User talk:Electriccatfish2

Archives (Index)

s/ 23 s/ 1 s/ 2 1 2

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

RfA review

Hi there, Electriccatfish. As promised, I have reviewed your edits regarding a possible RfA; I'm not too sure that an RfA in September would be a good idea. You are certainly a good editor - you have done a lot of good things and certainly have enough experience; however, there are a few too many occasions where you seem not to quite understand some nuances of Wikipedia policy. These are my thoughts (I will emphasise the problems - that's not to say that you don't do good work, but it'll be more helpful to you if I focus on what could be improved:

• Though you generally make good comments at AfD, there are a few occasions which are a cause for concern. Here, you're proposal for a speedy keep isn't quite in line with our criteria for speedy keeps. Your comment here is a bit thin - you assert that the sources are unreliable, but don't explain why. Again, here you assert that an article is notable without anything to back up your claim. Your non-admin closure here was a bit hasty - you should have withdrawn the nomination, rather than speedily keeping because the article met WP:BAND; meeting a notability criterion is not a reason to speedy keep but an unopposed withdrawal is. Another editor had to clean that up for you.
• I'm not quite sure what you mean here. You seem to suggest a cool-down block, even though you know that cool-down blocks are not helpful. You would certainly have to explain that at RfA. That whole incident could have been handled better, to be honest.
• Minor point, but you don't often use edit summaries when editing articles - some editors see this as important and might even oppose over it.
• You don't have a great deal of content creation or dispute resolution work, without which many editors would oppose you over. It might be worth spending some time improving articles or helping with dispute resolution - perhaps bring one or two to GA?
• You might take into account some of the comments at your editor review as well.

In summary, I think that you're a great editor and one day will make a great admin. Having said that, there are a few issues which need resolving - that will come with experience, more than anything else. If you submitted an RfA in September it might pass, but it would be far from certain. I would suggest waiting till around January, and spend that time getting a lot more experience in the areas you think you would work as an administrator. You might also find it much easier to get your CVUA up and running successfully without the distraction of other administrative duties. If you come back to me in January, I'd be willing to re-review your contributions and consider nominating you; in the mean time, keep up your good work. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 14:05, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing me! Just to clarify:

• Yes, the AFD's need some work. I will be emphasising this over the summer. Please note that those !votes and (non-admin closure)'s were from the start of my experience at AFD. I actually should've re-listed it instead of closing it and withdrawing my nomination.
• I thought that a block was in order because he personally attacked Riley on the CVUA talk page, but Riley made it sound like he wanted a cool-down block, which was against the blocking policy.
• I am having my first CVUA student, Hahc21 be my content creation coach. He is helping me with DYK's and GA's, also.
• I actually intend as an admin to focus on anti-vandalism work. It's very annoying to see someone constantly vandalize pages while your report has been pending for over an hour at AIV.
• I only include edit summaries when making subtle changes to articles or templates.

I will come back to you at the end of the Summer and see how I have progressed. If you think I'm ready for the mop, than I'll have it in September. If not, than hopefully in January. Thanks again, Electriccatfish2 (talk) 16:36, 22 June 2012 (UTC).

I 100% agree with the fourth bullet. It pisses me off so much when you know you have a vandal only account and you have to wait for someone else to block it. Dan653 (talk) 17:24, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Article for creation: Julio Herrera Velutini

Hi, electriccatfish2!

I hope I am writing in the right place, I am new at Wikipedia and I still do not navigate the site very well. :(

I see that the suggested entry has been declined because of lack or unreliability of the references. I used several references, including official ones from the Venezuelan government and the Federal Reserve of New York. Could you be a little more specific and explain what is wrong with them?

I greatly appreciate your help, I want to make a good entry. I started it in Spanish and it is almost ready for publication, so if it needs to be changed in the English version to conform to Wikipedia's standards, I will gladly do the work. :)

Regards,

IamTrumbo (talk) 18:02, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi and Welcome to Wikipedia! Please look at your submission under "References" and see that there are no references listed, although I see quite a few inline citations. Thanks, Electriccatfish2 (talk) 18:08, 22 June 2012 (UTC).

==FishingKing==

I am very sorry and I hope you aren't too annoyed with me. You have to understand i did a block template for a user out of desperation as nonadmin was coming. This ip like blanked a page every 30 secs. secondly I didn't say chip was a nazi I just said that admins are too bossy. Then too many people said don't use block templates, I got the idea on the first message! I didn't understand what soviet monster was at first but I now know, my brother who is the opposite to me and likes vandalising with our IP, he was using my account after so he could copy templates, turns out these templates were saying that a user was a lesbian and a cross-dresser. I have told my parents and he is banned from the pc, so I promise you this won't happen again. CLOSED (talk) 20:07, 22 June 2012 (UTC)