Wikipedia:Editor review/Ifnord

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] User:Ifnord

Ifnord (talk ยท contribs) I really enjoy dull and repetative tasks, the Wiki janitor role appeals to me more so than the blocking part of being an administrator. I like closing AfDs, I do it by hand, no scripts. Sometimes I feel the need to simply Zen out and find that these kinds of tasks relaxing while knowing I'm still being helpful. I would enjoy working on stuff like Did you know? which usually has an administrator backlog, it's one reason I would like to be an administrator here one day. This isn't so much my opening statement but my convoluted way of explaining why I'd be interested. Please, give me your evaluation below. Thanks.

Reviews

  • Well, now, I've always been a fan of wikijanitors such as yourself - it's very good to see people such as yourself hanging around, and I'd encourage you to keep it up. In terms of rounding out your involvement, I highly recommend you increase your edits to the article and article talk spaces: if you intend to run for a life of painadminship, you'll be judged by a great many users on your contributions to those two areas. As a passtime, see if you can get a few articles to GA (or even FA) status - it'll be very helpful if/when you start an RfA. RandyWang (chat me up/fix me up) 08:14, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Comments

Statistics for: Ifnord
(Permissions: N/A)
- Total: 3261 -
Main: 1386
Talk: 155
User: 73
User talk: 328
Wikipedia: 1235
Wikipedia talk: 17
Image: 50
Template: 12
Template talk: 2
Category: 3
-------------------
Total edits: 3261
w/ edit summary: 2731 (83.74%*)
w/ manual edit summary: 2494 (76.47%*)
Minor edits: 529 (16.22%*)
First known edit: Oct 4, 2005
-------------------
* - 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?
    I began 5150 (Involuntary psychiatric hold) as a stub when I first came on. Not more than a dicdef really. But, I keep going back and adding and adding to it. I looked at it as a whole recently and thought, "Geez, I never thought this could be a whole article." Other people added pop culture references and now I'm wondering (with a lot of work) if it could one day reach the level of a candidate for featured article status.
    My first real attempt as an article (as a serious writer) was Rock-a-Hoola (which is now Lake Delores). This was a total mystery to me, an apparent abandoned water park in the middle of the Mojave Desert on the well travelled road from California to Las Vegas. What was this place? What is it now? I thought the answer must be on Wikipedia - but it wasn't. I researched it, wrote about it, referenced it, found a good image under a Creative Commons licence, added a stub about the city that it was located in (Newberry Springs)...and learned a whole lot about Wikipedia. The article has recently been written about extensively by a new editor with apparent first-hand knowledge. I enjoyed showing him the ropes and while the article still needs lots of work it was a tremendous learning exercise for me.
  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?
    Not often, surprisingly. I really remember XS Energy Drink where I had repeatedly removed unreferenced sales claims. [1] shows the other editor really unhappy with me - but he did supply a reference of sort that time. So I cleaned up the reference [2] using proper formatting, showing him how it was done and showing him what assuming good faith was about. I left a note on his talk page [3] telling him so. I believe in WP:AGF, I think it works.