Wikipedia:Editor review/Srikeit

User:Srikeit edit

Srikeit (talk · contribs) Hello everyone, I have been an editor here since January 2006 and have been fairly active having over 8000 edits to my name. I had an RFA in early May but it did not reach consensus as many thought I needed to spend more time here and gain experience. I plan to request adminship again in mid-July. I request everyone to evaluate my performance & give their valuable feedback.

Thanks --Srikeit ^{(Talk | Email)} 20:34, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reviews

You're a great contributor. The primary complaint on your RfA was that you weren't around long enough. If you reapplied in August or September, or even July, I'm sure your RfA would pass. --Mr. Le fty _{Talk to me!} 23:46, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing but positive things to say, you're a stellar wikipedian! My recommendation to everyone here holds for you also: bolster your "Question 2" credentials and edit more chunkily in the mainspace. Doesn't have to be the Diablo test (pbuh), but some DYK's or other gems of articles (I even gave the same advice to User:Blnguyen, that's how shameless I am). I foresee a WP:200 RfA in the near future! -- Samir धर्म 08:25, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You're a great, friendly Wikipedian and I'm not ~~just~~ saying this to flatter you. Your countless additions to Wikipedia's coverage on cricketers, and especially the pronunciations, are welcome on this electronic encyclopedia. Your anti-vandalism efforts, and your helping with the Checkuser process as a clerk is also great, and also shows that you are a trusted member of the community. I'm very much glad you decided to become a regular of the Wikipedia Bootcamp, and I hope you will continue to help newbies. I'm confident your RfA will be successful :) - Tangot a ngo 12:12, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think your RfA demonstrated any failings on your part, but just the RfA system. A year ago, a lot more Wikipedians would have been only too happy to promote you when you applied, and the first generation of WP admins were not as circumspect and hard-working as you've been. People have become a lot more wary and picky. I strongly advise that you solicite criticism from people who opposed your RfA, to see if indeed there need be some ironing out of any serious concern. ERs such as yours will be a waste of time if only people who know you or look superficially at your editcount, etc., post comments. Also, I advise you to reduce thinking about RfAs by more than 50% of what you may be thinking now - the work you've been doing has made you more useful than many admins, and many people who've not shown your type of commitment have obtained the tools - and simply focus on building the encyclopedia. Cheers, Rama's Arrow 04:34, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You're a great user Srikeit and I was honestly surprised that so many people opposed you in your last RFA based on experience. Your stats show 60-edits per day...If you go for another RFA in mid-July (approx. 20 days lets say), you'll probably have around 9000-10000 edits under your belt. If people can still cite lack of experience after that I'll be honestly suprised. So good luck in your future RFA (note it is singular, not plural). I'm confident that the results will be pretty much unanimous. Nobleeagle (Talk) 05:35, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Watch out for editcountis...counts don't mean all that much. Rama's Arrow 02:54, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Srikeit... Srikeit... Srikeit..., what would Wikipedia do without you? You are an excellent vandal fighter; a lot of your edits seem to be reverting vandalism. Nice job on that, but you should really focus on expanding articles and see if you could bring some articles up to GA class or even FA class; stuff like this will earn you a lot of supports on your next RfA, regardless of time on Wikipedia.

Aside from this, you are an excellent user and you would make a great administrator... especially with all the vandals, WoW socks and imposters coming in these days.

