Mentifisto (talk · contribs) Hello. I've been registered for nearly three years, active for about a year and a half (with User:Mentisock mostly, last year) and I'd like to see what people think of my edits so far. I'd like a full critical review - I don't mind nit-picking, since I always try to improve whether heavily or the petty faults I have. -- Mentifisto 14:46, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reviews

• Hi there, Mentifisto! I've been seeing you around a lot in Huggle. Your vandalism reverts are greatly appreciated, shown by your collection of barnstars. You also seem to make minimal mistakes, which is great. I would recommend actually making non-automated edits to articles and the WP: namespace, in areas such as WP:XfD or maybe WP:AN. Keep it up! -download | sign! 18:59, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Seeing a lot of good work with Huggle and other automated tools. Perhaps venturing into article work might be a good way to branch out (I know it is hard, it took me a good two years before I started really doing it, and even now I just go for the larger technical jobs in articles themselves), or maybe (like Download said) WP:XFD might be your thing. Wouldn't reccomend WP:AN or WP:AN/I unless you are prepared for them though, often they require a thicker skin than the rest of the encyclopaedia. Once again - great work. :) — neuro^(talk) 04:09, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Alright, I've taken a look at your contributions, userpage, logs, etc., and I must say I'm impressed. Your anti-vandalism work is perfectly accurate, I personally think we need more anti-vandalism administrators, but that's for a different discussion. Even so, article writing is equally as important, and as Neuro suggests, you might want to look into that. The discussions on your talk page show that you're a helpful user who's willing to collaborate and work together with other editors. You do good CSD work (admins-only link) with Huggle, as a bonus. It seems like you're well on your way to becoming an administrator. Keep up the good work! Regards, –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 01:53, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• I realize I am essentially repeating what I wrote at your RfA, but anyway, per User:A_Nobody#RfA_Standards, I am happy that the editor under review has never been blocked, but this is essentially a WP:UNENCYCLOPEDIC. Please remember to explain your stance in discussions, but also keep in mind per our First pillar, we are more than just an encyclopedia (we are a combination of general and specialized encyclopedias, plus almanacs, and gazetteers) and as such we have a totally new concept of encyclopedic that goes beyond paper general encyclopedias. Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 15:57, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• View this user's edit count using X!'s counter

Questions

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

   I think the collective element of my contributions is satisfying. I'm a gnome at heart (the most I did at article writing so far was Adolph Diesterweg) so I like doing the little things that continue to perfect WP, from typo corrections to the fixing of technical things (like wikimarkup), welcoming new users (especially those with sensible contributions) and helping people, wikifying articles and emptying the short pages list, reverting vandalism and patrolling new pages.

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?

   Like anyone else, to a certain degree. I really try to not get involved emotionally - that's not logical in my opinion. I try to remain calm and rational and if I have to explain something I try to communicate clearly and effectively enough.