Wikipedia:Editor review/Jmajeremy

Jmajeremy

Jmajeremy (talk · contribs · count) I am a wikignome who would like to become an administrator, and am looking for feedback to see if I am ready to apply for adminship. —JmaJeremy ✆✎ 04:00, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
As stated above, I am largely a wikignome. I have contributed to several different areas of Wikipedia. Most notably I have worked in Articles for Creation (AFC), Articles for Deletion (AfD), and Files for Upload (FFU). I also sometimes spend time fighting vandalism (I am a rollbacker), I help with file renaming as a file mover, and I do some non-admin closures at XFD. Currently the place I spend the most time is at Request an Account (ACC). I guess I'd say I take pride in that I can find pleasure in doing these little repetitive tasks that some editors might find boring.
Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
I've never personally been in a "dispute." I have of course had a couple of disagreements, but these were mutually amicable and part of the constructive process. The closest I've come to a "dispute" is finding myself caught between two disputing members while trying to fight vandalism. I generally have done what I can to help the two editors find some common ground, but in a couple of cases I had to report people for edit warring. I think in the future this would always be my first reaction: to assume good faith and try to help everyone find a solution, even if I were involved in the initial conflict. If I was really mad about something, I would just stop editing for a day or two and give things time to blow over.
What do you want to get out of this editor review? Are you thinking of running for adminship? Would you like feedback on a specific area of your editing? Or would you just like a general review of your edits?
I am thinking of running for adminship, as I think I would make a good admin who could help out with some of the backlogged areas. My main concern is that others might balk at my lack of pure article creation experience, low edit count and periods of inactivity. I don't think article creation is a must to be a good administrator, my low edit count reflects the fact that much of what I do doesn't require editing pages but is nonetheless valuable, and my periods of inactivity are due to the fact that I'm a student who sometimes has no time outside his research. I would greatly appreciate any input on whether or not this is something that would prevent me from becoming an admin at this point.

Reviews

I wish the edit counter [1] were working. Perhaps you can prove yourself by making the results autopost on every WP:ER talk page? Sorry, I find myself dependent on that tool to get started. You are interested in adminship. You could look at User:Scottywong's tools. Your "admin score" is not very high. Where do you contribute that you might contribute as an administrator? In these places, what do the administrators do well or or do poorly? --SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:51, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jmajeremy, and thank you for submitting this editor review. Please accept my apologies for the rather one-year late reply, I'm sure I would have been impatient with this process as well if I were in your position. Nevertheless: let's get onto the review.
My initial impressions are, as you have indicated on your userpage, that you have spurts of feverish hyperactivity at times followed by somewhat lengthy wikibreaks. Generally speaking, that's not a significant concern, but I hope you that if you ever decide to pursue your goal as a Wikipedia administrator, as many of the people here do, that you have a working contactable email address should something concerning immediate administrator attention come up. Not a likely scenario, but it's one of the responsibilities of being an administrator. You don't necessarily have to be active, so much as either be contactable or show activity.
As most regular Wikipedians, you've done a stellar job in the countervandalism department, and judging by your talkpage responses from your archives, you're very patient and open to the criticism of others. You're also active in various Wikignomish processes like articles for creation and account creation processes, commendable to be sure. I hope you stay on Wikipedia and continue to work your way toward being an administrator in much the same way you've been doing now. As for requesting feedback on things like this, my recommendation is to just be bold and do it, and if you mess up template formatting for example someone will just correct it later, so don't worry too much about these technicalities.
However, on total you've had less than 5000 contributions in the intervening three or so years (I've noticed in your comments you've only found the "Wikipedia bug" since 2012) while many more long-term Wikipedians have over that many amount of edits. I think you might need to contribute more to the mainspace in terms of content creation as well; as a start, you've created one disambiguation page and one school stub article, plus uploaded a few other files. However, those looking for potential administrators would like to see more content article creation other than accepting articles from AFC; the general opinion is that if you know what is required to write an article, and the necessary effort expended, you would also understand the arguments for keeping as well as for deleting articles.
Overall, you could do with a bit more contributions, with a bit more emphasis in the mainspace. I think you're doing great as an editor, and if you return, you should continue what you're doing and expand your area of volunteer work a little more around Wikipedia. I'll be blunt about it and say you're not ready for adminship yet, but I hope that with a little time and a little more of what you call the "Wikignomish" work, you will be soon. TeleComNasSprVen (talk • contribs) 07:16, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]