Wikipedia:Editor review/Storkk

User:Storkk[edit]

Storkk (talk · contribs) I'm not asking for review as a precursor to an RfA. Just want to see what people think and how I could be better. I'm relatively new, a large portion of my mainspace edits are reversions, but I've also performed a couple translations from frWiki to enWiki. I also do a lot of gnome-type typo/grammar/tagging editing. Storkk 12:49, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reviews

Straight off the bat, you appear to be doing very well, particularly in the area of vandalism reversion. You might like to try something like WP:RfA to involve yourself a little more intimately in the Wikipedia process, although your edits at WP:AFD tell me that you're hardly isolated from that side of the project. More importantly:

You should make much more use of user talk templates to ensure that users know exactly why you revert/prod/whatever their articles (and thus avoid inadvertently violating WP:BITE). For example, this change should probably have been followed by placing {{welcomeanon}} on the IP's talk page, followed immediately by {{Template:PRODWarning}} (deletion notifications, such as the latter, are very important: if you only ever place one template, make it an appropriate deletion note).
In a similar vein, I recommend that you take a much more lenient stance toward vandals, for the reasons explained in Mindspillage's excellent essay. As a handy example, reversions such as this should not be followed up with a {{blatantvandal}} template: the edits in question weren't what most people would call "blatant vandalism," which involves damaging edits made out of clear malice. Moreover, such harsh templates tend to antagonise new users, either provoking them into further vandalism or scaring them aware entirely, neither of which are helpful. Try progressing through the full sequence of {{test}} templates in this table (from test1-n or the relevant equivalent to test4-n, in sequence, without skipping any), which provides a far more helpful template that will usually be far more effective than a harsh warning.

Overall, you're actually doing quite well. I don't intend to be overly harsh, since I used to behave in quite a similar manner until I failed my RfA because of precisely that same behaviour. This is really the only area I can see that needs improvement, and I certainly hope to see more of you around in the future. Happy editing! :) Daveydw ee b (^chat/_patch) 10:30, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for taking the time for giving your thoughts, I deeply appreciate it. I'll reply more extensively on your talk page soon. In regard to the diff you gave above where I jumped the gun a bit giving a {{blatantvandal-n}} warning to an anon: I reverted a whole slew of vandalism on one page, and did not go through each one to see who actually did this, which I do consider blatant. I therefore tagged the wrong user. I realize that's pretty unacceptable practice and will be more careful. I'll definitely use more talk templates when prodding from now on. Thanks again! --Storkk 14:11, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You shouldn't stress about it to much, it's a relatively minor error. Being more careful in the future will stand you in good stead for a possible RfA, and I think you're well positioned to become an administrator at some point in the foreseeable future. :) Daveydw ee b (^chat/_patch) 21:07, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

View this user's edit count using a PHP version of Interiot's tool.
User's current editing statistics according to Flcelloguy's tool. Daveydw ee b (^chat/_patch) 10:30, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Statistics for: Storkk
(Permissions: N/A)
- Total: 1802 -
Main: 991
Talk: 126
User: 103
User talk: 371
Wikipedia: 165
Wikipedia talk: 3
Image: 26
Image talk: 8
Template: 2
Template talk: 2
Category: 1
Category talk: 4
-------------------
Total edits: 1802
w/ edit summary: 1778 (98.66%*)
w/ manual edit summary: 1767 (98.05%*)
Minor edits: 1185 (65.76%*)
First known edit: Jun 27, 2006
-------------------
* - percentages are rounded down to the nearest hundredth.
-------------------

Questions

Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
Yes, I my Hippias Minor translation, as well as my Seille translation. Other articles are planned. I am also quite proud of an image that added to a couple articles, and a total rewrite (including image creation) of Heretic's Fork. --Storkk 13:00, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
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?
Minor, only. And they haven't stressed me much. The first one, seen on Talk:Dentin was the one where I got most wikistressed, but it very minor. I was very new, so may have over-reacted. I also had a difference of opinion about a {{intro length}} tag that I recently put on Diabetes mellitus: discussion seen near the bottom of Talk:Diabetes mellitus. Vandals don't stress me, I enjoy hunting them :-). Oh, I almost forgot my {{prod}}'ing and AfDing of Perceptive Software, my comments seen both at its talk page and User talk:Paularnhold. I hate spam. --Storkk 13:00, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]