Wikipedia:Editor review/Into The Fray

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Into The Fray

Into The Fray (talk · contribs) Well, I'm now a couple months into serious editing here on Wikipedia and thought I'd take an opportunity to gather some comment about my work. Granted, a good deal of it has been RC stuff, particularly vandal fighting, but I have made some other contributions as well. I generally like to try and find new users to help and enjoy the interactions that I've had. Curious for feedback on how best to flesh myself out as an editor based on community feedback. Into The Fray T/C 17:09, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Reviews
Hi Into The Fray. I feel your edits are very helpful for Wikipedia, such as your work at Wikipedia:Request an account and Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Perhaps all I can suggest is what people have suggested for me. Try editing more aritlces, more writing as they said. Still, you are a very helpful Wikipedian, and you should keep doing the edits you do, just do more article edits! The ammount of times your userpage has been vandalized (52) shows that you are also a good anti-vandal worker, which is always helpful. You are also a friendly Wikipedian, who always keeps his cool. Keep it up! — jacĸrм (talk) 16:30, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Polite and helpful when I came across this user. Tiddly-Tom 21:49, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

  • Review by Arknascar44 Hey, Into the Fray. You're a really great editor, and have your edits nicely balanced across the namespaces. Plus, you've got over 2,000 edits this month (now that's something I'll never have =D)! In addition, you're active at the help desk, which is always a good thing. Finally, and most importantly, you're a very thorough editor, (see here) and someone who always thinks things through carefully would make a good admin someday *nudge nudge, wink wink*. I do have some optional questions for you, so here goes:
Thanks for the review, Arky, I do appreciate it very much. Before I get to the questions below, I'd like to comment on your example of my "good" editing. I'm laughing as I write this, because the only reason I knew that was because I had been in the process of writing the {{ACC|n}} template for the IP's second request when I edit conflicted with the archival bot. So I didn't save my edit and then failed to note that the bot hadn't archived both requests, only the one you'd marked complete. So, mistake number one. Mistake number two came along when I saw my mistake based on your edit and wound up throwing the template up there again, screwing it up and edit conflicting with you while you were fixing it for me. So. Good editor? We'll see! But you are very kind. My answers are below. Into The Fray T/C 03:35, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
  1. Q: You're really active in helping out users at the help desk and such. Have you considered adopting a user? I think you'd be great at it :)
    A: Actually, yes, I have. I think Wikipedia can be daunting for the uninitiated and I've offered, in one fashion or another, to adopt a few users or at least to act as a couple unique individuals proxy. The closest I've come to formal adoption was here: [1]. I haven't heard back as yet. I haven't listed myself because, well, I just haven't gotten around to it yet.  :) I will soon, though. I am learning a lot and think that I might have something to share with newer editors. There have been times, though, that a helpful nature has come back to bite me. Live and learn, right?
  2. Q: It says on your user page that you don't often participate in RfAs. Why not? I think, from what I've seen from you, that you'd have some very well thought-out votes there that could really benefit some of the discussions going on there.
    A: Well, I don't often participate, but I do often read. RfA seems to be a hot spot for intense, snarky debate and that is sometimes a little off-putting. I have voted several times, but I generally keep my comments brief. This sums up my feeling about it pretty well [2]. In fact, the latter part of the conversation on that page is very interesting to me and osmething I'm still digesting and turning over in my mind. I do vote when I have an opinion and, in my later votes, that's been generally only about folks with whom I have crossed paths.
Cheers, ARkY // ¡HaBLaR! 03:05, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Review by delldot: Hi, I've run into you vandal fighting tons of times, you're always there in my automatic edit summaries! Do you sleep? Hehe, jk. Thanks for the star, I see that orange box with a bit of a sense of dread these days ("crap, what have I done NOW?") so it was very nice to get. I'll try not to let it bias this review. ;)