--Evan Robidoux 05:42, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've interacted rarely with you - I had become inactive by the time your editing reached a crescendo :( However, I had seen you on action in Sachin Tendulkar and distinctly remember feeling impressed with your actions. I don't know about your edit statistics now, but based on the stats available in the last rfa, I'd think that talk edits << user talk edits. Almost no edits in the talk spaces of cat, img and template - am not saying that they are necessary, but personally I found very engrossing discussions in category talk and wikipedia talk. You may want to explore those areas. --Gurubrahma 05:56, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have done some amazing work here...creating numerous cricketer stubs (I had awarded you a barnstar for that)...adding sound files...and lot of good vandal fighting. I noticed you participating in RFA discussions. Also great to see you volunteer for RFCU clerk job. Me thinks you will make great use of the admin tools. I skimmed through your contribs and found you spend more time vandal fighting. My suggestion to you would be to involve yourself in the Wikipedia project and project talk namespace, participate in WP:AFD discussions and lend your hand with any of the maintenance back-log tasks. - Ganeshk (talk) 01:37, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since the accolades have already poured in, I would prefer to point out on the weaker areas to mull on: Most of your articles have come with the population of articles based on cricketer bios [1]. There might be some who might find fault with that and would like to see you edit in a wider space. I believe that a featured article would be a very helpful addition to your candidature. Most people look at how you handled the process, a very stressful one indeed for a newbie. Also your talk pages count is very low: 169. You need to interact more with the community. Some additional tips: Take a more active role in WT:RFA, WP:VP, WP:PR, and WP:FAC/FLC. Also, I feel an admin should know about image licencing policies, fair use, and wikimedia commons:. Are you well versed with the above? Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 20:13, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

See this user's edit history with Interiot's tool and edit summary usage (Warning:Both tools have stopped updating and the edit counts are way off. Please consider using Flcelloguy's Tool or Interiot's Tool 2)

Summary of last 5000 edits based on javascript by User:Voice of All - Nobleeagle (Talk) 05:35, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Viewing contribution data for user Srikeit (over the 5000 edit(s) shown on this page)
Time range: 60 approximate day(s) of edits on this page
Most recent edit on: 5hr (UTC) -- 29, Jun, 2006 || Oldest edit on: 13hr (UTC) -- 30, April, 2006
Overall edit summary use (last 1000 edits): Major edits: 99.87% Minor edits: 98.74%
Average edits per day: 60.09 (for last 500 edit(s))
Article edit summary use (last 270 edits) : Major article edits: 100% Minor article edits: 100%
Analysis of edits (out of all 5000 edits shown of this page):
Notable article edits (creation/expansion/rewrites/sourcing): 0.04% (2)
Small article edits (small content/info/reference additions): 2.16% (108)
Superficial article edits (grammar/spelling/wikify/links/tagging): 10.14% (507)
Minor article edits marked as minor: 58.33%
Breakdown of all edits:
Unique pages edited: 2986 | Average edits per page: 1.67 | Edits on top: 19.52%
Edits marked as major (non-minor/reverts): 63.18% (3159 edit(s))
Edits marked as minor (non-reverts): 9.94% (497 edit(s))
Marked reverts (reversions/text removal): 26.56% (1328 edit(s))
Unmarked edits: 0.18% (9 edit(s))
Edits by Wikipedia namespace:
Article: 34.26% (1713) | Article talk: 2.82% (141)
User: 2.7% (135) | User talk: 33.64% (1682) 
Wikipedia: 24.24% (1212) | Wikipedia talk: 0.8% (40)
Image: 0.86% (43)
Template: 0.18% (9)
Category: 0.06% (3)
Portal: 0.38% (19)
Help: 0.02% (1)
MediaWiki: 0% (0)
Other talk pages: 0.04% (2)

Questions

Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: I have been quite pleased with my contributions to the Cricket project where I completed the list of ODI Cricket bios, which means that every player who has played international cricket has an article on Wikipedia. I have done quite a bit of audio work adding pronunciations to the List of Indian Cricketers, Indian states & major Indian cities. I have also contributed a bit to WikiProject Chemistry added articles like Dehydrohalogenation & Industrial production of Aniline. I also do my bit in vandalism reversion and POV/Spam removal in watchlisted articles.
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?
A: I have not been in any major conflicts but I have had my share of "Why the hell did you revert me?" on RC Patrol both on my talk & email and I have always striven to explain my actions promptly & lucidly. The only significant conflict was at Ajith Kumar which was subject to an aggressive revert war. When attempts to reason it out didn't work. I started a consensus on the talk page which effectively ended the conflict. I am basically an easygoing person and do not get wiki-stressed easily. I believe that in the event of a conflict, a short break to clear one's mind and later perceiving the conflict from the other person's Point of View, facilitates in the conflict's speedy resolution.