Wikipedia:Editor review/Ignatzmice

Ignatzmice

Ignatzmice (talk · contribs) I'd like to be reviewed because I want to know what people think I should be working on. I'm currently a WikiGnome and a Recent Changes patroller with about 600 edits. I've been editing since October '06. Ignatzmice^talk_contribs 19:32, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Reviews

You're doing well. I found Annie's, a disambiguation page you created, and I was pleased, though I would have left out "Annie's Natural" because it does not have an article in Wikipedia. Most of your other work as an RC patroller and ordinary editor has been helpful and uncontroversial.

As I have advised many users in the past, I recommend that you spend most of your time on pursuits other than RC patrol. We have plenty of backlogs, such as uncategorized pages, and you can find a partial list of them at the Community Portal (link on the left sidebar). You now have enough experience not only to correct obvious vandalism, but to solve more complicated problems.

I wish you good luck. Shalom ^Hello 03:07, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Comments

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

• View this user's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool

Questions

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

   Not especially. I've reverted a lot of vandalism and created some userboxes for people, though.

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?

   Nothing exept some userspace vandalism by angry anons. I'd probably try to talk to them about it, or take a short WikiBreak.

Additional Questions from Dfrg.msc:

Borrowed from Glen (talk · contribs), I'm sure he wont mind. These should test you editing skills, and show if you have any weaknesses which you can work on. So, just write your answer next to the Question. Good luck.

Speedy Delete or not:

1. CSD1 Not familiar w/ procedure, but I'd nom for deletion w/ delete in 14 days and tell the creator.
2. CSD2 Same as 1, but I'd tell let the creator know about WP:NOT#SOAP.
3. CSD3 Same as 1.
4. CSD4 Yes.
5. CSD5 Nom for wikification, references.

Vandalism or or not:

1. [1] Yes, but just uw-vand1.
2. [2] Same as 1.
3. [3] Yes, uw-vand2.
4. [4] Delete "mudkip" thingie? Not vandalism.
5. [5] Same as 1.
6. [6] Same as 1.

Have fun! Dfrg.msc 07:44, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Comments by Addhoc

• In this edit you threatened to block an experienced editor, for being trolled.
• You are overzealous in reverting and issuing warnings in general.
• You frequently assume bad faith in regard to IP accounts.
• You are oversensitive about criticism - you posted on the AN/I noticeboard about a non-existent personal attack.

Although this has been explained to you on the AN/I board, on your talk page and elsewhere you don't appear to have got the message. Addhoc 14:19, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Calton was doing his own share of the trolling there. Not that he just went on a rampage — the IP was teasing, annoying, attacking him. I was trying to help both parties by stopping them. The IP seemed to me to be the start of the trouble, so I reported it. However, Calton was keeping the trouble going and seemed really mad at the IP, so I warned him but didn't report. I admit I probably should have used {{attack}} rather than {{uw-npa4im}}. —Ignatzmice^talk_contribs 15:50, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

You don't appear to understand the word 'trolling' - I suggest you have a look at Wikipedia:What is a troll? Also, you should carefully review Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars. For the avoidance of doubt your involvement was (again) unhelpful. Addhoc 16:54, 15 September 2007 (UTC)