Wikipedia:Editor review/Blnguyen

User:Blnguyen[edit]

Blnguyen (talk · contribs) Hello everybody. I sort of came here because most of the articles to which I have contributed to - are mainly those which no one else has an interest in. I've been here (actively) since December. I try to get community involvement, but mostly these aren't in areas where I particularly edit content. I would like to be become an admin, but I am still trying to broaden my versatility in terms of writing a wider range of content, and also trying out different facets of wikipedia first. Thankyou.

Reviews

Your contributions are quite impressive: massive contributions to sports and Australia-related topics, including the appropriate templates, portals, and categories. Also, you have participated in many AfD's and have apparently made lots of useful contributions to the discussions, including reporting Jason Gastrich vote stacking efforts. You have managed to get a list featured so you are apparently a good editor, successfully nominated two admins including me (with excellent nomination statements) which shows that you have a good notion of how the adminship process works and who could be successful, reported a couple of vandals, and generally have been helpful and done good work in the Wikipedia space. Why are you not an admin yet? Kusma (討論) 03:35, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Amazing editor. Is one of the integral members of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket. He is not only a good contributer but also helps maintain the NPOV & copyediting of the articles, which is a big chore considering the number of cricket fanatics. Is polite & helpful. Has got my vote! Srik e it^{(talk ¦ ✉)} 09:23, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Very experienced, civil and wise user with a huge amount of experience. Also, you're very well rounded and surprised me by (Warning: Cliche minefield ahead) not being an administrator yet. I'd gladly nominate you if that was ok with yourself. _-M ^o P-_ 16:21, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No 'meaty' strong contributions to any particular article. This is heavily countered, however, by your exceptional organising, sorting, checking and tidying up of existing articles - as well as creating many stubs. Always cool and never kicks the POV bucket. I look forward to what you will produce in the future, you would have my vote if you stood for admin. michael ^talk 04:33, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Reviewee Comment - an FA is one of the things on my wishlist - although Australian Mathematics Competition might turn out to be a bit too dry. It's important to become a solid editor before admin I feel, rather than simply reverting vandalism or doing AfDs because there are a lot of complicated content issues which are important to an encyclopedia. I feel that a person should not be defence minister, unless they have been in the defence force themselves, for example, so the the same applies here to me I think. It's good to see someone with high standards for articles like you. ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! - review me 07:11, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good outlook to have! I have been reading your geography contributions in north-west Adelaide though; I might step in and add something in soon over there, provided I can get some research materials. You seem to have an exceptional drive, or passion, for so much of wikipedia and adding in your voice where you can. Sometimes I'm amazed where you've been lurking. Your reply here signifies this. michael ^talk 08:16, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From what I've seen, you're always civil and helpful, you get along well with people, keep your cool well, and with 9000 edits in such a short time you're obviously committed to Wikipedia. These things are far more important to adminship than the number, diversity or nature of your edits. I would have nominated you for adminship two months ago, but the short period you've been here was bound to be the cause of some objections. Too many good editors have been turned off Wikipedia by unpleasant RFAs, so I prefer not to nominate you for a few months, when you'll be certain of sailing through. If someone else nominates you before then, you can count on my strong support. Snottygobble 04:46, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Wonderful Wikipedian. You are committed to the project and nice to have a talk with. I have seen you contribute heaps to both Aussie, Indian and maintenance stuff. The substantial content shouldn't put you off. I haven't contributed to a FA unfortunately, (played a minor part in Portal:India become a FPo though) but you succesfully nominated me for adminship. I would give you a strong support unless something controversial popped out of nowhere, like for Deeptrivia. Btw, if you were/had a troll/sockpuppet/vandal earlier on in your Wiki-life be open and admit it now, otherwise another catrastophe might unfold. Gizza^Chat ^© 11:11, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
BLNguyen is a valuable contributor and has the necessary judgement to be an Admin. Capitalistroadster 00:29, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I associate the username BlNguyen with someone who is always making useful edits and takes a community-minded approach to editing (which could be more important than the 'meaty' edits). — Донама 13:31, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have never interacted with this editor; however, I have noticed his presence in many articles, talk pages and DYK nomination pages. I think here is a brilliant would be admin. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 18:36, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I concur with all of the above. Blnguyen seems to be a first rate wikipedian who would make an excellent admin. He's committed, polite and civil and never pushes a POV. -- I@n ≡ talk 00:27, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry to say this but you will NOT have my vote if you stood up for admin. You joined hands with a repeat offender called Zora who is facing a wall of incivility complaints here and blanked out whole paragraphs, lines, links and even sections without a pretense of trying to understand the quality of work done. You didn't have the basic decency to go through history of the article and distinguish between vandal and contributor. Citing past cleanup issues, you reverted the article provoking a unnecessary revert war in Ajith. Anwar saadat 10:17, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just a bit of information for any readers. Zora, Blnguyen, Jath, Benzee (who got unnecessarily blocked after Anwars complaints), Nichalp, Ganeshk and all others that have edited Ajith know that we are not at fault. He did not blank out paragraphs and lines, he just got rid of User:Anwar saadat's POV from the article. Nobleeagle (Talk) 07:53, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You should apply for adminship as I think the admin tools will help you with your goals. You are another good editor who should edit more substantially in the mainspace. -- Samir (the scope) धर्म 08:56, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I know your work, you are an excellent user. You have my support when you decide to run for an admin. Why not now already?
From what I've seen so far, Blnguyen is great editor, very polite and civil with plenty of experience. As with the above comments, I reccomend that he should apply to become an admin soon. --☆TBC☆ 02:15, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Given the relatively short time you have been on Wikipedia, the extent of your contributions is astounding. Since I first encountered and welcomed you, I have seen you take to Wikipedia with great enthusiasm. Something that has particularly impressed me about your contributions is their variety; you appear to be engaged in every field and every sphere of Wikipedia. In addition to efforts in the main namespace, you participate in community debates, combat vandalism, and handle disputes with great skill. You have all the virtues of a good administrator. One thing I thing I would do is to encourage you to be a little bolder. Good luck, --cj | talk 08:49, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your assistance when I needed it, and I am amazed at how much work you have done for Wikipedia. I hope that if you become administrator, you can continue to ensure that users can successfully and accurately edit Wikipedia. Thanks again, and best of wishes. Nehrams2020 17:37, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You're just waiting to be nominated! ;) - Mailer Diablo 07:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've had a ~~argument~~ disagreement with him in the past but I can't deny that he's a pretty good editor, and apart from that initial rift I've come to realise that he does contribute and organise across many Australia and cricket-related articles. Keep up the good work Bl! R o gerthat ^Talk 04:32, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Its time you should become an admin. I see no problem with your contributions. Keep up the good work! --Ter e nc e Ong 07:35, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Time for the cliched "I thought he was already an admin". Looking at your talk page you have offers from several esteemed editors to nominate you. I recommend selecting one or two of those (but no more than 2) to nominate you and get on with it! --kingboyk 09:58, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

