Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/Editor of the Week/Nominations: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 17:54, 22 June 2019

WER Project main page

Editor of the Week

Current Nominations

Nominations talk page

WP:EotW/N

This is the place to nominate someone for

Editor of the Week

recognition: an unsung hero who has been doing great work. To nominate an editor, add a new section to this page with a 100-200 word description of how they meet the criteria for Editor of the Week. Please be specific in describing the tasks and behaviors you are recognizing, so nominees can fully appreciate the positive effects being acknowledged. Please do not use the editor's name in the section heading, link to the editor's user page, or otherwise ping the editor.

Please do not link to the nominee's user or talk page in the same edit as you add your signature!

Echo

will inform them of their nomination and spoil the surprise. Also, please do not include the editor's name in the section heading because it will appear in watchlist notices.

Just type their name using plain text, or use {{

noping}}, and we will replace it with {{User10

}} in a way that does not notify the nominee.

Add a new nomination now!
Criteria for Editor of the Week

Sample nomination text:

I nominate Easter Bunny for his persistent efforts in tidying up articles. Often editors will hurriedly introduce new information to an article, without placing a full citation, or with spelling and grammatical errors. Over the past four months, Easter Bunny has been fixing the edits of others, doing the tedious work of completing the citation information, copy editing the prose to resolve errors and to align it with Wikipedia's Manual of Style, and fixing links to other articles. Here are some examples: [1] [2] In addition, Easter Bunny has a great positive attitude in discussions with other editors: he always finds the most promising aspects of the comments of others, and follows up on them in trying to build a genuine consensus. Without willing editors to perform cleanup tasks, Wikipedia could not sustain its level of participation from one-time editors who just want to get in and out with their edits as soon as possible. Easter Bunny is a great example of a Wikipedia editor who improves the community through his excellent work! isaacl (talk) 03:58, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gerda

True to her kind ways, Gerda has repeatedly declined nomination for this award, no matter how much we all think she deserves it!

I nominate Gerda Arendt to be Editor of the Week for two reasons. First of all, she is a dedicated content creator, particularly in the realm of

Lepricavark (talk) 16:09, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Second BIG content creator. Very active and helpful at DYK. Pleasant teamwork-kind of player. Wiikipedia is a better and kinder place for her consistent and long standing work. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:28, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the nom. When this award was created Dennis approached me for helping, and I had my reasons not to (no merge with Precious, that is), and I said "give it to the unnoticed!" I am not one of them ;) - thanks for thinking of me, but please respect: give it to the unnoticed! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:32, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. It seemed odd that you had never received this recognition before, so I sort of suspected you had declined it in the past.

Lepricavark (talk) 17:25, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

This is actually Gerda's third time to be nominated. Way back in the beginning she was nominated but, sadly for us, she politely declined. She was nominated again about two years ago but we clerks knew she would again decline and we informed the nominator (forgot who it was). She is most deserving but I will, of course, respect her wishes. As long as you guys are all here, I will take this opportunity, though, to mention that the queue for nominees is quite bare. I spend much of my time searching here and there for viable candidates. I would prefer to have a dozen in line but finding them on my own has proven to be a bit time burden. I've nominated about 60 over the years so my circle of editors available has decreased. Any help or ideas of where to "shake the trees" is appreciated.―Buster7 ☎ 19:15, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

BIG YES from me, too! She's a pleasure to work with and has done great things for this encyclopedia. Her work at DYK (where I cross paths with her the most) is among the best I've seen. Hopefully she will accept our nomination so we can celebrate with her.

Cheers!

✉ • ✎) 20:21, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Gerda is a great editor to work with and I whole heartedly support them being editor of the week, In all honestly never mind a week Gerda deserves Editor of the year! :), –Davey2010^Talk 02:07, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I join the chorus in support of this nomination. I will let Gerta chose hr favorite choral piece to add these voices to :-) MarnetteD|Talk 02:10, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oops I missed that Gerta had posted above. I hope she knows how much we appreciate her work! MarnetteD|Talk 02:12, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support.

talk) 11:22, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Support. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 20:16, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support Vami _IV✠ 15:56, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support A major content contributor, especially in music, where she excels. Also thoughtful and considerate of others, especially those who have been lost from the project. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:37, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just came here to nominate Gerda Arendt as well for all the amazing work she's putting in. Too bad it won't happen, but I thought I'd still leave a big thank you here. Zwerg Nase (talk) 13:44, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I don't think the summary "refused" is correct. I just said frequently that many are less blessed with recognition than I am, and that stands. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:57, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft for #5

Editor Paul Siebert
Discussions @ Talk:World War II
A year ago I awarded this editor a barnstar with the comment "I don't always agree with your points but have come to greatly respect the diligent way you make, defend and amend them". This approach has been maintained. A worthy recipient. Wikipedia needs more like them. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:22, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft for #6

Editor

Draft for #67

48 featured articles or lists, 83 A class articles, 59 good articles, 66,000 edits. 148 new articles and seven new templates created. Peacemaker67 is also a prolific and helpful reviewer of articles, at all three levels, but especially at ACR and FAC. A long time coordinator of the Military History Project and currently serving as the lead coordinator. He seems to be everywhere in the project, offering sage and calm advice, and making sure that everything runs smoothly at the editor interface.. Exactly, it seems to me, the sort of selfless editor this award was created to recognise.

@@ Line 47: / Line 47: @@
 * Editor
-==Peacemaker67==
+==Draft for #67==
 featured articles or lists, 83 A class articles, 59 good articles, 66,000 edits. 148 new articles and seven new templates created. Peacemaker67 is also a prolific and helpful reviewer of articles, at all three levels, but especially at ACR and FAC. A long time coordinator of the Military History Project and currently serving as the lead coordinator. He seems to be everywhere in the project, offering sage and calm advice, and making sure that everything runs smoothly at the editor interface.. Exactly, it seems to me, the sort of selfless editor this award was created to recognise.