Wikipedia:Editor review/Bmusician

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Bmusician

Bmusician (talk · contribs · count) I created my account on May 10, 2011, have been active as a rollbacker since June 30, 2011, and have made over 12,000 edits to the project. I'm willing to know the quality of my contributions, how I'm doing, whether or not I'm doing anything wrong or making a mistake, and what I need to improve on as an editor. Bmusician 07:03, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    I primarily work in Articles for Creation, Articles for Deletion, vandalism patrol, and new pages patrol. I have a CSD log and PROD log that can be viewed. As for content work, I've tried to refresh, clean up, and expand articles about Western classical music, particularly about the compositions of Frédéric Chopin, and am a classical musician myself. As for biographies about classical music, I've done significant work on Arthur Rubinstein. I've also created a few articles about classical musicians and compositions myself, but a majority of them are pretty short, and I've created nothing near good article criteria.
  3. Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
    A few editors have questioned some of my "non-admin closures" at AfD; a couple of them have caused controversy. Clearly, the worst closure I made was Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Poet Tree (closed when I was new-ish to closing AFD's), in which I closed as "No consensus". That was clearly wrong. An editor complained about the closure here, and I learned since then that "close calls and controversial decisions are better left to an administrator". I have currently been trying to only close debates which are a "clear keep" or "no consensus with no prejudice against speedy renomination". If I am in a dispute, I always try to seek dispute resolution and stay cool (I however have a horrible temper and am sometimes very impatient, so at times I fail to stay cool.)


Reviews

  • This edit was a very helpful, thoughtful and valuable one. One slight issue I would raise with it, however, is that you directed an editor to an essay WP:CIR when that essay specifically says not to do so. It's worth familiarising yourself with the contents of essays before linking to them! (Not removing the asterisk as I haven't carried out a comprehensive review of the editor's contributions.) --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:20, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Okay, thanks for your advice! --Bmusician 00:58, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Some more I'm afraid! Young or very young editors often disclose personal information about themselves unwisely on Wikipedia. Such information may be removed from public view by administrators or oversighters. In such cases, re-posting the removed information (or a subset of it) on a highly visible forum such as WP:ANI, is very unwise.
      • One more general piece of advice (from personal experience). If a situation makes you "very very anxious", then on Wikipedia it is usually sensible to avoid that situation and similar ones; in most instances, others will generally already be well aware of the situation and be able and willing to deal with it. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:31, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. I'm not sure that running around putting sockpuppet tags on accounts associated with the editor in question, is the best way of avoiding the situation and letting others (administrators, for example) deal with it. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 17:24, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies. I will refrain from dealing with anything related to User:Walter55024 any further. Bmusician 12:40, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for this. The majority of editors find it difficult to respond positively when it's suggested they've approached something in a less than perfect way, so your helpfulness and willingness to compromise on this contentious issue is a very telling indication of your constructive and thoughtful attitude as an editor. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:57, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Did you forget [1] [2] [3] [4] what you said only just over a month ago? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:22, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think I did, actually, it's rather annoying to find another sock of his on my watch list. (probably I shouldn't make promises that I can't keep?) Bmusician 01:28, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Your work at AfC is excellent. You demonstrate good knowledge of the core policies and you communicate well with others. I can see you are quite active in CSD tagging and your CSD log shows that you are generally accurate in your assessments. One piece of advice: be cautious requesting CSD on AfC submissions, some admins are less inclined to delete them because it can discourage new editors who may simply have been testing things out—albeit in a somewhat disruptive manner. In respect of your non-admin closures: I think you now know only to close the most obvious 'keep' discussions. Personally, I would leave apparent 'no consensus' discussions to admins—it's less grief that way. Although I think non-admin closures are valuable contributions and help ease the admin workload, I don't personally see them as a pre-requisite for things like adminship. The ability to remain calm and polite under pressure is, and I think you tick those boxes quite nicely. In summary: keep up the good work, remember to let things go sometimes and step back. Continue to expand and create content and consider pushing one of your creations to GA if possible. Pol430 talk to me 12:52, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Pol! From your comment, I will try to only request CSD on AfC submissions when the submission obviously was made in bad-faith (G3, G10, G11, G12) and will try to avoid G2. I will also continue to make valuable content contributions as well – thank you for taking the time to comment! Bmusician 13:10, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You are very welcome, Just a note on G11 and G12: not all copyright violations are made in bad faith, some people just don't realise it's a problem. I'd only CSD submissions for G12 if they are an unambiguous copyright violation and have not been edited in more than 7 days; otherwise it is probably sufficient to leave them as blank and {{Afc cleared}}. As for promotion, I would suggest only CSD tagging the most outrageous advertisements, things that contain phone numbers and addresses along with lines like "come to us for the best deal!". Pol430 talk to me 13:50, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have seen this user since a long time. One of the greatest quality of Bmusician is politenss and helpfulness. They are always willing to help no matter weather the issue is small or big. Another thing that they respond to each and every message send to them which is itself a good thing because many users dont reply to minor issues. This user is always optimistic and appreciates other's work. Their work on wiki are also very notable. They are almost active everywhere. In participating RfA, New page patroling, recent changes, AfC, dissucssing, etc., their work is amazing. I've rarely seen a user so active, and polite who does the right thing. I also feel that they are eligible to become admin looking over their contributions. Overall, they can be considered as a all-rounder and superb editor. Yasht101 :) 06:53, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Review by Worm That Turned.

