Today: Sunday 20 June 2021 , 1:04 am


advertisment
search




Editor review katieh5584

Last updated 9 Day , 19 hour 26 Views

Advertisement
In this page talks about ( Editor review katieh5584 ) It was sent to us on 10/06/2021 and was presented on 10/06/2021 and the last update on this page on 10/06/2021

Your Comment


Enter code
  === User:katieh5584 ===
I would like a review because when I applied to be an admin, I was told it would be a good idea. Katieh5584 13:14, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
Reviews
  • Hello there, katieh5584. Hopefully this review will be helpful for you.
  • :* Although you did your first edit in November 2005, you started contributing regularly in August 2006. As you may have noticed, candidates should have contributed for some months (usually 4-6 at least) before they try to become administrators. You are still contributing regularly, so it should not be a problem in the future.
  • :* According to mathbot, you use edit summary in 32% for major edits and 99% for minor edits. That is pretty low. The summary is shown in the history of an article, and is pretty useful for others. In example, if you revert vandalism but state nothing, someone else who has the article in his watchlist will see that you have modified the article, but will not know what you have done, so he will check the modification out, spending some seconds in doing that. However, if you state "reverting vandalism" at least, he will say "Hmm... katieh5584 reverted a vandalism, let's see if that is true", and may check what you have done. But after the fifth or sixth time he checks and realizes you have indeed reverted vandalism, the next time he will say "Oh, katieh5584 caught another vandal" but won't check your edit as he will trust you, saving him a couple of seconds. Wikipedia is a community where everyone needs to assume good faith and trust the others. The faster others recognize you as a good faithed contributor the better, as it will save everyone time.
  • :* One thing that really worries me is the fact that you clear your talk page whenever someone writes anything there. Technically, you are free to do that, but the fact that you blank people comments' about your behaviour means you don't like others to see the controversy you may have with your edits. I make mistakes too, and sometimes other editors complain in my talk page. However, I don't delete their comments, but instead keep them there as a reminder of something wrong I did, and what I should have done. In fact, I point to my replies in my talk page, so that anyone can check my replies at all times. Personally, I think high of anyone whose talk page has warnings that had been accepted, with apologies given when necessary, as they are not afraid of showing others they were mistaken.
  • :* As a full RC patroller, you are bound to make mistake when revertings, to have edit conflicts, to warn people, to get complains in your talk page about mistakes, etc. Such "profession" is very stressful, and bound to give you more headaches than satisfaction. Please, take a break whenever you feel you are being overwhelmed, as there is nothing worse than a stressed patroller.
  • :* 475 user talk edits, a pretty high number considering you have little over 1600 edits, almost 25% of your edits is in talk pages, warning vandals and replying to inquires. Of course, this is what I would expect since you are a patroller.
  • :* Now, you have only 4 article talk edits out of 1600 edits in total. Although you have stated in your user page that you are not good at writing articles, remember that this is an encyclopedia before all, and as such, everyone, including candidates for adminship, are expected to know how to create and expand articles. While some users say you need to have a good number of article talk edits and others request that the candidate has written at least one featured article, it is my belief that, unless you take a break from time to time to write and expand articles, you would not get many positive votes in your next request for adminship.
  • :* I notice that some people complain about some of your reverts. It is good to see you always try to stay cool and civil, respecting the other, giving an apology when necessary. However, I think some of those problems could be prevented if you take a second or two to review the situation before reverting. Remember, the best patroller is not the one who reverts the most, nor the best editor is the one who writes the most. The best patroller is the one who checks everything before reverting an edit and warning a user, as the best editor is the one who supplies reliable sources to verify the inserted information. So, when you decide it was vandalism and need to be warned someone else already did so? Well, just continue with the next article. You are not the only patroller in Wikipedia, so don't feel as if all the responsability to keep vandalism away from Wikipedia is in your shoulders.
  • :* I notice 22 edits in the Wikipedia namespace. As you plan to become an administrator someday (considering you have already tried once), you should spend some more time in this namespace, contributing with articles, templates and categories for deletion, giving opinion and judging whether an article is notable enough to be inserted in Wikipedia. This will allow others to see whether you are an m:inclusionist or m:exclusionist, if you are reliable in your judgement, and especially, if you are consistent. Remember that as an administrator you may one day be speedy deleting articles and closing stuff for deletion, and unless you have tried participating in these tasks, people won't trust you to handle them. Also, spend some time contributing to requests for adminship, see what others ask from candidates, and check whether you would pass their requirements.
  • : As any patrol, you are likely to need the administrator tools someday. However, people are not going to trust you those tools unless you spend time discussing deletions, checking candidates for adminship, and writing articles. One day you will sit down in front of an article that has been tagged as speedy, and you will have to consider whether the article could be enhanced to fit Wikipedia or it is pure trash, or going to close a deletion discussion where half are requesting a deletion and another half is requesting to keep the article. And unless you have written articles, you won't know whether the article has potential or not. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 03:11, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
Comments
  • View this user's edit count using a PHP version of Interiot's tool.
  • Questions
    1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
    2. : Answer No probably not, as I haven't had time to make large edits. I spend most of my time helping out with beating vandalism.
    3. 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?
    4. : Answer Yes, I have had conflict and some editors have been very rude to me, but I try to see things from the other person's point of view. If I make a mistake I always apologise to the user.
     
    Comments

    There are no Comments yet




    last seen
    Most vists