Wikipedia:Editor review/TopGearFreak

TopGearFreak (talk · contribs) I have been on Wikipedia for close to two months and would like to know how valuable my contributions are, and if I have made any major mistakes. I used to myspace, I'll admit it, but I've changed. I am part of Wikiproject Wikify and use Huggle to revert vandalism. TopGearFreak 17:20, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reviews

• Userpage: It's pretty good 7 STARS
• Vandalism: Keep up the good work, make sure to give the vandals warnings 6 stars
• Article: Great!! 7 stars

--Spittlespat 21:47, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from La Pianista (talk · contribs)
I find it very hard to believe you're just twelve years old. Your edits display a remarkable level of maturity - your near 100%-edit summary usage (and they are helpful and detailed) is equally commendable. Such high WP:CLUE levels for your age are very rare. Furthermore, although you have had your share of conflicts, the manner in which you have dealt with them is especially understanding - you easily grasp both sides of the issue and are ready to apologize if you recognize your wrong. Your reports to AIV are also helpful.

Your main tasks, however, (typo-fixing, reverting vandalism) are quite repetitive - I think the use of tools would make it easier. Perhaps, for fixing the typos, you could install WP:AWB and for the vandalism, use WP:HUG. In my opinion, Huggle is much more efficient than Twinkle or Lupin's tool, though much easier to make mistakes. It takes a while to get used to a such a powerful tool.

Also, I would recommend you try some article building. I understand you're relatively new, and so, it's best for new users to try a little of everything. Basically, you've been a WP:GNOME, and, though there's absolutely nothing wrong with that (I am one myself), you could try some other work, like at WP:DYK, or WP:AFD. Either way, see what else you can do and find what you feel most comfortable with.

As is, though, I feel confident enough to say that you will be a fruitful admin candidate in the near future. :) —La Pianista ^(T•C•S) 23:44, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Pianista, I've just installed Huggle, and I find it much more efficent than Lupin. I do comment a WP:AFD once in a while, but now that I know that they're not noticable I'll go there more frequently. I'll also investigate WP:DYK. Thanks, TopGearFreak 14:45, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing, TGF - when commenting at AFD or any other discussion, try to avoid "per nom" or "per above" arguments, which basically add nothing to discussion (unless you cannot reword it better). It's more appropriate to reword your thoughts, or at least add "per nom, because ____" —La Pianista ^(T•C•S) 17:37, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Andy (talk)

I have to say, that, I have seen you a lot around, especially MOTD and for an editor who came only 2 months ago, you are great! My advice would be keep on doing what you are, see if you can get an FA (I can't!) and get stuck in! Regarding your age, I think it is fantastic, as La Pianista pointed out, with your knowledge and maturity in dealing with issues. I would give you 9.5 out of 10 overall. Andy (talk)

Comments from the_ed17/Allanon

Wow. Did you say that you were twelve? I don't believe you. :P Anyway...on to the reviewing. I didn't see too many mistakes, though remember that all professional (MLB) baseball players are notable. :) Don't feel like you have to Huggle or get a FA, by the way - if you love the smaller contributions, keep gnoming and wikifying away! Someone's got to do those. :)
I liked your edit summary here alot...you told everyone why you did what you did! Allanon ^{♠The Dark Druid♠} 04:39, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do enjoy wikifying, but Huggling is fun too, and rooting out low points in articles in preparing them for FA is always exciting. I'd say I'm pretty balanced in my editing. :) TopGearFreak 20:36, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from User:sinneed (talk) This is *NOT A CRITICISM*. It is an encouragement: I would encourage you when patrolling for vandals to be a bit more cautious when killing edits by IPs.

You recently reverted an edit 3 times (correctly-the content needed to go: it was valid but completely OT, belonging on the talk page) at Ellen DeGeneres. By chance I saw one of them fly past in Huggle...and saw that the IP was trying to fight off a violation of wp:BLP... but apparently simply did not know how. I find a lot of times IPs that are causing me pain with repeated edits simply have no clue what they are doing wrong... and just ... keep... trying. Sometimes I feel like they are trying to drive nails using their heads as hammers. An unmeasured but (wp:OR haha) Large percentage of the time, it isn't worth pursuing. I do try to look at what they are doing if it isn't obvious vandalism. In this case following your trail to the article, I found that someone had slipped in a bit of nonsense about DeGeneres and P&G and animal testing from a tabloid, violating wp:BLP and some well-meaning but Wikipedia-ignorant IP was trying to refute it. I killed the offending content.

I, personally, like to hand out the large block welcome message. I can't even say I encourage you to do that. The link block is a bit dated: some of the links go nowhere useful. But I found it very useful when someone gave it to me, an I light-heartedly hope some of the newbies and IPs I warn gain some value from it. Just something to consider.

I have to go earn a living for a while now, but I will try to remember to scan through some more of your work. From what I have seen so far, I mainly want to say "Go For It!": keep fighting vandals and fixing what you can/have time for.

I am confident you don't do this for the appreciation of some other random editor, but I Thank You nevertheless. All the best.

In answer to your question about my (on review not clear) comments about welcome link blocks. I use Wikipedia:Friendly. It adds tabs for various welcome blurbs. I recently put "welcomeg", what I call the large block-o-links at talk. Incidently, if you want to see a "good" example of a poorly handled exchange, please feel free to read my *POOR* work (and I mean that honestly, I let the IP get under my skin and was rather rude - not my best work ... I hope), you might look at my intereaction with that IP. The IP behaved badly, but I escalated instead of defusing. Tossing gasoline onto a fire because I am mad it does no good, eh? :)

Hope that was at least mildly helpful. Cheers.sinneed (talk) 19:50, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool

Questions

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

   I made quite a large contribution to Top Gear (current format) in reducing its criticism section, and I also nominated Bohemian Rhapsody for GA status after making some improvements. Those were my two proudest moments.

3. 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 have been in a couple of conflicts. I use a shared computer, and one time one of my friends created a vandalism account and I got blocked because of that. Another time I forgot to log out and a different person deleted part of a discussion under my username. One contributor to the discussion got a bit annoyed with me, but forgave me when I explained. Another time I accidentaly sent a vandalism warning to the wrong person, but he forgave me after an explanation. In the future I will simply edit off my home computer and be careful when sending out warnings.