Wikipedia:Editor review/Anthony cfc

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] User:Anthony_cfc

Anthony_cfc (talk ยท contribs) RC Patrol Member dedicated to anti-vandalism. I think I may want Adminship, but I am worried I have been with Wikipedia for too short a time despite the fact that Adminship is the one thing I want most on Wikipedia! Please leave comments or advice about how I am doing, and whether or not I should go for Adminship. Also, if I did go for it would you honestly vote for me or not??? Thank you very much.

Reviews

  • Well, the fact that you've made 162 edits put you above more than 80-85% of registered Wikipedia users right off the bat - most people register, make one edit, then never return. However, running in a successful RfA requires that you gain the trust of a number of other editors here, and that takes a lot of time and patience, and a much larger editing record than yours. Please don't feel discouraged: you're off to a good start, but becoming an administrator requires a lot of work beforehand. To get you started, I highly recommend you involve yourself in a few of these activities:
    • Recent change patrolling, which largely involves checking a few of the hundreds of changes made every minute to Wikipedia pages, and reverting whatever vandalism you find. Then, you can warn the users that made that vandalism, using the templates here. This is very menial work, but is absolutely excellent for getting to know Wikipedia policy and "how things work."
    • AfD debates are where articles that have been nominated for deletion are voted on by the community, and generally involve some debate over the reasoning. As such, they're very helpful for getting to know Wikipedia's policies on what articles and content may be included here, which is very useful for administrators.
    • WikiProjects are great ways to get yourself involved in making significant edits to articles, and since they're organised by interest you should find it easy to join one you like. Just get started on the work they involve, and you're automatically an editor.
  • So, don't feel discouraged: you've started on a very long road toward your RfA, but keep at it. Try to make perhaps 10-15 edits per day, which isn't so hard if you involve yourself in the above activities, and you'll be there in just a few months. Good luck! RandyWang (chat me up/fix me up) 00:58, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Comments

  • I'm not trying to be rude, but based on this editor review, you need some more experience with templates and perhaps with following instructions. I'm not sure how or why you decided to put your information on the main page, rather than on its own page per the instructions and the example of the other editors on this page. Again, I do not wish to offend, but I just had to re-format and re-list your review properly, and that doesn't look good. --Chris Griswold 23:35, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
User:Anthony cfc's response on my talk page:
Really sorry, but I have absolutely no idea what you are on about on my editorial review. I thought it was the policy of Wikipedia to have no personal attacks which in my book you just violated by basically stating I can't follow instructions.
Maybe I've got the whole thing wrong, so could you please explain your comments on the editorial review on my [page]; oh, and let's not make enemies of this, i just want to know what you are on about.
Cheers
Anthony cfc
I would prefer to discuss matters concerning your editor review within the context of your editor review. You seem to be braced for a fight, but you won't find one with me.
Firstly, I directed no personal attacks at you. You came here to ask for an evaluation of your performance and abilities, and the first thing I saw was that you did not follow the directions written on the page, possibly because you did not understand templates. After correcting your error, I addressed it within your review.
The directions say, "create a subpage in the format of Wikipedia:Editor review/Username and use {{Editor-review}} there...and place your subpage at the top of the list below."
You did not create a sub-page. You used {{Editor-review}} on the main page. You added your listing to the bottom. Those were the directions. You didn't follow them. I am sorry if you misunderstood what I wrote as well, but I did not direct a personal attack at you. --Chris Griswold 01:57, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Thank you very much Chris, I see what you are saying nowThe instructions were strange to me as I had never encountered subpages until now, and because of this I placed the template on the wrong page. Thanks for the explanation, Anthony 17:19, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Statistics for: Anthony_cfc
(Permissions: N/A)
- Total: 162 -
Main: 77
Talk: 2
User: 9
User talk: 58
Wikipedia: 9
Image: 4
Template: 3
-------------------
Total edits: 162
w/ edit summary: 61 (37.65%*)
w/ manual edit summary: 60 (37.03%*)
Minor edits: 3 (1.85%*)
First known edit: Feb 28, 2006
-------------------
* - percentages are rounded down to the nearest hundredth.
-------------------

Questions

  1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
    The contributions is the vast amount of editing I have done to articles on Scottish Railway stations, and the number of vandalised pages I have fixed. I feel these are my own small contributions towards the marvellous Wikipedia.
  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?
    The only conflicts I have been involved in are when I first joined the RC Patrol, and my inexperienced ways resulted in more superior users giving me a fair telling off! My scars of these conflict are still on my Talk page, but I have since apologised to Ancheta Wis and I hope she bears no grudge!