See this user's edit history with Interiot's tool and edit summary usage (Warning:Both tools have stopped updating and the edit counts are way off)
- As English Wikipedia is no longer replicating data to the toolserver, the user's edit count (as of 21:12, 22 April 2006 (UTC)) using Interiot's Tool 2 is:

Username Blnguyen

Total edits 9229

Distinct pages edited 6688

Average edits/page 1.380

First edit 22:40, 14 September 2005

(main) 4650

Talk 715

User 261

User talk 969

Image 54

Template 186

Template talk 3

Category 221

Category talk 14

Wikipedia 2050

Wikipedia talk 106

Questions

Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
Answer Well, Swimming World Swimmers of the Year is a featured list, and also the Portal:Swimming and Portal:Eurovision are somewhat notable. Possibly also resuscitating the Wikipedia:WikiProject Eurovision. Mostly my articles are bios of swimmers, cricketers and geography of South Australia. I also keep an extensive list of material on my userpage and the subpages which I have linked as I am a bit of a record-stats-keeping pedant. Probably the general thing that I take pride in is trying to kind out new ways of editing and trying to diversify my conribution range (I've recently tried t help at WP:PNT) with Vietnamese articles - although all of them have turned out to be unenecyclopedic and were deleted - mostly csd a7s)- Also, do I have an abnormally high percentage of category/template/portal edits??
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?
Answer Not really. The thing which makes Wikipedia great - it's open sourced nature - "the encyclopedia that anybody can edit" will ineveitably lead to people who are over enthusiastic about certain things - discussing POV edits on the talk pages can solve this (this also allows for using WP as a cricket forum :) - possibly the only polite cyber-cricket forum around). For people who try and use WP as advertising or for political marketing, this is something I was always mindful of; so this always keeps me philosophical when these things happen. I don't do any religious/nationalist debates, so I haven't gotten involved luckily. I revert once, and explain in the edit summary, but if the other party doesn't agree, then I use talk or user talk.