Page semi-protected

Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Autopatrolled

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Administrator instructions

Autopatrolled

(add requestview requests)

User:Ɱ

My primary efforts on Wikipedia are content creation, including many new articles. ɱ (talk) · vbm · coi) 18:41, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
Please let me check with you whether I've got this right. You created the article Frank Shiner in October 2015 (fact; you don't have to confirm that part) and when it came to the deletion discussion, you participated there as an anon (User:2601:643:1:FF00:CCAF:6262:9998:F62B). Why did you not argue the case under your login? I'm less concerned about your declared paid editing but would like some clarification on the Shiner deletion discussion. Schwede66 00:54, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
Not done Don't worry about answering the above. When you publish articles written by others in this state without further improvements, autopatrolled isn't for you. Schwede66 00:59, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
Jesus Christ. The Shiner thing was a mess. My IP edit was fully disclosed but I viewed it as necessary as some simply awful editor was holding me to my word at the time that I was taking a break from editing due to the Shiner mess. I just went back to try to defend what I wrote, defend myself when nobody else would (see this diff's edit summary). As for the second article you linked, that was part of the WikiNYC event Purchase ArtandFeminism 2018. The students are trying their best to produce pretty much very good content, while perhaps making some novice mistakes. I did feel under obligation to publish those articles during the event, however, though all the ones I published definitely meet GNG and all other policies, to the best of my knowledge. You've really cherry-picked two slightly bad apples out of dozens and dozens of good ones, which I can't believe. I've been an editor for over 8 years, creating GAs and FAs plenty for years, and some of the most lengthy, thorough, up-to-date, well-researched articles, many with extra templates added to bring the best of Wikipedia's tools to create what I believe should be wonderful articles. ɱ (talk) · vbm · coi) 02:14, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
In fact, the only reason I had to publish the articles during that event was because the Event coordinator right (that I do have) was not yet created, and there was a trial ban in place at the time, banning new editors from creating new articles. Thus the students couldn't create new articles then, and now can. ɱ (talk) · vbm · coi) 02:17, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
Also note that editors are perfectly free to edit while logged out, so long as it's not to deceive (I disclosed my username in the edit summaries) and other non-applicables (see WP:LOGOUT and WP:SOCK in general). So I don't appreciate you scorning my completely legal actions. ɱ (talk) · vbm · coi) 02:32, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
For the record, I'm not too worried about the Shiner article now that I've got the context. With regards to your event coordinator actions, it would be better for you to reflect along the lines of "now that I have reconsidered the situation, I realise that I should take some responsibility for draft articles of other users that I move into mainspace and tidy them up". On that basis, we could have a discussion. Schwede66 20:08, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
Okay, sounds good. And yes, I began to realize and remember how rushed my approval of articles was when one of them was deleted. I did really feel pushed by professors and students to approve articles so the students could meet the assignment and leave, which obviously is not good. Surrounded by a group of 40 or more, and myself being a student as well, this wasn't easy, and I will not pursue performing that task at events again. ɱ (talk) · vbm · coi) 19:45, 19 June 2018 (UTC)