Wikipedia:Editor review/RyRy5

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] RyRy5

RyRy5 (talk · contribs) Hi, I have been editing here at Wikipedia for a while now and I have a reasonable amount of edits. I actually do want to become an admin in the far future, but would like to see how I am doing so far. Well, editing here at Wikipedia is a hobby for me, not a job. I am mostly active all week, but not as much on weekdays. I am a person who does not get frustrated and always has a cool head. I am only human so if I do make a mistake in my editing, please tell me politely. I am trying to do a lot better than I was as a beginner at Wikipedia.

I have a few main areas of work here on Wikipedia. I am starting to write more articles, mostly baseball-related articles, so I may help out at WP:MLB; that is probably where I'm most active. My best article I have written so far should be Justin Masterson. I new page patrol and revert vandalism, and try to make the appropriate actions there. I also use my patrol page which does lend me a hand sometimes. I vote at the WP:AFD on occasions. I do copy-edit and wikify on pretty much any article as well. RyRy5 talk 07:35, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Reviews

  • I have to say, this editor is one of the best ones I've seen in Wikipedia. You help new users with adoption, as well as old ones by showing them new WikiProjects. Whenever Wikipedia is having a bad day, RyRy5 is sure to make it Wikipedia's best days. He is easy to get along with and has made MAJOR contributions. I'm surprised he isn't an admin yet. Whenever you need help, count on RyRy5 to save the day. Nothing444 20:31, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
  • I think you should increase more edits in the mainspace. I also find that the you edit your user page too often. Although editors should improve their userpage, I think you shouldn't overdo it. I am impressed though, in your dedication in adopting users. --Lenticel (talk) 09:08, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
  • As I told RyRy, I truly believe he should focus his energies on the mainspace. Edit count for its own sake is not necessarily a good thing; we typically look for the QUALITY of the edits, not the quantity. I also wish that RyRy would use his energy to work with our existing adoption program rather than recreating the wheel, but that's his discretion.
I admire his enthusiasm, and have no doubt that he'll mature into an exceptional user. - Philippe | Talk 04:18, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
  • As other have stated, more mainspace edits are needed. You would also benefit from more project space edits. One other glaring Red flag that jumps out at me is your edit summary usage - there simply isn't enough of it. Be sure to check the edit summary usage in the preferences. Give it at least another 6 months or so before accepting a nomination, as accepting one before then will only amount to a snow closure, which is something no one likes to see. ArcAngel (talk) 15:35, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
  • You're a fine editor so far. Try to get more mainspace edits and work there instead of focusing so much on userspace, adoption, welcoming, etc. (although that is a very good thing, it won't help as much in the road to adminship). I think everything else we've pretty much discussed via your talk page. :)   jj137 (talk) 21:18, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
  • I think you have, as said by Philippe, a lot of enthusiasm about Wikipedia, and the entire concept of a wiki. You do need more mainspace edits. Remember to keep editing a hobby, not a job. Become more familiar with some of the policies, or some of the essays Wikipedia has that aren't (or aren't yet) policy. Basketball110 pick away... 02:17, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
  • As I've said on your talk page, I think you need to slow down. You seem to be dabbling in many things, and not always understanding them. When you nominated Jesus for featured article, was it because you understood featured articles? Or did you just think you were supposed to get involved there in order to become an admin? Do you understand why some pages of yours have been nominated for deletion for being overly bureaucratic? I think you're still biting off way more than you can chew. Slow down, and chew thoroughly. It's better that way. Friday (talk) 03:11, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
  • I haven't seen too much of this user, but what the hey. I agree that you should use edit summaries more and do more mainspace work, but otherwise you're doing just fine. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 03:05, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
  • RyRy, I would suggest you force yourself to use edit summaries via "My Preferences" I would also suggest more work in the mainspace rather than your userspace. About 1/8 of your edits are to your userspace That's all from me. - Milk's favorite Cookie 00:37, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
  • User seems very trustworthy, seems to get along with everyone here. User participates at the Rfa's and stuff and voice his opinion. This user will be more notable and stuff in the future. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:58, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
  • I'm growing increasingly concerned that you're perhaps being led astray by other editors. Even here at this review, I see people shouting "hooray!" instead of actually reviewing you. If you want to know how you're really doing, I can think of a couple ways to achieve this. 1) Stop asking your friends to review you. Do you think they'll say anything meaningful? So far they're just cheering. This is not useful. 2) Start looking at the actual feedback you're already getting. Several editors (Yes, myself included) have tried to give you useful advice at your talk page. So far I see you smiling and nodding at it, but I see no evidence you're actually read it or understood it. You don't need an editor review; you need to pay attention to the feedback you're already getting. You need to slow down and try to understand what you're doing, rather than merely sticking your fingers in as many pies as you can find. Friday (talk) 15:25, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Yes, RyRy5, it does seem that you do overdo user talk and userspace. I've noticed that you start adding these little banners on the talk pages of users you've met advertising that you made another 1,000 edits. This serves absolutely no purpose to the encyclopedia and is only useful to yourself. Remember that Wikipedia is not Myspace. Also, while you have about 5,000 edits as of now, you only have 1,000 in the mainspace-- the actually import part. Most of them seem to be minor spelling corrections and vandalism reverting. While I agree this is very useful to the 'pedia and I admit, I do it a lot myself, it is really important to start making major, quality edits, as you advised on my review. Perhaps it would be useful joining Wikipedia:WikiProject French communes, as there is a lot of work to be down here. Editorofthewiki 14:16, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
  • I seem to be the fourth editor watching your contributions to clean up any mishap. I strongly suggest that you slow down and take a good look at your own edit history, as well as any remarks on your /Talk. Your enthusiasm will be a valuable asset, but you are overshooting your target at the moment. --Yooden ☮

He is great Wikifan6365 (talk) 01:03, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Comments


Questions

  1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
    I have a couple. I am very happy with my contributions for the Red Sox WikiProject. Why? Because I know I am helping the WikiProject grow reverting vandalism, creating articles (10+ created), and helping clear out the red links at this link. I am also happy with helping others learn about Wikipedia. I am a co-adopter and I only have 1 adoptee, but I am happy to help him out. I also created the Los Angeles Angels WikiProject. It was just created go so it's still in construction. Generally, I am very happy with my reverting of vandalism and editing many different kinds of articles, mostly baseball.
  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?
    Few, but I try my best to avoid them. I can only think of the deletion of my adoption program. I see what I was doing wrong, teaching my adoptees some wrong info, so I actually decided to delete it at the end. That's the reason why I'm a co-adopter now. I plan to learn alot more about Wikipedia so I can teach my own adoptees alot better. I always have a cool head so I rarely get stressed out here at Wikipedia.