Wikipedia:Editor review

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
"WP:ER" redirects here. It is not to be confused with Wikipedia:Expert retention, Wikipedia:Editing restrictions, or Wikipedia:Edit requests.
Noticeboards and related pages (Dashboard)
General
Content
User issues
Noticeboards
Request an editor review
Before requesting a review, please understand the following:
Shortcut:
  • Editor review is a process that allows users to have their behavior and contributions to Wikipedia evaluated by peers, who will provide constructive feedback on areas for improvement. Anybody may request a review, regardless of their tenure at Wikipedia.
  • While an editor may remove comments about them that appear to be off-topic or simply personal attacks, it is important to remember that the editor review process may produce comments that the editor may not like or personally agree with, and the editor being reviewed should make every attempt to use this collaborative process to communicate with others. Editors should not refactor comments they dislike. These should either be simply removed or discussed.
  • Administrators requesting a review of their administrative actions should see administrator review.
  • This page frequently gets backlogged, so requests may wait up to several weeks for a response. If you have less than 300 edits (or your last request was within the last 3 months), your request may be removed without notice.
  • Please consider reviewing another editor when you request a review
  • Users requesting feedback on their newly created article should do so at requests for feedback.
If you would like to be reviewed, please follow the steps below:
  1. Create a subpage using the box below, replacing USERNAME with your username. Please make sure there is no space after your username, as this makes it hard for reviewers to reach your request.
  2. Do not save the page yet! Follow the instructions in the box above the request page. Please remember to fill in the requested fields.
  • Optional, but highly recommended: You may put the {{Editor review}} template or the {{Editor review sticker}} template on your user page to advertise the review page.
  • Optional: It is possible to add a userbox onto your User page (after the review is finished) by placing {{User Editor review}} at your user box section on your User page. Instructions on how to use templates may be found here.
  • Optional: As only admins can see your deleted contributions, these admins have volunteered to perform editor reviews focussing on deleted contributions (this will probably be of most interest to newpage patrollers)
  • Optional, but highly recommended There is a large backlog at Editor Review, so take some time to review some of your fellow Wikipedians.
Request form
Replace USERNAME with your username.
Click here for unreviewed requests

Contents

[edit] Current requests

[edit] Banaticus*

Banaticus (talk · contribs · count) STATEMENT Banaticus (talk) 02:52, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    I am a WikiGnome. I mainly work on reverting vandalism, but I also occasionally throw my hat into the ring and handle abuse reports, review articles, help people on IRC, answer {{help me}} requests, answer semi-protected edit requests... and sundry other things. I'm also one of the Wikipedia:Ambassadors. I have a bit more about me on my user page.
    I'm particularly pleased about my single-section Ancestry revamp of the Cleopatra article (yes, the famous one). She has a "seriously messed up" family tree (more like a tangled bush). When I first came across the article, it used the more typical family tree stemma. This was rather confusing, as her ancestry is quite tangled, so I redid it using the {{family tree}} template. A day or so later, I changed family tree to the {{chart}} template, which "generates lower preprocessor node count." I did it all on paper, was almost done, realized that I missed one uncle, and had to redo the whole thing again before typing it into the computer. It was made more complex because she is descended from 11 people, including three uncle-niece and two brother-sister relationships, and all of them are descended from the same two people.
    You can also take a look at Special:WhatLinksHere/User:Banaticus/contact and Special:WhatLinksHere/User:Banaticus/contactsemiedit for the people/articles I've helped recently.
  2. Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
    Of course I've been in editing disputes -- I've been a Wikipedia editor for a long time. Occasionally somebody gets really upset when somebody says that a person is from "Southern California" instead of "Greater California" or something, you know what I mean? Sometimes people (like me) make mistakes or jump to the wrong conclusions (and sometimes it's the other person). It happens. It doesn't cause me stress -- I usually just smile and laugh about it -- not in a mean way, but like hey, that's life, you know? If it was starting to cause me stress, I'd just step away and come back when I felt better.


