Wikipedia:Editor review/Flubeca

Flubeca

Flubeca (talk · contribs) I am Flubeca, I am a vandal fighter, wikifier, AWB user, Weaponry Task Force member and I recently started reviewing Articles for Creation. -Flubeca^Talk 04:18, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Reviews

A lot of good work on Wikification, categorisation, vandal-fighting and typo-fixing. Some specific suggestions:

• This edit indicates that you might not understand the Wikipedia:Username policy. If Abb Jones is notable enough to have a Wikipedia article (and I see this is now disputed) then the usename should not be used. Further, if this is Abb Jones, they should not be creating their own article, due to the policy on Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Tim Vickers 22:29, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
• Figures are best in PNG format, rather than GIF, see Wikipedia:Preparing images for upload.
• This isn't really a minor edit.
• Don't use edit summaries like This.

Hope this helps. Tim Vickers 22:39, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Comments

• View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.

• View this user's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool

Questions

1. Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?

   I am not particularily pleased with any article. However, Beholla Pistol Is an article I made, and when I asked for information on it (so I could improve the article), they copy-pasted that article :/

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 never entered any editing conflict. However, If I encounter one, I whould probably discuss it on the talk page, rather that entering an edit war.

Additionals from Dfrg.msc

Borrowed from Glen (talk · contribs), I'm sure he wont mind. These should test you editing skills, and show if you have any weaknesses which you can work on. So, just write your answer next to the Question. Good luck.

Speedy Delete or not:

1. CSD1 CSD A7
2. CSD2 Don't delete but tag it as stub :)
3. CSD3 CSD A7
4. CSD4 CSD G1
5. CSD5 CSD A7

Vandalism or or not:

1. [1] Factual Errors
2. [2] Nonsence
3. [3] Vandalism
4. [4] The removal was not vandalism.
5. [5] I whould revert, but im not sure if its vandalism. (Assume good faith :) )
6. [6] I don't get what he's talking about. I whould ask someone who knows more than me on the subject to verify.

Have fun! Dfrg.msc 07:15, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I did have fun doing those :) -Flubeca^Talk 22:31, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Response:

1. Yes, you could tag A1 as well.

2. Good.

3. True, but exercise caution.

4. 100%

5. 100% Correct.

Nice work. :) Dfrg.msc 09:08, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

_

1. Good.

2. Correct.

3. Correct.

4. Correct and good demonstration of understanding policy.

5. Id label it as a Test, borderline vandalism and an unhelpful edit. Test 1 and Welcome.

6. You could also check user, user history, previous warnings. When in doubt, leave it in, but I'd ask for sources or references.