Hey Bmusician. I hope you don't mind yet another review. Seems a little unfair since there are so many unreviewed editors above and below! But anyway. You've been here about a year, and have a good 15000 edits, mostly focussed on patrolling and behind-the-scenes work.

Content creation
As I said on another review, I know content creation isn't something that a lot of wikipedians are good at, but when it comes down to it, it's why we're here. It worries me that your most edited article is List of The Annoying Orange episodes, which doesn't have a single reference. However, given that the topic is an internet phenomenon, I believe most of that is vandalism reversion. In fact, having looked at all the articles you've made more than 20 edits to, you haven't actually added much content to any (except, it seems Happy Valley Shanghai). I am glad to see you've created a number of articles on classical musical pieces, though since they are currently stub or start class, I'm sure you can do a bit more on them! I think this is an area where some improvement would be a good thing.
Adoption
Well well well, this is familiar! I'm glad to see we've got more adopters around, and that my adoption course is being used elsewhere. My first reaction is that this lesson is one that you don't want to be missing out on - it's a rather important thing for new users to learn. Otherwise, I'm not going to give you too much advice on adoption here, though you are welcome to come and ask for it, but I will say - be careful how much you take on at once. As with all things on wikipedia, it's quality, not quantity that really matters.
Name changes and off wiki past
I see you've had quite a few names since you've been on the encyclopedia. I think I've bumped into you (or noticed you) in all the different guises, but didn't realise that all were the same person. Combined with the fact that you appear to have tried to erase the links between your old names (deleting redirects to your new page), I get an uncomfortable feeling. I also notice the involvement you've had in User:Spidey665 and User:AwesomeSponge and wonder how much of it was to do with whatever caused this. Neither factor worries me too much, but I'm afraid they don't sit too well with me either.
Temperment and Adminship
I understand that you are considering adminship, and to that end you do seem to have done a lot of decent work in admin based areas (for example, non controversial relistings at AfDs, good CSDs, reporting to AIV and so on). However, one thing that does worry me is how you deal with blocked editors. Demiurge1000 points out the case of Walter above, and something that stood out to me was your edit warring with Davis June over him blanking the page. I see no benefit in you doing that - yes, he shouldn't have done it, but it'd have been much better for you to report it to an admin after warning him, so they could change his block. If they didn't feel it necessary, perhaps you should have trusted their judgement - otherwise you will get frustrated and escalate the problem. Another recent example of frustration - it seems it's something you are aware of at least.
Ownership
Ok... this is going back quite a while - but I also noticed this. That text is still there, however, you should know you've released it under CC-BY-SA license - no one needs permission to use the source code, even if it is polite to do so. For example, I have absolutely no issue with you lifting large parts of my adoption course, just as Hersfold had no problem with me large parts of his.