Reviews

[edit] Jeff G.*

Jeff G. (talk · contribs · count) Hello. Please review my edits.   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 01:44, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    My best contributions have been writing (and improving) Daniel Terdiman and helping interventions against many vandals. I have: written a DYK, uploaded many images; used Twinkle, Huggle, and AWB; joined multiple WikiProjects; warned many editors for violating policies and guidelines; nominated and discussed multiple pages at WP:XFD; contributed to WT:RFA; opened a user content RFC; requested protection at WP:RFPP; been named as a party to Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2010-04-29/Serboi (since deleted); worked constructively with the article subject and multiple other editors to rescue Michelle Kaufmann at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michelle Kaufmann; and contributed to many discussions and done much project space work at WP:AN, WP:ANI, WP:AN3, WP:SPI (and previously WP:SSP and WP:RFCU), WP:AN/Δ, WT:ARBCOM, WT:RFARB, WP:AE, WT:AC/N, WT:RFC, WP:CHUU, WP:CHUS, WP:DELREV, WP:WQA, WP:CP, WP:ADCO/RFC, WP:PUF, WP:HD, WP:ITN, WP:VP, WP:VPP, WP:VPT, WP:BN, WP:CJS, WP:BRFA, WP:UW, WP:NAR, WP:EA, WP:ELN, WP:TEA, and WP:FFU. I think they all improved the project.
  2. Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
    Over two years ago, I misinvoked WP:EVULA (felt that I was right) in continuing to revert what I felt was vandalism, and got blocked for it[1] without notice. The duration of the block was 28 minutes. I have occasionally come into contact with users who I felt were not here to help write an encyclopedia, and I have been civil while encouraging them to either stay and be civil or leave.


Reviews

[edit] PaoloNapolitano*

PaoloNapolitano (talk · contribs · count) I have been here for almost a year now, and I want some feedback which can be useful in a future RFA and to improve myself as a Wikipedia editor. PaoloNapolitano 14:07, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    Most of my work here is administrative, like reverting and reporting vandalism, I am also active in dispute resolutions, discussions and especially arbitration, where I make outside views and statements. I don't see myself as a content contributor, but I have done some work on updating Norwegian footballers' articles.
  2. Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
    As I'm not a content contributor, or my content is pretty much uncontroversial, I haven't been in many disputes. I have rather participated in resolving disputes, especially through arbitration.

The way I approach disputes is by looking at the cases from both viewpoints. I try avoiding becoming partisan, but in cases where one party has clearly broken policy, it may be hard to avoid. I have a strong sense of justice; noone deserves a more or less strict sanction than what is required to end the dispute


Reviews

[edit] Alexroller*

Alexroller (talk · contribs · count) I am a relatively new Wikipedian (user for 8 months) and I am very interested in other editors' opinions of my editing. Alexroller (talk) 02:56, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    I contribute in a variety of ways and types of articles on Wikipedia. I like to find random articles to copyedit and once in a while contribute original content. I would not say I am pleased with a certain article I have edited or projects I have been a part of, but this will change when I start to narrow my editing more.
  2. Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
    I have never been in an editing dispute. If I were to become part of one or see one starting up, I would calmly explain my opinion, try to avoid conflict, and compromise with the other editor involved. If there was a continuing issue with one editor, and we could not come to any sort of agreement, I might request assistance from outside editors.


Reviews

[edit] Chris the Paleontologist*

Chris the Paleontologist (talk · contribs · count) Hi! I've been here on Wikipedia for about 5-6 months and just want to know ways that I can improve my editing. Chris the Paleontologist (talk | contribs) 03:02, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    My contributions to Wikipedia are quite varied: I spend a lot of time trying to fix up articles, but also revert and notify vandals in addition to participation in AfD debates (I'll admit that I sometimes am too hasty to jump on the deletion bandwagon, but my decisions are getting better as a acquire more experience).
  2. Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
    I don't think I've ever been in a real dispute, unless you count vandal-reversion or disagreements on AfD. If I was in a dispute, I would try to explain my viewpoints to the opposition on the appropriate talk page.


Reviews

[edit] Kylekieran*

Kylekieran (talk · contribs · count) STATEMENT Kylekieran (talk) 02:34, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    Answer to question 1
  2. Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
    Answer to question 2


Reviews

[edit] Skater (2)*

Skater (talk · contribs · count) Decided to have yet another "How's my driving?" sort of checkup since my return to the Encyclopedia. I currenlty have over 6000 edits to the Encyclopedia, and am wondering how I measure up as an RFA candidate in the future as well. I am also resuming my Admin Coaching with User:Fastily SKATER Is Back 08:46, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    I used to be a primarily behind the scenes type editor, being more then happy to fight vandalism, New Page Patrol and the sorts of that. I still do that from time to time as well as Upload log patrolling, but I'm also in article space now. As of right now i have 4 DYK articles with two more awaiting review, and I'm waiting for Aaron Rodgers to be reviewed for WP:GA so I can improve it further.
  2. Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
    I have in the past, but none since my return. I've opened a few ANI threads which the archives can be searched for, they were so long ago I don't really remember to tell the truth. The best thing to do with situations like this is to stay calm, remember that as hard as it is to believe this is still the internet and it's not going to hurt you in real life. Calmly explain your side of the situation, and listen to theirs and try to gain a consensus. If all else fails go through Dispute Resolution.


