Wikipedia:Editor review/Bjweeks

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Bjweeks

Bjweeks (talk • contribs) I've been around for about 5 months and I would like to be nominated or nominate myself for adminship in the next few months, so I would like hear what everybody think I could work on improving. BJ^Talk 15:22, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Reviews

• Well, I shall get started with this, then! First of all, you wish to become an admin. Well if you want to get votes, then you had better start to improve your popularity. Complaints about you deleting information in articles without proper reason is a serious accusation! People do not like admins who delete much information without giving reason for doing so. If you wish to become an admin, you must do that. Until I see improvement in that aspect, that is all I will say. Captain panda In vino veritas 21:53, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

Hi there. I hope I'm editing this page properly! Please move my comments elsewhere if I am not! I would like to comment that this user reverted an edit of mine without even looking at the edit. I simply changed a word in an article to one more easily understood by American readers. This user reverted my edit and sent me a message stating that "[my] recent contribution removed content from an article." This user did not take the time to even see what I had changed before reverting it; therefore I believe this user should take more time when editing articles and may not have the qualities the Wikipedia community values in an admin. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.141.144.170 (talk) 00:47, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello. This user has a tendency to revert pages and delete information without having any valid reasons. With the Barry Goldwater High School article, Bjweeks has made it a lifelong goal to constantly delete information on the school. Obviously the students of the high school are the main contributors to the article; therefore, much of the information is unsourced due to firsthand accounts. However, all information is factual, verifiable, and vital to the health of the article and more importanly, the school the article describes. Through Bjweeks's constant actions against the article, information on Barry Goldwater High School has been limited greatly. By thwarting the growth of the article, Bjweeks is not only detrimental to Barry Goldwater High School, he is detrimental to the Wikipedia community. He does not have any of the values needed to become an admin, and if given that position, it is my belief that he will only use it in a selfish manner. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by G0sp33dracr (talk • contribs) 04:31, 21 February 2007 (UTC).

Content on Wikipedia must be previously published and verifiable. It sounds to me like Bjweeks appropriately removed unsourced statements that did not come from a previously published source. Please read Wikipedia:Attribution. If you'd like this sort of thing to be included, start a blog or write a book about your school, and then cite that. —Remember the dot (t) 18:27, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Yeah, I don't recommend this guy. If made an admin, he will probably abuse his powers. For example, he deleted an article about our school's chess team because he couldn't write about his own. I find that selfish and immature, qualities that make him unworthy of becoming an admin. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by AyayaChan (talk • contribs) 06:20, 22 February 2007 (UTC).

Ayaya, have you ever thought to look up wikipedia policies? He deleted the article most likely because it was NOT notable, I do not know anything about your chess team, so unless it's been in major newspapers.. Illyria05 (Talk • Contributions) 18:13, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

What G0sp33dracr and AyayaChan are referring to is me stubbing [1] their high school article. As for "because he couldn't write about his own", I never wanted to write about mine, my school's article doesn't even meet notability guidelines and I'm not even sure we have a chess team. I think he is referring to this this comment, after it was made I looked into the BGHS page and after seeing what bad shape it was in, I stubbed and sourced what was left. BJ^Talk 18:31, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Professionalism? Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Communist47

This user had taken my admin-nomination, and opposed it, in the form of an unprofessional, if odd, joke. And then, acting against policy, he, with no right, had closed down my nomination. After my attempt to revert it back, he again, against policy, closed it down.Communist47 10:42, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I suggest the above comment is ignored. Communist47's RfA had zero chance of passing with the user having made fewer than 100 edits to Wikipedia. C47 also made it blatantly obvious he/she wanted the admin. tools in order to push a POV. Speedy closure was the correct decision to avoid wasting any more time on this prankster/crank.--Folantin 11:06, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I do not appreciate you insulting my beliefs and me as a person. Communist47 11:16, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

He is not insulting you or your beliefs, if you really have a problem with me, my vote or me speedy closing your RfA please take it to WP:ANI. BJ^Talk 11:39, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

It'd be great if you didn't break Wikipedia policy in the first place instead of telling me what to do.Communist47 11:33, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I didn't break any policy that I know of, again you should take this to WP:ANI where my actions will be reviewed. BJ^Talk 11:38, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I too would advise other users to ignore the above comment. Blatant POV pusher that failed an RFA in which Bjweeks correctly opposed with some humor and closed per WP:SNOW.--Jersey Devil 21:51, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I remember there was a major argument because of that WP:SNOW decision on the talk page of WP:RFA. Captain panda In vino veritas 21:47, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Questions

1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?

   I'm most pleased with my work coding BJBot (I must give credit to MECU and others for the great ideas) which tags orphaned fair use images for deletion and its new task of listing incomplete IfD. I'm not very good at writing article prose so I stick to formating and citing sources as my contribution to articles.

2. 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 in a few content disputes before but none ever escalated beyond WP:3O. In the past I think I have handled the disputes fairly well by discussing it on the talk page and using the the dispute resolution process. I try to use reverting as little as possible but I find that hard in some cases (more so when IPs start revering me). I have never broken 3RR but any edit warring is disruptive so I hope get better with that.