This is the place to nominate someone forEditor of the Week recognition:an unsung hero who has been doing great work.Tonominate an editor,add a new section to this page with at least a100–200 word description of how they meetthe criteria for Editor of the Week. Pleasebe specific in describing the tasks and behaviors you are recognizing, so nominees can fully appreciate the positive effects being acknowledged. Pleasedo not use the editor's name in the section heading, link to the editor's user page, or otherwiseping the editor.

Please Note: There are over a dozen nominations currently in theEditor of the Week Queue. Considering this, you should be aware that there will be considerable "lag time" between your nomination and the actual awarding which will occur early next year. Not a problem; just letting you know.

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

Sample nomination text:

I nominateEaster 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!Example (talk) 03:58, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

I nominateBunnypranav (talk ·contribs ·count ·logs) to be Editor of the Week for ... their excellent off-the-scenes work. They are a very active and constructive editor who significantly works at Categories for Discussion. They often close or relist Categories for Discussion nominations (they do so many!) and votes in the Editor of the Week. They are also very skilled in reverting and rollbacking vandalism or good faith edits. They are a friendly and active mentor that NEVER bites. This editor is so skilled, we thought that they should be an admin, as shownhere. And even with very little recognition, this user continues to grow in doing back end improvement. ~Rafael (He, him) •talk •guestbook •projects14:22, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support!—TechnoSquirrel69(sigh)02:15, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Of course!HouseBlaster (talk • he/they)02:17, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• SupportVacant0(talk •contribs)10:53, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Support with pleasure.QuicoleJR (talk)12:38, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]