Reviews

  • Keep up the good work on article-writing, hope to see more DYKs from you. I would prefer that you work on New Page Patrol, its tougher than run-on-the-mill vandal-fighting and you'll get the most learning experience out of it. - Mailer Diablo 22:06, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Magister Scienta*

Magister Scienta (talk · contribs · count) Hello, after recently reaching the 2,000 edit mark, I realized that I wanted to further enhance my editing abilities. I thought one of the best ways to do this was to see what aspects of my editing other users thought I should change, thus this forum was perfect. Any comment, even the hard-to-hear ones, are greatly appreciated. Magister Scientatalk 00:06, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    I truly think that my primary contributions have been considerably diverse. A concise list of major contributions is: Template creation and maintenance, NPP (which has made me fairly well experienced in CSDs), welcoming new users, maintenance of articles (somewhat often pertaining towards Judaism), and occasionally creating articles myself.
  2. Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
    Truthfully, I've never been in an editing dispute, I vehemently believe that cooperation is always better than competition (the non-friendly type). The few instances in which I thought I came off a little strongly, I attempted to quickly reconcile with the other user. If I were to get into an editing dispute, I think my actions would depend considerably on what was being disputed. For example, if another user was inserting blatant vandalism into an article, I would first ask the user to stop (maybe even 3 times) and would then seek administrative action. However, if it were a more complicated issue I would strive to reach an agreement, or middle-ground, with the other editor. If all else failed, I would ask for a consensus amongst other editors and then, if the consensus sided with me, seek administrative action if the other user persisted in defying the consensus.


Reviews


  • I'll leave the "not reviewed" tag since I only checked a sample of deleted contributions, particularly speedy deletion taggings. Speaking of which, it looks mostly good except a tendency to sometimes use {{db-reason}} when speedy deletion is really not appropriate (even if some admin with a track record of ignoring policy deleted them) or using the wrong criteria where they do not fit. Unfortunately my browser crashed, so I lost some of my previous comments. Some examples I think were incorrect (although deleted):
  • Scarlet soho - A7. A band that toured with multiple notable artists, had a tour sponsored by Red Bull, songs on a Canadian sitcom and reviews in Drowned in Sound? I think there were really sufficient indications of significance and importance.
  • File:Con-58b.wav - F1 and F2. I'm baffled by that one. Again, deleted contrary to policy. F2 does not allow to delete WAV-files just because they are not images and the WAV-file worked fine for me.
  • Xecure Lab - "it is a blank page". First of all, if it really had no content, A3 is the correct tag. But that page had an infobox with relevant information, so it was not blank and if an infobox exists, A3 cannot be applied.
  • 1 v - "it is about an unremarkable location". Again, if WP:CSD does not allow to delete something, do not use {{db-reason}} for it. Locations should not be speedy deleted.
  • Dillon Pace - A7. Again, a musician with plenty of indications of importance/significance: Signed by Toby Gad, collaborated with a dozen notable musicians, in a band with Mandi Perkins etc.
To sum it up. Keep up your work but be more careful with speedy deletion taggings in the future. If something does not fit the explicitly narrow-worded criteria, don't try to make it fit but use WP:PROD or WP:AFD instead. Regards SoWhy 11:24, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback, I assure you I will be more cautious in my use of CSDs. Magister Scientatalk (Editor Review) 21:43, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Crazynas*

Crazynas (talk · contribs · count) Looking for a general assessment, I feel I have the clue if not experience (currently) to handle a mop, but I'd like some outside input. I recognize that I'm lacking in audited content contributions, however I've been putting a bibliography together on Strauss-Howe generational theory which I would like to get to FA eventually (honestly maintenance is far less 'work' then writing, although one of the reasons I started back here was to hone my writing ability. Thanks in advance to any editors that takes time to review, it is greatly appreciated. Crazynas t 00:26, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    My contributions are mostly maintenance, I maintain two alternate accounts CrazynasBot (for automated work) and ObjectivismLover (huggle account). Content-wise I've spent time on various Magic: the Gathering articles, various Objectivist (most of those edits are ancient history however I did help found the wiki project)
  2. Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
    No particular conflicts that I can recall (unless you count vandals), I tend to not give a * about content. I would, however, like some input on my full disclosure and how it would affect any future RfA.


