Wikipedia:Editor review/Asics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Asics

Asics (talk · contribs) I have only recently started editing seriously, over the past 3/4 months, but I just wondered about suggestions of how to improve my work etc. so that in a few months I could apply for adminship, and be successful! As this is probably a long term aim on wikipedia. Any help would be much appreciated! Asics talk ^{Editor review!} 16:23, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Reviews

Review by PeaceNT:

Hi Asics, here is my review, I hope you find it helpful.

• Firstly, you've proven to be very strong in editing the article mainspace (good job!). I can see good edit summary usage (both sufficient and informative), you revert vandalism and have a GA, which is great. Avg edits per page is high, which means you have a number of articles that are your focus and you're a major contributor. Just a note, I notice Trivium (band) is currently tagged with {{advertisement}}, why don't you consider improving the article and get rid of the tag? Articles marked with tags are often annoying to look at :). The same can be done with Bring Me the Horizon. Matt Heafy should have a lead section. As for The Crusade (album), the lead is a little too long and doesn't go well with WP:LEAD#Length.
• I've looked through you talk page edits, you don't forget warn vandals using the appropriate official templates, and you're civil to others editors. I also like this very much. Overall, I think you cooperate well with others, you behave in a kind and civil manner everywhere. It's nice to have editors like you around.
• Your Wikipedia space edits are good, too. You created WikiProject Trivium and work there actively . A question, did you make the proposal here before starting the project? I couldn't find it in your contribs, so I asked :)
• Another thing, as you said you're interested in running a RfA in the future, I think it would be a good idea to participate more in XfDs, AIV, ANI etc, you'll surely get more experience with the admin-related work. Also, please be careful not to consider AfD a vote poll like you sometimes did [1] [2]. This is important, I've seen RfA candidates get opposition because of this.
• Yet another thing, this has nothing to do with your contribs, but it's about your statement above. You consider adminship a "long term aim on wikipedia"? Oh please don't. I believe the main goal of everyone here is to build an encyclopedia. Adminship only provides some extra tools to help you edit better and achieve that aim, not the "aim" itself. If adminship is your "aim", then what will you do when you've become an administrator? :P I like it when people are ambitious, just don't let the admin status be your primary objective. You're not an admin now, and you're doing a great job already.

I think you're on the right track being a valuable editor and a civil Wikipedian. Happy editing and good luck with your future RfA! I wish you a good day. PeaceNT 11:27, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

P.S: You're one of the very few editors I know who really take the time to explain exactly what they do in the edit summary. Most people are lazy (take me for example). 11:42, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.
• View this user's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool
• Response to first review:
  • I'll have a look at what I can alter on the articles you have mentioned, in order to make them more apt for wikipedia.
  • I didn't know there was such a thing as wikiproject proposals page... I was less experienced when creating that wikiproject, so I didn't know, but will remember in future.
  • I'll treat the XFDs as discussions rather than votes from now on.
  • When I say it is an aim to become admin. I don't think I expressed what I meant very well at all! I mean, I believe in the long term it would be good to get the tools to help with deleting pages, protecting them, blocking vandals, and other such jobs. That's what I meant really!Asics talk ^{Editor review!} 12:06, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
• Peacent's comment: Well, the Wikiproject proposals page is used to examine if a project will gain support from the community. I'm not entirely sure whether it's a requirement for a creation, but actually I was quite concerned because it is clearly laid out at the top of the page that "If the scope of your project idea is very narrow (such as a TV show, music band, video game, etc) then you should start a task force of an existing project instead of starting a whole new WikiProject". According to that warning, Trivium project appears to be improperly created. Just my 2 cents PeaceNT 16:39, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Questions

1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?

   The Dawn of Relic page is the one I am most pleased about, this is due to it being my first real contribution! I also created several articles relating to the band and have and these were done at the same time, so they are also something that I am proud of. Another part that I am proud of is the WikiProject Trivium. This is because I created it after the page was unprotected, and it so far has not had great amounts joining, yet people are becoming members at a steady rate. We edit pages to due with Trivium keeping them up to date, factual and vandal free, making me proud to have started something that helps my favourite band. It makes me feel as though I am a part of the band =D!!! Although this is not the real reason why I did it! I genuinly did believe that due to the constant vandalism their page did need some form of protection, and semi-protection wasn't really an option!

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?

   There was a big conflict over the Job for a Cowboy page, it was created (by someone else) then deleted, and this happened several times. I then joined the discussion on what I believe to be the 3rd deletion, a user decided that it should be initially made in a userspace, this was done in someones, and I played a large part in ensuring that this was an article that would not be deleted again. I researched for all proper sources of info, and then after adding all this requested that the page was undeleted, and the result was outstanding almost unanimous, I think there was only 1 person opposing!