Wikipedia:Editor review/Nineteenninetyfour

User:Nineteenninetyfour

Nineteenninetyfour (talk · contribs) I am Nineteenninetyfour, and I wish to be reviewed so that I may make a more educated decision on whether or not I should make an RfA. Ninety^wazup? 23:00, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

• As a fellow WikiFriend, I must candidly say that you cannot make an inclined decision about applying for RfA at your current status. Although you are the co-founder of WP:PJAA (which may up your morale), you have only made 192 edits and only have an under-par rating of edit summary usage (I have poor edit summary usage myself). You may not have the sufficient experience as well. In time, you will be a sysop (if you choose to) and a good one at that. Sr13 (T|C) 00:25, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
• I must agree with Sr13 for now. ~200 edits is not nearly as many expected from an admin (usually a bare minimum of 1500, most users like 2000-3000). There are only 8 mainspace edits. This is, in many users' opinions, the most important namespace, and at least 1000 edits in this namespace are recommended for an RfA. Try doing some vandalfighting, minor fix-ups to articles such as cleanup, and helping to bring an article to featured or good status; these (especially 1 FA/GA) are a big plus on RfAs. As for Wikipedia namespace: There are few edits in this, too. Try participating in XfDs with good arguements, as this will increse your knowledge of policies and guidelines. There aren't too many Wikipedia talk edits expected for an RfA, but usually at least 25-30 are the standard. Some editors may even expect 50-100. Image: One of the less important namespaces, but you might want to get 10 or so edits to this namespace and one or two uploads. Talk: At least 100 are usually expected. If you decide to bring an article to FA/GA status, you'll probably end up making a lot of edits on its talk page, as it is for discussing inprovements to the main article. However, it shouldn't be this talk page excusively that you edit; find other subjects you're interested in and make a few comments there. (You don't necessarily have to raise its status, just help improve the article.) Also note that sheer number of edits to these namespaces are not as important as the quality; if the majority of them are vandalfighting, then that will be frowned upon. Well, that's all my suggestions; good luck and good llamas! –Llama man^{sign here} 20:15, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
• I must agree with Llama here, hold off on the RFA until you hit the 3000 mark with edits all around the namespaces. Also you must ask yourself "Do I need the tools at this point in time", right now I don't exactly think you do. Hmm...try getting involved in some vandal-fight and participating in XFD's. Strong contributions to XFD's are a vital key. Basically I agree with all of Llama's points at this time. If you have any questions or comments please contact me. cheers! ~ Arjun 17:00, 4 February 2007 (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?

   Probably the article on the BFRO and also the new WikiProject Abandoned Articles, because they were both pages that I created, and they were pages that people can benefit and learn from, not just something like my userpage. Ninety^wazup? 23:14, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

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?

   I have not as yet been in any conflicts with other users, but, should it happen, I will mostly play it by ear, doing as I think will be best. Ninety^wazup? 23:14, 31 December 2006 (UTC)