I hope that isn't too much, and doesn't seem too harsh. You're doing a good job generally, but I think you could be doing some content great work in classical areas. If you've got any questions, feel free to ask here or at my talk page. WormTT · (talk) 13:33, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Worm for your review. Of course, I appreciate positive comments, but the thing I need is constructive criticism (which is why I opened this review, because I wanted to know what I'm doing wrong). In this reply I will address the criticisms of yours.
As for the name changes and off wiki past. I had changed my names twice (from Bryce53 to B.wilson, then to Bmusician, and I feel most comfortable with my current name). I changed my names not because of my off-wiki past on Wikia but only because I wasn't really comfortable with them. The name "B.wilson" revealed a little too much of my real-life identity, and so does "Bryce53".
I did have a horrible past - I was globally blocked 1 year on Wikia last summer for not adhering to the Terms of Use. I then asked the Wikia staff to permanently disable my account. This really upset many contributors on the wikis I was an admin on, which made them get an account on Wikipedia to "contact me". But the Wikia block occurred a long time ago (9 months ago) and I don't think my behavior back then should be used to evaluate my current behavior.
As for temperment and adminship. I agree that my AFC, AFD, AIV, and CSD work is decent, and that no editors have raised significant concerns about it, and I know when I interact with blocked editors I totally get off the line sometimes. To be honest, I have an extremely short temper (as short as an ant, no kidding!) and it takes this and this to get me really angry. And I feel my comments at the ANI thread I opened because of that were not appropriate. A temper is not a good thing to have in a collaborative environment.
I did not intend to edit war with Davis June - he did not only blank his talk page, he also personally attacked other editors. I did report request urgent help from admins on IRC the first time he personally attacked the blocking admin, and it did take a long time for one to respond. His talk page access was revoked and his block was extended.
Your friendly criticism is never too harsh - I thank you for taking the time and effort to review my actions. I know what my main issues are (that would affect me if I ran for adminship) - the short temper, my interactions with blocked users. I will also try my hardest to do content work in classical music articles...perhaps even pushing a few to GA! Bmusician 02:10, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank's for the reply - it certainly does alleviate some of my concerns. I think that the short fuse might well be the sticking point if you were to run for adminship, especially seeing as it has manifested so recently, despite the fact you are aware of it. See if you can go a little while without getting upset (and I don't mean hiding from problems, but actually focusing on staying calm) and hopefully you'll be ready. Finally, if you get no response on IRC, drop a note on wikipedia, someone will pick it up sooner or later. And if it's something as irrelevant as "blanking a talkpage", just let them do it. WormTT · (talk) 07:24, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Review by Soviet King

I enjoy working with BMusician. He demonstrates a good wiki-spirit here and is an extremely valuable asset to Wikipedia. I wish him best of luck if he decides to run for administrator privileges. Soviet King :   Talk or Yell  14:37, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reviews by TheSpecialUserTalkContributions

I have been here for only 3 days now, but have learnt a lot and the credit should go to Bmusician for that. His adoption school is just like fresh and cool breeze in the early morning. It is an amazing experience working with him. Hats off to your dedication in Adopt-a-user program. It was remarkable. Good judgements in AfDs and accurate CSD tags which is an amazing record along with helping in AfC and vandal fighting. An perfect all-rounder in short.

I m new and may also be wrong but, there is just little lack of edits in article space which can be a concern if you run for RfA as it is going down every month

Overall, a superb adopter and better editor then others whom I have seen working. TheSpecialUserTalkContributions 09:26, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Special User for your review. You are a superb adoptee. Of course, I don't work in article space often, as I am most active in NP and RC patrolling, and work in administrative areas. But you are right that I need more edits in the article space. →Bmusician 12:36, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Editor_review/Bmusician&oldid=1136099580"