Wikipedia:Editor review/American Eagle

From the Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can change

[change] American Eagle

American Eagle (talk ▪ changes) - This is not an RfA, nor do I (myself) intend to start one based on the result of the reviews here. But I would like to be considered to be granted the Sysop tools in the future. I have been on for two months+ (a few weeks under the advised timeline). I would ask that you add a review with any comments, questions, or otherwise things you would like to say regarding my edits or otherwise. Thanks a lot -- America ^†alk 03:13, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Reviews

• You are an excellent user with a strong commitment to the mainspace by percentage of edits (58%) and the 100+ stubs you have created. You also demonstrate diversity in working on cities, universities, people, films, and sports. I wouldn't hesitate to support a future bid for adminship. Cassandra (talk) 03:32, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
• I've kept an eye on your edits since your start and I have to say in my eyes your well on your way towards Admin status. You change your sig ALOT which gets distracting cause after we get used to one you change it and we don't know, or at least I don't, know it's you until the sig is clicked on...you need to work on that. Helping others clear their sand box sometime wouldn't hurt even if you need help (hint, hint). And while I love, for lack of a better term, the Christian part about you it wouldn't hurt to branch out to other areas , like I need to do. In short...your on the right path.--  † ChristianMan16  04:11, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Oops, forgot about that. I'll also try to keep this sig for awhile. Cheers -- America ^†alk 04:17, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

• A look at your edit count and your article, your doing pretty good so far, and well on your way on a WP:RfA passing. I noticed you've created a lot of stubs. Try to get one or two of your articles you've created to WP:GA, and even WP:VGA. Over 500 edits to the project space means you have a decent amount of experience in administrative pages. All I would suggest is do to some recent changes patrol. I don't see you revert that much. I know I've only been here for about 28 hours, but I haven't seen one revert. Vandal fighting seems like a good trait for admins. Try it. So overall, do some vandal fighting and article expanding. If I think I se your ready for RfA, I'll ask to nominate you. Best, RyanCross (talk) 05:20, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

A note to RyanCross, I've already said that I would nominate him over email and on the IRC channel that we both go to, but if you would like to nominate him as well, feel free to nominate him as well :). Cheers, Razorflame 05:39, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Can I be nosey and ask a) which channel and b) why are you not in irc:#wikipedia-simple?

I have reverted hundreds of vandalism (for example, see here). And if you look at what links to my page, have warned hundreds of vandals. But I haven't done much vandalism reverting today. And I both started and did a ton of work to Charles Spurgeon and Billy Graham, both are WP:GA's. I also wrote John Piper (theologian), George Müller, and Bill Gothard. But I know I should try to expand articles more, it's just hard to focus on. I thank you for your review and comments. Cheers -- America ^†alk 05:32, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh, well I guess I wasn't here long enough o see you revert. So basically, there's no problem here. Just don't get into any big disputes. Thanks, RyanCross (talk) 05:41, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

• To tell you the truth, I believe that you are one of our most improved editors that we have here on this site. After being taught how to both revert vandalism and make articles, you have completely taken in all that information, and have converted that into some amazing feats. You are one of our best article simplifiers that I know (up there with Lights and Gwib) and I believe that you are near a successful RfA. All you need to do now is continue with what you have been doing and all should fall into place in the future. Cheers, Razorflame 05:39, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
• Very high edit count in just a mere 3 months. A few more months, and you will be ready. If you don't want a self-nom, we will do it for you! Chenzw  Talk  02:29, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
• I thought you were an admin when I first came here, looking at your editing and how helpful you were. I think that says something. Staeiou (talk) 01:29, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool
• ...Or with this more accurate edit counter
• And this list of pages I started

Questions

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

   160+ pages created (but some were just some stubs), 2400+ article edits, and started - Charles Spurgeon and - Billy Graham.

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?

   I may been in minor conflicts, such as this and this, but those were easily resolved, plus I'm not that kind of person.

3. Is there an area of the wiki you wish you dedicated more of your time to and if so where? (Question from ChristianMan16)

   Hmm, starting out, all I did was try to create the Books of the Bible, but got tired of that. I have created many articles on Christians (see here), and have gotten on kicks to redo things (like redoing all the pages in this category to this just from seeing it wrong). And also I have zoned-in to making 100's of edits to make a VGA/GA (see here). But have edited more 2,000 pages in total. I have also just clicked Show any page and edited those pages a lot. And also I have added categories, interwiki links, infoboxes, etc. to articles at random. But as I just go through (and see that you changed your question as I was writing) this category, I wish that I had the time to fix them all, but aren't able to do them all. Hope that answers your question. -- America ^†alk 04:38, 15 June 2008 (UTC)