Reviews

  • Don't worry about your past history. Its 5 years already, if it doesn't recur and your contributions have been consistently and significantly positive I don't how it would become a major issue to sink an RfA. - Mailer Diablo 22:09, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Sainsf*

Sainsf (talk · contribs · count) Hello. I wished to have a review for I wished to know how good or bad I am, whether I can be trusted, and what my peers think of me. I wish to get suggestions and ideas which can help me improve. Sainsf <^> (talk) 14:06, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    I am mainly a reviewer and a new page and help page patroller. I mostly write articles in and contribute to things related to fungi, plants and animals. I have developed a few many stubs like Common eland ( I am particularly pleased with it for I have done a lot to improve it from a stub to a B-class article ) and many others into better articles. I have removed vandalism and deleted improper articles often, too. I like things like userboxes and templates ( you know that seeing my userpage ). But, over all, I have always loved Wikipedia and simply help it as much as I can.
  2. Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
    I have never been in any edit war or dispute till today. If I ever face a war ( though I do not expect I will ) I would try my best to end it and pacify the user(s). I would contact an experienced user or protect the page if the war persists. I have made many a mistake mostly when I was new here - like making unnecessary edits, uploading copyrighted files and so on, if you count these as disputes.


Reviews

  • Tip : Try to use your edit summary more frequently. Doesn't have to be in detail, shorthands (like 'expand', 'sp' or 'reply') is perfectly okay. - Mailer Diablo 22:34, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

[edit] PassaMethod*

PassaMethod (talk · contribs · count) I want to know how to improve Pass a Method talk 14:57, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    Mostly content contributions
  2. Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
    I havent been in any major disputes. In the minor disputes, i solved them by asking for third opinions, or by requesting admin intervention


Reviews

  • Tip : Try to use your edit summary more frequently. Doesn't have to be in detail, shorthands (like 'lede', 'sp' or 'reply') is perfectly okay. - Mailer Diablo 22:13, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

[edit] LikeLakers2*

LikeLakers2 (talk · contribs · count) Hi, I'm LikeLakers2. I wasn't sure about whether I wanted to be reviewed on this page, but after I read over some already-existing reviews that have been answered, I decided to take a shot at it. LikeLakers2 (talk | Sign my guestbook!) 18:49, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    I am usually patrolling Category:Wikipedia pages with incorrect protection templates and WP:RFPP. I also have reverted vandalism occasionally, and I used to be active on WP:AIV. (I'm not active on AIV anymore; I don't exactly remember why) I am generally one of the more lenient editors of WP; i.e. I sometimes, though not always, let a user off without warning them the first time. (I still revert their vandalism, however)
  2. Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
    Yes, I have, actually. I try not to go too far, while trying to stay calm (and I never am intentionally impolite) in even the rudest/worst of situations.

Additional information: I have a somewhat-self-induced ban on myself, where I am not allowed to edit the userspace and user-talkspace of any user other than my own, unless it is for reverting vandalism, or simply striking up a conversation with a user. I also have somewhat a good sense of humor, though I am not sure if I have ever expressed that directly on-wiki.


Reviews

  • You seem to be good user but he did a little incident in the block log. Congrats! Mohamed Aden Ighe (talk) 01:19, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
  • Tip : Try to use your edit summary more frequently. Doesn't have to be in detail, shorthands (like 'rvv', 'sp' or 'reply') is perfectly okay. - Mailer Diablo 22:13, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Dipankan001

Dipankan001 (talk · contribs · count) I want to conduct this review as I wish to know, how am I trusted by the community, are my contributions OK, and other suggestions,if any, would be appreciated, and I would like to follow the suggestions if possible. That's me! Have doubt? What I done? 10:35, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    My primary contribution to Wikipedia is New Page Patrolling.With over 450 pages already patrolled,i'm highly experienced in this.I think this a vital work which should be done very carefully,and not carelessly.
  2. Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
    Frankly,to say,I have been,till now,not been in any edit-war.If I ever face a edit war,first of all,I would get out of the discussion,I would warn the editors not to edit war;and if,after that,they continue to edit war with other newcomers or any other Wikipedian,I would go to WP:RPP,and Request a temporary Full Protection because of edit warring.


