Wikipedia:Editor review/MathCool10

MathCool10

MathCool10 (talk · contribs) I wish to be reviewed because I wish to see what places I'm doing good in, and where I should improve. I don't plan on doing so any time soon, but I also wish to see when I should request for adminship. MathCool10 03:32, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Reviews Review by Razorflame:All right...I don't usually review other editors, but I will start reviewing other editors now, starting with you. First off, if you want to become an administrator, I would recommend you read the Wikipedia:Criteria for Adminship page first to find out what the requirements are for becoming an administrator on this site. Once you have done that, you will find out that you do not have enough edits to become an administrator on this site. I like to see at least 600 mainspace edits and have mainspace edits be the majority of your edit count. I also like to see people who would like to become administrators to be more heavily involved in discussion that happens around this site. Furthermore, I like seeing future administrator candidates to have more vandalism reversions as this goes to show that you do indeed know how to revert vandalism. After going through your changes that you have made on this site, I only saw about 10-12 vandalism reversions with no reports to the Vandalism in Progress page (unless I missed some). If you want to become an administrator, I would like to see more vandal reversions as well as more reports to the ViP page and warnings to the vandals that you reverted appropriately, as this goes to show that you have read and understand the vandalism guidelines here on this site. I would also like to see more participation at the Requests for Deletion page and I would also like to see more deleted edits and more articles correctly tagged for quick deletion as this goes to show that you have read and understand the deletion policy. Looking at your edit count, you currently only have 50 edits in the Mainspace, while you have more edits to your user and user talk pages. If you want to become an administrator, you should work in the mainspace more and in your user and user talk pages less. If you were to look at my edit count, you will see that I have 15,000 edits in the mainspace, while I only have about 7,000 edits combined in my user and user talk counts (this number is only so high because lots of people leave messages on my talk page and I usually like to respond to them :)). Also, while looking through your changes that you have made here on this site, I noticed that you haven't created very many articles for this site. While I won't hold it against you if you applied for adminship in the future, it might be a cause for concern for some other people. I would recommend that you create more articles for this site, as this goes to show that you want to help to make this Wikipedia a better place, which is a big positive when you apply for adminship. Also, you have only been editing on this site for about a month. Most people like to see people who apply for adminship to be at least 3 months old. This doesn't mean that you can just stop editing until then, though. For those 3 months, you have to be an actively editing user. Sorry for being so critical of you, but you must understand that I am only being extremely critical of you in order to help make you a better editor here on this site :). I hold no grudge against you and I definitely think that you are a good editor here on this site :).

As for the things that you have been doing good for this site so far, you are doing a great job at understanding what an appropriate redirect is, and you have also created some very nice articles so far :). I also like your calm and cool demeanor, which, if you keep it up, could be a great tool that could make your RfA a success.

All together, your editing is very well done so far and you definitely have the potential to become an administrator in the future if you were to keep up your editing on this site. No red flags popped up while looking through your user changes, and in a couple of months, you should be ready for an RfA if you take what I said above and run with it. A recommendation about having an RfA: I would recommend that you wait for someone else to nominate you instead of self-nominating yourself in the future. This will state to other users that you are trustworthy on this site and will be a big plus for your RfA.

I am lookiung forward to seeing you edit on this site in the future, and possibly nominating you for administrator later in the future. Sorry for writing such a long review, but this is the usual length of my reviews that I have done in the past. Cheers, Razorflame 22:29, 28 December 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?

   I suppose that I am pleased with my "major" edits to Major League Baseball. It is the most I have contributed to one page of the Wikipedia.

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 no editing conflicts yet, but in the future, I would calmly talk to the other editor on the discussion page, none of us making an edit until we have an agreement.