Wikipedia:Editor review/Yngvarr

Yngvarr

Yngvarr (talk · contribs) Just looking for general review of my behavior, edits, productivity, etc. I'm not interested in being an admin, so I hope someone will slap me in the face with that statement, if ever I get nominated. Yngvarr 23:30, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Reviews

• The first thing I see when I look at your contributions is your extensive use of edit summaries. I'm glad that you use long and detailed summaries because it really facilitates collaboration on articles. I also notice that you've been spectacularly accurate when it comes to finding articles for deletion, notably on January 4 when you achieved 100% accuracy on all AFDs and speedies. You have a good balance of article editing and deletion-related comments, but it really looks like you have a passion for certain articles, like Chowder and List of Lazlo chars, so I hope you continue to do that. It seems like you are a capable editor with a complacent attitude and the right idea when it comes to deletion. ALTON .ıl 06:51, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Review by delldot

• I love seeing people who are active at WP:AFC, lord knows it needs it. I was also glad to see you've been actually creating articles from there, which is way harder than declining them and I think a lot of people fail to do. You're also properly leaving the IP in the edit summary for the GFDL. I like to leave a link to the date subpage I got it from, too, but I don't think it's really necessary. I also like that you do a bit of cleanup on the stubs you create. Gotta search for those copyvios, as it looks like you learned with Kid Norfolk.
• Also psyched to see there's been a surge in edits from you lately. Looks like your edit summary usage has improved greatly too.
• Why'd you have your user page deleted? Not that I think you don't have a right, but isn't a userpage a handy way to let other users know a little about yourself to facilitate collaboration?

• I'm a fairly low-key person, and I've always lived by the judgment that my work will speak better than my words. It's easy to play spin-doctor, but when it comes to substance, that's harder to imitate. Yngvarr (c)

• Very respectable. delldot on a public computer talk 11:08, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

• Looks like you're very dedicated to the camp lazlo article, you have tons of edits to it. I thought your description of the conflict sounded fine, very reasonable action. I looked at the talk page and most of your posts there were very friendly, nothing uncivil. Maybe "Um, no." could be interpreted as kind of curt, but if that's the worst you've got, I'll take it :-) I also saw you intentionally softening your wording and making an effort not to come across as harsh, so good work. Similarly, your talk page edits are consistently more than friendly, you make yourself very approachable and are kind to folks even when they have criticism. This is great!

• Yea, I realized immediately after posting that might have raised an eyebrow, but since it was pretty much committed, I couldn't very well back out. Unfortunately, that particular example was posted by an IP editor who was insisting on forcing that issue into the main article, which had been reverted (not just by me) several times. Yngvarr (c)

• You're doing pretty advanced stuff like adding fu rationales to images. Stuff like that, your AFC work, and your newpages patrol show me that you have a very good idea of how things work.
• Looks like you're active in the cartoon wikiproject. Didn't see any good or featured contribs, but may have missed them. Are you interested in improving articles this way? That's too bad about your deleted contribs. How long ago did you write them? Why did they get deleted? What do you think of the deletions now? If you want me to look at them, point me to the deletion discussions.

• The Cartoon Netowkr wikiproject doesn't have any GA/FA articles, to my own distress. I've been trying to see what we can get, but it's mostly the nature of the beast. Unless it's a world-renown, social commentary cartoon like the Simpsons, there's not a whole lot that I feel that might qualify for GA/FA. I've submitted a few articles for article review, and did what I could, but that's pretty much as far as I think I can take it.
• For the deleted contribs, most of those were related to the World of Warcraft series, which went thru a heated (IMO) AFD period. I don't honestly remember how long I wrote them, but they were deleted under WP:V and WP:RS. I'm still a little sore about the deletions, as I felt the whole thing was WP:POINT, since it came on the heels of another video game AFD series (Runescape), and was initiated by a WP:SPA, but none of those were valid enough reasons, so I basically just pulled out of the debates. Yngvarr (c)

• From everything I saw, you are a completely awesome Wikipedian! I respect that you're not interested in adminship, it's cool that you're not into the trophy business and whatnot. But it's kind of too bad, I bet you'd be a good one, and you could obviously make good use of the tools. If you ever change your mind, let me know. After issuing the requisite slap, I'll take an even closer look at your contribs and likely nom :) delldot talk 07:44, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

• I'm an admin in Real Life, so I am pretty much technically inclined. But I'm of a mind that I don't really want to add more stress to something which I'd rather consider either a hobby, or a service. I also have a particular personality trait that drives me to get deeply involved in things, which usually sends me off the deep-end and causes to me cease altogether. Just as an example, I've been a volunteer GM on several commercial MMORPG, and the "work" distracts from the "fun", to the point where I pull-out completely. One of my favorite quotations is re-quoted by Tolkien, from Dasant: We must be satisfied with the soup that is set before us, and not desire to see the bones of the ox out of which it has been boiled, and once you start to desire the to see the bones of a thing, the magic begins to fade. That applies to Wikipedia, games, or almost anything. Yngvarr (c) 23:15, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

• I completely hear that about burning out after too much activity. But I haven't found adminship to be more stressful than general editing (granted, I avoid things like 3RR blocks and sockpuppets). And I don't really see how being an admin necessarily requires you to participate more. There are plenty of admins with a lower activity level than you currently have. Or do you mean you would have to increase your activity to pass an RfA? Anyway, I think it's very respectable when someone doesn't want to be an admin, it shows they're not into the status business. So I won't badger you, but the offer stands. delldot on a public computer talk 11:08, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

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?

   The major contributions which I've made have all gone thru AFD, and no longer exist, so I guess they're not valid for judgment. Since only admins can see deleted contribs, those AFD'ed were related to World of Warcraft. I'm sure you can still find my participation in the AFDs in my contribs. I was participating in the xFD process for a while, also running RC and NP tools, submitting to CSD when I felt it necessary. Most of my CSDs were not challenged, so I must have been doing something fairly correct. I've gotten a little soured on the xFD process, so I stepped back and now I tend to keep an eye on things like trying to address POV, supposition, trivia and other non-verifiable facts in those articles for which I am interested. I'm more of a minor editor, spelling, grammar, trying to wikify, categorize, and so forth.

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?

   There have been two conflicts of which I am aware:

   1. List of characters in Camp Lazlo: An edit war erupted between myself and several IP editors (and one registered editor) over the validity of (POV) trivial characteristics. At that point, I requested full-protection. The admin apparently agreed with the dispute, and the article was locked. Once locked, I tried to resolve the issues on the talk page. Those attempts never went anywhere, so I did not press the issue, left the request for full-protection in place, and kept my distance. An admin reviewed the full-protection, and eventually released it.
   2. A series of AFD's on several World of Warcraft articles. I won't go into the whole gory details of the issue, but I am pretty sure my opinions were obvious both by my contribution to that series, and by my edit summaries. I still have my conspiracy theories at hand, but this soured me on some of the inside workings of WP, so I sent myself off on a wikibreak for about two weeks.