Wikipedia:Editor review/Navou2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Navou

Navou (talk • contribs) It has been suggested that I take comments via this venue. I agree. Any comments relating to any of my editing areas, or interest in adminship perhaps mid-march, are appreciated. Navou ^banter 02:42, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Reviews

So you wanna be an admin? :)

• Recent changes patrol is good, keep up with that.
• WP:RFPP experience is good as well, especially look at how admins respond to requests and when they protect/unprotect articles. Keep up requests there too.
• It's good to keep up with the administrator noticeboards as a reader and a poster.
• WP:AIV reports are good.
• Deletion debates are good too, but you may want to increase your activity in those areas.
• You may be too new, having only started heavy activity in December.
• Template and Category acitivity needs work.
• You may want to spend some more time in the mainspace.

Overall, you are quite good, and will be a good admin candidate in a couple weeks/months. Cbrown1023 talk 01:34, 8 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?

   Very difficult to say if I am displeased. I want to write the encyclopedia. My attention is turned to Combat lifesaver and 68W and will be in the near future as I have just received paper references. My contributions to WP:AFD I hope are meaningful. I also hope in the near future to perhaps move on to adminship and assist with the responsibilities there, any comments in this area are welcome.

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?

   Conflict here. I will admit, the entire conflict caused me stress, but the stress was near the end when I was unsure of how to proceed. This is when I requested assistance from another, more experienced mediator.

---

I'm not much for the if-this-were-RFA format, so I'll just keep things real and start a thread. What makes you tick? Why do you want the tools? Are you ready for the inevitable baiting that goes along with being a sysop? Have a look at User talk:Durova/Admin - it's a page I started shortly after I got mopified and I update as it seems appropriate...sort of a distillation of my particular style of adminship. Let's talk. Durova^Charge! 05:05, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Keeping this real works for me. What makes me tick? I enjoy feeling like I am part of something, making a difference. A friend of mine recommended wikipedia to me, and I enjoy it. Thats my motivation. This is a project I believe in.

The tools, in the way I enjoy working with the project, I want to help the project the best way I can. There are some things I already do. I copy/edit, source and expand where I can, maintain where I can in the way of participating in deletion debates, RC, Patrol, csd tags, etc. That is writing the encyclopedia first, everything else second. I can do both. With the tools, not only can I write the encyclopedia, I can be helpful at 3RR, AIV, RFPP, CSD ANI and deletion debate closures.

As far as being ready for baiting... I usually walk away from bait. While I enjoy good faith discussion, I don't really like bait.

I have seen your essay before, and I agree with the style and technique. Its all about the encyclopedia and community the writes it. Navou ^banter / _{review me} 05:29, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Anyone who spends enough time at RC has a good reason to get the tools. CSD helps too. Has your userpage been vandalized? Have you been trolled? What I'm getting at here is some people's reactions change radically when they discover an editor is sysopped. It took only ten days for me to get into Category:Rouge admins and I'm a softie. If you've got a weak spot somewhere the problem users will play around like naughty little children pushing random buttons until they find it, and then they'll go in for the kill. Part of what it takes to be an administrator can't be taught. You're expected to have the wisdom of Solomon in the stickiest situations and at a moment's notice. That's the downside of being able to block a serial vandal. From the things you've been doing it sounds like you could get it, if not now then sometime soon. But would you really enjoy it? I don't care whether you answer that question to me, but answer it to yourself. If you go for adminship do it because it suits your personality rather than for something like bragging rights or because it seems cool. Every editor at this site gets powers that most websites would reserve for sysops. The extra tools really ought to be a means to an end. I guess what I'm saying is, I see answers in your reply that look like right answers, but where's the heart? Where's the fire? What really grabs your imagination about Wikipedia? All of us got hooked for a reason. What's yours? Durova^Charge! 19:58, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

I have always been good with english. In high school, I took the advanced english and lit classes. So the written word has always been my passion. Wikipedia is really a place I can let my red pen go to work, as far as spelling, grammar, style, usage, and tone goes. I can really take an article and go to work. This is what initially hooked me. Then I began to see the larger picture... there is an actual community behind this. I can do more things, actually expand article when I run across material. I can participate in the decision making process for the inclusion of content. I can assist others by acting as a mediator. Perhaps... I can even mop. My user talk page was vandalized here very recently. I reverted once, left the standard warning notice, and the second time, I decided to wait to see if an admin would notice it roll down the recent changes, and one did. I sent it to AIV. I don't think arguing with the user about this is productive. I really don't get a furious angry feeling when my user talk page is vandalized. I just revert, and if I have to revert again, AIV is down the hall. I don't think my user page was ever vandalized. I would probably handle it in a similar manner. I'm generally very logical when dealing with adversity. Its not a battleground, its an encyclopedia. Navou ^banter / _{review me} 00:19, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Okay, if the written word is your passion then what article contributions are you most proud of having made? Durova^Charge! 03:28, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

For the project, I think I would have to be proud of this as I was able to actually add information and sourcing. I have more information from the US Army, I will be able to actually expand this more. My end goal is to nominate this for FA. I was able to add this sourcing as well. Another article I hope will reach FA status. Of these two, I am particularly proud. I have dabs of copy editing, examples are here, here (difficult as I am not familiar with the subject)and, spelling correction example here. Primarly I copy edit spelling and grammar. Style, usage, and tone will come as I become more comfortable. Actually sourcing comes if I have the source in front of me, normally. Navou ^banter / _{review me} 19:24, 11 February 2007 (UTC)