Wikipedia:Editor review/casmith 789

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] casmith_789

casmith 789 (talk · contribs) After returning from a two month break from Wikipedia, I have decided to take up an editor review. This is to ask others what I have been doing wrong, and to help me evolve and improve as an editor. Eventually, I would like to become an administrator, however I do not feel I am ready yet, due to my lack of involvement in Wikipedia processes such as WP:AIV and talks on Wikipedia namespaces. I patrol special:newpages regularly (when I am online) and, looking through my contributions, I have noticed that CAT:CSD is not cleared as speedily as hoped. This is one of my reasons for wanting to become an administrator. Two months ago, I felt that the standard of new articles being created had increased, but now it is the same as before, and so I wish to know what else I could do to help this, and other areas of Wikipedia. -- Casmith_789 (talk) 14:42, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Reviews

  • I did ran across your editor review a week ago but somehow I didn't review, so I apologize! Anyways, hi Casmith, I'll try to provide some of my opinions on your contributions:
The former article looks good, I would rate it Start class as for now, but it could easily be improved to B class with some formalization in style (check related featured articles for reference). If you think it reaches good article status, visit WP:GAN and follow the instructions there. If you think it reaches featured article status, visit WP:FAC and follow the instructions there.
  • Great work on tagging pages for speedy deletion. You mentioned that you have few conflicts with them. I could not find anything significant browsing through talk page history, so I'll just be general. To avoid future conflicts, maybe don't tag too fast, if the article was created just a moment ago, the author might be still working on it. Tagging the work speedy deletion rapidly may cause other editor's stress or biting if the editor is new. But you have actively responded and helped couple users that was confused by the process, which is very good of you.
  • You know this, but I feel that I need to say this again. Excluding Penmon (place) and couple other articles, your actual contributions to the encyclopedia content is very low. Most of them are merely stub sorting. As you work on contributing more to the content of the pages, you may need to start posting more in article talk pages as you currently have 9 only.
  • You realise the importance of WP:AFD and WP:AIV in WP:RFA, which is good. It is especially important for new page patrols to be highly in active in these two areas to be considered for RFA. By participating in WP:AFD more, you will have the opportunity to prove your communication skills, which is crucial.

I feel that's enough comments for now. When you have more edits, I may have more things to say. But yeah, that's it for now, cheers! AQu01rius (User • Talk) 15:16, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Comments

Questions

  1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
    I have not created many articles, or contributed to many articles. However, the two articles I have created (Penmon (place) and Problems in coal mining) I felt were useful additions after finding that they were not on Wikipedia. I am especially pleased with the first of these two articles, and I want to get it rated (from FA class to Stub class) but I do not know where (can someone please help!?) My contributions to the mainspace, which are around 900, does not include the many articles I have tagged for speedy deletion. I am particularly pleased with my contributions there (when newpage patrolling).
  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?
    Any conflicts over editing I feel have been delt with in a civil manner, and so I feel that I will act accordingly in the future. I have had a few conflicts when tagging for speedy deletion, but I feel that any conflict I have had has been sorted out quickly and efficiently and no-one involved has been hurt afterwards as a result. Other users have influenced my views on speedy deletion, but none of them have caused me stress and that is something I find good from an editing point of view.