Wikipedia:Editor review/Terence Ong 2
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] User:Terence Ong
Terence Ong (talk • contribs) I am an editor for more than 21 months since my first edit on 28 January 2005 with over 13,000 edits I guess. For those who want to know my activities, I mainly do article writing, upload images to Wikimedia Commons, couple of xFDs, vandal fighting and help to select for good admins at RFAs. I had three unsuccessul RFAs, the first I declined due to inexperience. I had some conflict on IRC as well as on Wikipedia itself, I would want some comments on my editing pattern, edits, quality of argument on xFDs, and other comments. Please also tell me on ways how I can improve myself e.g. writing skills, attitude, admin chores etc. Thank you. --Terence Ong (T | C) 13:29, 6 November 2006 (UTC) Terence Ong (T | C) 13:29, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Reviews
Comments
- View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.
Questions
- Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
- Answer
- A: Singapore 2006, Central Sikh Temple, Singapore general election, 2006, National Museum of Singapore. I created all the three pages except the election page. Singapore 2006 and Singapore general election, 2006 were articles that I helped to write a significant amount of content and appeared at the In the news section of the Main Page. Singapore 2006 was an international event and it was a very important event and I felt that I should try my very best to help out with the article, since it was held in my homeland. This article is not a fantastic article, but I felt proud when I edited this article and it appeared on the Main Page. For Central Sikh Temple, it received a DYK mention which is my only one as of now. I strongly believe that the encyclopedia should have sufficient coverage of every part of the world, and every topic an encyclopedia has. In the elections page, I've helped with quite a lot of content, though its not fully done yet. I've created every constituency (current), though two was actually a total rewrite. For the museum article, I took quite a long time to have enough information in my hands before having the final version. This was a mammoth task and I took like a week to write the article, I plan to do more work on it and bring it to GA if possible. I've also helped with articles such as Light Rapid Transit (Singapore) which I did a massive cleanup, and hope to style it after Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore). I've edited the latter and improved the quality in a way and its sub-pages as well. I hope to work more on article writing, and to have a better coverage of articles on Wikipedia, with more honourable mentions. For a list, see here.
- 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?
- Answer
- A: Recently, I was involved in a mass Singapore shopping mall AFDs, I had a small conflict with User:Nehwyn and several editors about malls being notable and there was quite a heated debate here. I decided to keep my cool and assume good faith, but arguing my point that the couple of malls sent for AFD and some were nominated for PROD, that these malls definitely meet the notability criteria. I try not to get angry easily and will keep cool usually. I had conflicts with User:Monicasdude and was involved in the arbitration case due to unacceptable conduct. He has since left Wikipedia, due to the parole given in the end. It all started in December 2005, when current featured article Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore) went on FAC and he objected. There was a long dispute over his crticisms and I myself also debated with him over the article. Later, he strongly objected to it, claiming the article was not modified as he suggested, and was not neutral, and kept on commenting on the article, arguing his points. There was a lengthy dispute at my talk page, and he kept on removing my comments from his talk page as I told him to archive his talk page. My comments were blanked thrice without any reason. An admin had to interfere into our dispute. By the time it was promoted to FA status, he made claims adding tags saying the article did not follow the NPOV policy and contained "weasel words". There was a mini edit war, but it stopped. An RFC was filed against him for his behaviour and did not take his RFC seriously, and continued with his uncivil conduct. An arbitration case was filed against him, and I was one of the ten users involved in it. It included his conduct at AFDs, which I always saw his comments on the AFDs. I was involved in it and suggested several enforcements to the RFAr case. Another time was a group of members from the Airline and Airport WikiProject, but it has since cleared. The people at the Airport WikiProject wanted a standard format for airlines and their destinations in a normal format. However, Singapore Changi Airport had a table format, and a standardisation took place and there was a lengthy argument on the style of the article. As I was not very familiar with things back then, I made a personal attack at two of the members without realising it was against policy. I then remained civil and not to make any personal attacks anymore. Months later, I had a dispute with an Airline Wikiproject editor over Singapore Airlines subpages, several Singaporean editors also disputed on the content. Some of this sub-pages doesn't exist for most airlines and the user sent the article for AFD. As a result, one was deleted and the other kept due to a lack of concensus. The dispute was whether the two articles, Singapore Airlines flight numbers and Singapore Airlines fleet violated Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information.
