Wikipedia:Editor review/Aaroncrick (2)

Aaroncrick

Aaroncrick (talk · contribs · count) I'm Tasmania's only current substantial editor on English Wikipedia and I'm requesting a review from peers to help me improve as an editor. Many articles I edit, are ones few have much interest in. I would like to be become an admin within a year or so, but first I think it's important I improve my writing skills and get involved in more admin related areas of Wikipedia. Thankyou. Aaroncrick (talk) 02:39, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Questions

1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?

   I started off contributing mainly to Tasmanian related articles; however, I now mainly contribute to cricket articles and occasionally dabble with Australian rules football arts. The article I have spent the most time on would have to be York Park, Launceston, Tasmania (when I was very inexperienced and did not have much clue} and Ricky Ponting (all Launceston based topics).

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?

   Luckily I haven't really ever been in any serious editing disputes I can remember. Yeah, maybe the odd anon vandal, but everything has been dealt with swiftly - nothing major. I'm not one to get stressed over issues on wikipedia as I'm usually a carm individual and I stear clear of religious/nationalist debates.

Reviews

By the looks of it you are a very knowledgeable Wikipedian especially when it comes to article maintenance, and improvement. I even believe we have crossed paths on Wikipedia before, but I could be wrong. Anyways, if you want to be an admin you have to have a solid edit count, knowledge of Wikipedia policy, a specialty area where admins work and plenty of supporters amongst the user populations.

You have a solid edit count 10,847 live edits and 11,220 total edits. Approximately 11.01% are automated edits, I would try to keep this percentage under 25 but the lower the better. You also appear to have plenty of friends on Wikipedia which is also a positive quality to have. You do need improvement on work in Wikipedia space where most of the issues admins deal with take place. I recommended getting into discussions at WP:AFD or WP:MFD not only is it a good way to share your knowledge on policies, its also a good way to get into heated discussions and debates that can help better prepare you for admin work. Overall good job though, and if you were up for RFA right now you would have a support from me. -Marcusmax(speak) 23:24, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

I'd be careful when getting involved at AfD and MfD, as discussions can get adversarial very quickly and tempers frayed. I guess try to keep in mind there is no black and white..only shades of grey and focus on solutions and compromises where you can. Try to offer a solution where you see a problem. A good place to trial negotiating is article review places such as WP:GAN and WP:PR as well as WP:FAC. Show how well you can get on with others. Reviewers are in short supply so thoughtful reviews I am sure will be gratefully received by other editors. Can you tally up your FA/GA/DYK contribs thus far? You might want to find and link to your worst conflict/flareup with another editor here rather than have a surprise srping up at RfA (which is I presume where this is heading) Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:28, 10 December 2009 (UTC)