  • User interaction: looks great, didn't see anything of concern after a look at your talk page. I like that you're not afraid to admit you don't know something or to ask for help. And you're very friendly and personable with other users. And not afraid to admit you've made a mistake, if a little hard on yourself when you do.
Thank you for the review, delldot! In general, I am a little hard on myself, perhaps, but largely that's because so many of the mistakes that I've made are very easily avoided ones by using the preview button. A sense of humor's a big deal to me, so I try to keep it fun and as light-hearted as possible, though there are times to get serious.
  • Which one were you, in the conflict you pointed to in the questions below? What's the story with the change of username, if you don't mind me asking?
I was at that point DMT. My reason for changing was based purely on privacy concerns. That wasn't really even a dispute per se. Broken down, what happened was I was vandal fighting, I saw experienced user A make a rather nasty change to inexperienced user B's user page and wasn't sure what to do about it. So I went to an admin to ask for advice, that admin decided to get directly involved, A took mild offense to it and left a note on my talk page saying I should have come directly to him. The admin said the same thing. In retrospect, I was very new at the time, but I think I really got kinda bitten and that was the gist of the whole thing. I don't think I was wrong in going to an admin for advice (at that point, I don't think I even knew about WP:ANI) given my level of experience at the time, but I was made to feel that I was. I don't hold grudges, the admin in question is a prolific contributor for whom I have tons of respect.
Sounds like you handled it well by forgiving and forgetting. delldot talk 17:27, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
  • About this guy, I'd personally recommend being very, very careful with the word troll, because it can be damaging. Especially if there's a possibility of them just being oblivious. And if you can deal with them by ignoring them, then that solves your problem whether they are one or not. It seems like you were starting to lose your patience with them a little, though you didn't flip out or anything. What's the story with them?
Yah, I've noticed lately that troll can be a pretty controversial word and perhaps it wasn't fair. I pulled that notice because I decided that, one, I could handle the situation myself and, two, there were at least two other admins who had their eyes on the individual too and so my posting there was probably unnecessary. I do not often go to ANI (only twice) and like to tackle things myself if possible. The situation was that, although one admin disagrees with me on this point alone, I felt like the individual in question was masquerading as a child to simply play childish games and be disruptive. I try very hard to give the benefit of the doubt, but what got under my skin (and I shouldn't have let it, because I think that's what it was designed to do) was that the individual was posting my user name all over the help desk and referring people to me. Whether I'm right or wrong and whether the individual is here to play games or not, I'm on the fence about and so I pulled the notice.
LOL! I am not a huge SciFi fan, truth be told. I just love to read, period. I cover just about every genre and I asked Mike for some recommendations because I know from running into him a few times that he's a fan. I'm reading Heinlein and Le Guinn on his recommendations at the moment and both are excellent. I used to manage a bookstore and I've heard of Butler, but never read. I'll keep her in mind!
  • Count-related: Tons of AIV posts, lots of help desk posts, too. Guess you weren't kidding when you said you like to help new users. Which is positively brilliant, a very important role. I don't see many article content contributions, but I could be missing them in the midst of your tons of vandal-reverts. I don't see a problem if someone doesn't want to participate in an aspect of the project, as long as they're helping out somehow, but others may. Not that you should necessarily worry about what others think...
Mm. The question. Am I naught but a janitor, a word I've seen used pejoritavely in some RFA's, which I think is generally unfair. No, my article space contributions haven't been high and I'd like to get them higher. And, in fact, will. I have a couple ideas on self-initiated tasks that I'd like to do. Earlier on in arriving here, for instance, I was a naughty drive-by tagger, before I realized that that's not exactly what I want to do here. So, for instance, I've worked on Jude Stringfellow (which was an interesting experience) and LFMG, trying to help them both along. Stringfellow's been redirected based on an AfD. LFMG will be deleted, I imagine, if it hasn't been already as of the writing of this. But I suppose my point there is not really to help the under-dog as much as it is to try to help the original editor and the article to a point where it can survive. Earlier on, I called myself a "deletionist", but then I read some more essays and various other topics and, though I'm still not afraid to prod or AfD something, I'm more inclined to see if I can help it out instead. That's a long winded answer to a question you didn't ask, I know.  :) But the point is that I would like to increase my article space contributions/interactions as well.
  • RfA-related: Still too new, but everything else looks great. Keep up this quality of participation and I'll nom in 3 to 5 months if you're interested. delldot talk 15:46, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Still too new, I agree 110%. I still have stuff to learn! And I'm having fun learning it. There is for instance this rather methodical, lengthy discussion I'm having with a great editor here [3]. Be forewarned, I work in a quasi-legal field, that article is about a lawyer and the main participants in the discussion page are also lawyers. But it gives you a feel for how I am learning and, I think, coming to understand policy and guidelines, better. Particularly the minutia.
Sounds good, keep in touch. delldot talk 17:27, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Comments

  • You were mean to me on my page.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Schoolstuff63 (talk • contribs)
    I don't think that was mean, an appropriate warning for vandalism, and then a message so friendly asking you to stop that I almost fainted! Great work ITF! delldot talk 15:46, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Mate! -I missed the part where a midwestern american is an "expert" on the All Blacks! -Gime a break Ed!!—Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.195.225.27 (talk • contribs)
I'll assume this is in reference to this edit [4], which speaks for itself. Into The Fray T/C 21:17, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Questions

  1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
    I think I'd be dismissive if I didn't first say I am proud of my vandal fighting work. While neither scholarly or glamorous, I think it's a necessary function here at the same time. Cleaning and maintaining Wikipedia adds to its credibility, which I think benefits us all. I've done some light copy edit here and there. Articles that come to mind are (some under my previous user name) Doreen Bird, Bird College of Dance & Theatre Performance, Coin collecting, Thompson (band), Enfield Automotive. I intend to do more. I've also started little project of my own, which is the creation of redirects to specific cities using the State's abbreviation (e.g. Detroit, Michigan - Detroit, MI). I started with Ohio because I was born there. I particularly like helping new editors (and have considered listing myself as an adopter) with acclimating themselves to Wikipedia: [5].
  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?
    Honestly? No, I haven't. Early on, I had a couple issues while I was getting used to policies and roles, but I wouldn't have called them conflicts. The one that sticks out in my mind is summarized pretty well here: [6]. I try to keep pretty cool and civil at all times. Neutrality is important to me, particularly when it comes to establishing credibility here.