Wikipedia:Editor review/Lethaniol

User:Lethaniol

Lethaniol (talk · contribs) STATEMENT Lethaniol 21:16, 19 December 2006 (UTC) I suppose I am getting to the stage where I am interested in Adminship, I know I have a way to go with only 1800 edits and that's why I am here. I want people on where I am falling down - what do I need to improve. Be critical, but construcitve, and I promise to review at least 5 other user on this page, as well as any user who reviews me (please leave mention that you are also up for review). Cheers Lethaniol

Reviews

• I'll state some of the obvious things to me that immediately pop out: You're "new" and don't have many edits in talk space (excluding user talk). 4 months, even though you have generally be steadily contributing since then, may be too soon to apply for RFA and some may hold it against you. Also, you don't seem to edit a lot of talk pages -- excluding user talks which is a by product of your adopt-a-user involvement. Folks at the RFAs like to see involvement in talk pages because it means you're involved in the community. You have lots of article edits, which is great. Your recent involvement with trying to get CSD templates created is a good start in this direction. Also, maybe try to write a little more in the edit summary boxes, most of your are very short which may be appropriate most of the time, but can't be always. If this were an RFA, I would have to go with oppose or neutral, mainly because of your newness, lack of talk edits, and no real purpose for the admin tools -- all of which are easy to fix over time. Get a little more involved with the community aspect and in a few months I think you'll be fine and ready for RFA. --MECU≈talk 15:22, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

• You have the level head to be an admin. I think you just need time and contributions to be a good candidate for a RfAdmin. As Mecu said, there's a lot of edits to user talk pages (natural for a WP:Adopt person, even before recent events. Just get involved in building consensus on talk pages, and I think you'll be fine. Good Luck! SirFozzie 19:08, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

• I have concerns about Lethaniol's impartiality regarding political and human rights issues in India. He/she has tagged the Wikipedia entry on Late Mr. Jaswant Singh Khalra, a Human Rights activist who was extensively tortured and killed by Indian security forces in 1995. IMO this editor has treated the aforementioned Wikipedia entry in a prejuducial manner, instead of contributing to the entry and making it balanced to his satisfaction, or even specifying the nature of the imbalance. Therefore, I would like to suggest that any privileges granted to the editor exclude jurisdiction over Human Rights issues related to India. I do not have an opinion on any other fields where he might be contributing to Wikipedia. Thanks. Gulguley 16 January 2007

Comments

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

Questions

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

   My contributions as an Adopter with the Adopt-a-User program have been very satisfying, as well as difficult. On one hand I have learnt many things, by having to answer my adoptees tricky questions, on the other hand I have (soon to be banned) sockpuppet and have been through a number of negotiation processes including Mediation Cabal and Request for Comment. I have also been working very hard for the Adopt-a-User program developing the service, which is really starting to take off.

   I have enjoyed New Pages Patrol duties in the past, and at the moment am developing the notification templates for users when their new page is up a Candidate for Speedy Deletion and deleted. I strongly believe in the WP:BITE philosophy.

   In terms of writing articles I spend most of my time writing for Catch-22 and its characters, as well as on Pharmacy/Pharmacology type articles. I hope once I get the Adopt-a-user program running well to finish setting up a Pharmacology Wikiproject as a sub of Medicine or Drugs wikiprojects.

2. 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?

   During conflict I feel that I am quite level headed - responding to the issues not the emotions. I found this to be especially true over the sockpuppet issue of one of my Adopters. I feel that I was balanced keeping the respect of all sides.

   On a less favourable note - I need to learn (as I think I have) not to jump to conclusions too quickly before negotiation begins. During negotiation I am fine, I constantly re-evaluate my thoughts, but before that I can get cross. In one particular case I had a disagreement with an Admin's deletion of an article (not mine). It was a while before we started communicating, but before that I was cross and said a few things on the article's talk page I regret. Once discussion started it was all sorted fine, but the initial comments were not helpful. I need to control such emotions and then follow WP:AGF before opening any discussions.