Wikipedia:Editor review/CattleGirl

User:CattleGirl

CattleGirl (talk · contribs) I've been editing Wikipedia for a few months, working mainly with vandal 'fighting' and other things- I contributed to a major sockpuppet case a while ago, and rather than nominating articles for deletion I've been re-writing them. I'd like this editor review to point me in the right direction and hopefully prepare me for a future RFA. CattleGirl ^{talk | e@} 09:21, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• G'day. You're doing quite well. I've seen you positively contributing to RC patrol where you revert vandalism effectively. Warning users with a WP:VAND tag is always helpful. If you ever want to go for RFA, however, you will need to be able to demonstrate examples of positive article development: adding reliable sources to articles (i.e. from "Category:Articles with unsourced statements"); trying to get editors to provide an equal balance of sources in "Category:NPOV disputes"; or simply just article development how you see fit. Further, getting heavily involved in AFD, FA, RFC, CP or PUI discussions (just to name a few) helps to demonstrate to other users that you have a sound knowledge of all the policies of Wikipedia. You're in the early stages of your career here. Keep your head down and your spirits up gradually getting more involved in the positive article creating community and the policy and administrative functions and you will be seen as a responsible editor who will be a good admin. Cheers and happy editing! Jpe|ob 10:20, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll try to get involved in building articles more... and also those comments and links to some 'blue pages' were great. Some of those discussions I hadn't seen before, but after reviewing the policies, etc, of them I'll be sure to be contributing- thanks again for the review! CattleGirl ^{talk | e@ | review me!} 09:41, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

• Hello there, CattleGirl, how are you doing? Here is my review, I hope you find it useful.

  • First of all, I suggest you removing Image:PanicAtTheDisco promo 2006.jpg from your user page. According to our Fair use criteria, point 9, fair use images should only be used in the article namespace. People is quite sensitive about misusing fair use images, and the faster you correct it, the better.
  • You are using edit summaries pretty well, they are informative and useful, great!
  • I see quite a lot of vandalism fighting, have you considered (if not yet) joining the recent changes patrol? Warnings you had posted appear justified and correctly applied.
  • Oh, someone who prefers to rewrite articles instead of sending them for deletion? That is pretty good! Hopefully you don't spend time while working in articles that do not assert our required notability. I don't see many users doing this (I do not do that, for sure!), so my compliments for your effort in expanding Wikipedia.
  • What I would point out is that you have relatively few edits in the article talk namespace. Discussing with other users in talk article talk pages is important because it indicates you are willing to listen and share your ideas with them in order to improve articles. Maybe you should try to help the WikiProject Star Wars in creating a good or maybe even a featured article? In these collaborations, users do tend to talk quite a lot in order to coordinate efforts, and learn to work in teams instead of individually (which I think you do as you like saving articles that editors usually don't find useful).

  Adminship isn't that far for someone contributing like you, however you need to do a couple of things. Besides participating in recent changes patrol, you may want to check whether the pages that are being vandalized should be protected or not, reporting them to requests for page protection when necessary. Also, if you don't like participating in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, you should then try to give a hand at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion, Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion and Wikipedia:Templates for deletion, as usually only a very small amount of users do give their opinion there. Also, I recommend to spend some time at the noticeboard, where users and administrators try to solve some problems, with may give you hints as to how to act in determined situations. Finally, don't forget to warn users if what they did to an article is not useful. Remember that we have four levels of test warnings, and that you can repeat them as much as you consider necessary. In example, if a user adds "egg" to an article that does not need it, it may be a simple test, which you can warn with a {{test}} or not depending whether you think it was a one-time vandalism, or someone who is testing and should be redirected to Wikipedia:Sandbox. If after your warning the user adds "egg" again to another article, there is no need to escalate to a {{test2}}, just give him a test1 even if he has it. The important thing is that the user is redirected to the sandbox when he is doing good faithed edits, and that people who are on vandalism spree know editors are tracking them out. The way you handle these situations will, in the future, be examined by those reviewing candidates at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship. Oh, and while you gain experience to present yourself in such request, don't forget to continue editing. Administrators are also editors who are expected to know how to write articles. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 23:37, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, that was very helpful! I've been wanting to bring a few articles up to good and featured status lately, and the Wikiproject Star Wars should be a good place to start (plus saving the Panic! pages from another afd process, that would be good too!), so thanks for bringing that up. Since you added the comment about warning users, I've been trying to do that for every revert that I do, so thanks again! CattleGirl ^{talk | e@ | review me!} 09:41, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.
• View my edit summary usage.

Questions

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

   There aren't many major edits that I am pleased with more than others, because I'm pleased with all of my edits, however I must say the article re-writes I've done have been probably the most satisfying. It's also good to save an article from a potential deletion.

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?

   A while ago I was having a small argument with Topcattheirrefutable, as he had been accused of sockpuppetry and retaliated against the user who put the tag on his page. It was a discussion on following policies and what it means to Wikipedia, and I believed I handled the discussion well. Other than a few angry vandals, there haven't been any other situations like that at all.