after all his name is The HelpfulOne. I don't know enough about the workings of Wikipedia t say weather or not the above claims are true but I will say that if he is not anything else, TheHelpfulOne is very helpful;) Smart Guy ( talk) ( Sign) 14:12, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Review by Britishrailclass91 I think that you are always on the ball and good at what you do. I notice that you notify users quickly if they have made a mistake and I value that in wikipedians. All in all, I think you are very capable. (Sorry it's such a short review) Britishrailclass91 ( talk) 15:50, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Review by
Editorofthewiki
This user seems to be a fine all around user, though I would suggest contributing to the mainspace more beside vandalism reverting. Try to work on a DYK?
Editor
of
the
wiki
review my edits here! 19:57, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Comments
Questions