User:Gwernol/Guinnog

Informal Editor Review: Guinnog

What's not to like about a user whose Celtic username is taken from his favorite beer? Guinnog is a prolific contributor to Wikipedia with an excellent record of editing articles, uploading images and fighting vandals. He understands policy and is polite and constructive in his frequent interactions with other editors. He remains calm in discussions and works well to achieve consensus and improve the encyclopedia. It's time we gave him the mop.

Edit count - 13198 (http://tools.wikimedia.de/~essjay/edit_count/Count.php?username=Guinnog)
Time around - Guinnog has been contributing since the beginning of January
Email enabled? - Yes
Controversial userpage? - No; there are a few userboxes but they're in moderation and used appropriately.
Any blocks? - No
Stupid signature? - No
Edit summaries - Early usage was a little low, but much improved lately
Civil? Generally an exceptionally civil editor who holds himself to very high standards. On the odd occasion (see below) when he falls beneath his own standards he admits and corrects the problem
No personal attacks? - None that I could find
Mistakes - A few minor ones, but always corrected (e.g. forgetting to subst a welcome)
Any edit warring? - None that I found

Contributions review:

Please note that I have attempted to make this a fair and representative survey of the user's work. Therefore some diffs may show 'bad edits'. Whilst I obviously want this nomination to succeed, I think giving people an informed and complete picture of the candidate is more important than 'skipping over' anything that might not be quite perfect in an attempt to make this happen.

Article: (10319 edits) Guinnog has been an impressive and prolific article contributor. He has made major contributions to articles related to the Rebus novels by Ian Rankin and to articles on the novels of Iain Banks (Whit, Walking on Glass, Dead Air, The Crow Road, Canal Dreams and many others). Beyond major Scottish writers he has significantly improved articles as diverse as Portuguese Air Force and Culture of Botswana.
Article talk: (820 edits) Plenty of polite [1], constructive (Talk:Redwood_National_and_State_Parks) discussions. I have some concerns over the lengthy discussion at Talk:7_World_Trade_Center and its archives. There are a couple of places where he could have been more civil as he admitted himself, and I believe the debate went on longer than the subject merited. That said, nothing in that debate suggests he should not be an administrator.
User: (281 edits) Appropriate and generous awarding of barnstars to other editors, maintainence of his own highly informative user page.
User talk: (916 edits) As always, polite [2], calm [3] and helpful [4] interactions with other users. Clearly demonstrates he has the right temprement to be an administrator. Plenty of appropriate vandalism and WP:NPA warnings, showing he has experience for admin duties.
Wikipedia: (433 edits) Has been active recently at WP:ANI, with substantive and insightful contributions to the debates [5]. Considerable experience both nominating and commenting on AfDs. While I do not always agree with his conclusions, he shows good knowledge of policies and guidelines, for example Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chess During World War II.
Wikipedia talk: (43 edits) Less activity here, but handled himself well when discussing allegations of sockpuppetry on Mets501's recent RfA Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship/Mets501_2.
Image: (303 edits) Lots of great contributions with appropriate tagging, including a main page featured image.
Image talk: (8 edits) Good interactions with users, as usual
Template: (30 edits) Appropriate work on templates such as Template:Iain_Banks
Template talk: (24 edits) His usual civil and constructive interactions with other users

Summary: From Guinnog's userpage (which I strongly encourage you to read): "I wouldn't spend as much time as I do on it if I didn't still think Wikipedia was a great project. Unlike Usenet, it attracts predominantly the right sort of people, who want to write an on-line encyclopedia of human knowledge. How cool is that?" How cool indeed. Wikipedia will be much improved by giving this dedicated editor a few additional tools.