Wikipedia:Editor review/Chupper

Chupper

Chupper (talk · contribs) I have been contemplating the idea of becoming an administrator. I have been a member for just over 1 year and only have ~500 edits. Recently I've been patrolling recent changes and have been doing what I can there. I have created 6 articles and 1 template and I am a very active editor of many other articles. I'm curious to know any recommendations anyone would have for me regarding the way I write/edit articles, following policies, and anything else you think I need improvement on. Additionally, do you think it would be wise for me to apply to be an admin? I was hoping to gain the ability to block vandals and protect pages immediately. Thanks for your time! Chupper 17:43, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Reviews

• Don't Do It! -by that I mean, don't attempt to run for adminship. You have 600 edits, and from what I can tell they are great- you are doing RCP, warning the vandals, etc, and contributing to mainspace articles, which is really important and arguably the most important part of any editor's contributions. However, if you went to an RfA they would savage you, possibly eating your heart and then complaining about how "new" users are so greedy for the adminship rights, you're destroying wikipedia. (I was only joking on one of those three.) They would oppose you for two reasons: one, your edit count. Unfortunately, many would !vote on whether you have so and so number of edit counts. I would say the bare minimum is around 2000- and half of them sadly don't care if they were getting an article of to GA status or were just reverting vandalism on the National Society for Velociraptor Attack Prevention (yeah, that page has never existed, but stick with me.) Essentially, you're going to have to be 2,000, 3,000, and up if you hope on having a decent chance on getting adminship. I should stop here and note though that if you were to go to an RfA, based on your need of the tools I would be in support; too many see adminship as "more power" and don't do the things that would actually require the tools -clearing certain backlogs, closing AfDs, etc. Back to where I was. 2) Many would savage you because you don't have WP: space edits. In other words, from the cold callous eye of the common reviewer, you would need to participate in AfDs- participate in RfAs- do rote maintenance tasks, and all that jazz. What I would suggest is that you get involved in wikiprojects; they're helpful, they're a great way to meet fellow editors, and (to be honest) they look good on RfAs. Don't sweat being an admin- fact is, not much will change (except people will come to you with their problems). Just get out there and contribute more! Dåvid ƒuchs (talk • contribs) 01:03, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Comments

• Awesome reviews so far. Loved yours especially David :). For the record, I've decided not to run as an admin. But please keep reviewing and letting me know what I should work on. Chupper 05:23, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.
• I would definitely not run as an admin yet. Most admins have much more than 500 edits, typically well over a thousand. Also, it seems as if a majority of your edits are sequential. Try to group them into one or two big edits to avoid messing up the page history. --Wooty Woot? contribs 01:20, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Questions

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

   I am most pleased with and still excited about the creation and continous edits to the Mental health professional article. I did a lot of research for the article and is an exciting topic for me because this is the field I am planning on going into.Chupper 17:47, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

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 conflicts in the past, but all very minor. Generally I give others the benefit of the doubt and try to look at things from their perspective. If either that person and myself - or - that person and another person both feel like they are right, I try to create a compromise that would make both parties happy. I'm never ashamed to say that I'm wrong and have done this before many times.Chupper 17:47, 18 January 2007 (UTC)