Reviews

  • Thanks for patrolling new pages, but you need to read the definitions at WP:CSD and be more careful about choosing the right speedy tag - see my note on your user page today about inappropriate {{db-hoax}} and {{db-vandalism}} tags. JohnCD (talk) 12:20, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
Yeah,thanks for that.Will look over it.That's me! Have doubt? Track me! 14:20, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
  • I don't know your editing style or really anything about you as a Wikipedia user, but the one interaction I had with you was civil, so for that you're already a lot further along than many editors on here. Jrcla2 (talk) 15:16, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Unfortunately, it seems you still need to work on your grammar, which I brought up here. While there isn't really a problem with it on talk pages, when you create articles with bad grammar, it creates more work for other people to clean it up. After all, this is an encyclopedia, and encyclopedias are expected to have correct grammar. Other that this, I'm sorry to have to say that it would do you good to read or re-read some of Wikipedia's policies. From removing a request to merge on your own article when it probably should be merged (see WP:NSONG) to drastically underestimating the good article standards to not having a knowledge of policy, you are on the cusp of owning your articles, feeling overly protective of them, and refusing to believe they are not-notable or have something wrong with them. I'm sorry if I sound harsh, but you really need to know this stuff to contribute effectively. If it makes you feel any better, the better part of articles I've made have been merged. Continuing with the grammar thing, your lack of knowledge of the English language is evident at the top of this page in your opening statement. A grammatically correct version: "I want to conduct this review as I wish to know how am I trusted by the community and if my contributions okay. Other suggestions, if any, would be appreciated, and I would like to follow the suggestions if possible." In general I feel that because you don't have a firm grasp on English, it is degrading your work in all other fields. I might suggest taking a wikibreak and coming back when you are willing to improve you English and quality of work. You seem to be a bit too overenthusiastic right now, so a bit of time away from the wiki might serve well. Sorry again if I sounded harsh. "Pepper" @ 14:00, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
OK. All right. Recently I try to follow your grammar - A bit problem might occur, as my mother tongue is Bengali, but I would be rectifying those. As for your comment on owning articles, I would never even try to do that - I joined Wikipedia because I thought that we may share our knowledge to edit the encyclopedia - that's all. And for the merging - you may be correct. Hats off to you, Pepper!Dipankan In the woods? 15:53, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
  • In that case, have you perhaps considered working on translation of articles from here to the Bengali edition? I'm sure there must be tons, and your reading comprehension in English seem quite good, even if your Bengali grammar is better, and translation is a much rarer skill than patrolling (not to say you can't do both). —KGF0 ( T | C ) 20:07, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Agree with the comments above. You're clearly enthusiastic (which is a great thing) but having a firmer understanding of English grammar would really help you out. Cheers, Magister Scientatalk 02:31, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments- I have translated Difficult to give cibara from Bengali language to English language.Dipankan In the woods? 12:42, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Oddbodz*

Oddbodz (talk · contribs · count) I've been here about half a year and I just wanted to get an opinion on what others think of me. Oddbodz (talk) 22:40, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    Mainly vandal fighting through Huggle.
  2. Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
    On my first day I was in an edit war. However, I have read the policy pages and havn't been in one since. I now use user talk pages to discuss matters.


Reviews

  1. You have been doing good work as a vandal fighter. However, seeing User:Oddbodz/CSD log, i think you need to just thoroughly read WP:CSD. My immediate advice to you would be to join WP:NPP as its a good place where you can brush up your kills on working with new article and editors. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 18:05, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

[edit] TRLIJC19

TRLIJC19 (talk · contribs · count) I'm TRLIJC19. I've had rough patches on WP including 3 blocks for edit warring but I'd really like to get back on track. TRLIJC19 (talk) 20:46, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    My primary contributions are to Grey's Anatomy articles. I am a member of WP:WPGA and really try to help out with them. I am very pleased with the article I just wrote, Rebecca Pope. I added photos but they were removed due to CR violations. I would like to know how to add photos to her page without them being removed. I also like to work with WP:GAN.
  2. Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
    Yes I've been in several. I used to deal with it by partaking in edit wars but recently I've talked about it to the user directly. In the future I would continue to talk to the other user and try and work it out.


Reviews

By Ebe123 (talk · contribs)
You're a good editor, even though your 3 blocks for edit warring. Your vandalism warning was in error, and that happens to everyone. You know well the difference of AGF and vandals, thats in handy. ~~Ebe123~~ (+) talk
Contribs 14:27, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
By Katarighe (talk · contribs)
You are a good editor, but you should stop edit warring becuase it's bad and may lead you a lifetime block. But you are still good! --Mohamed Aden Ighe (talk) 01:26, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
By Mailer diablo (talk · contribs)
  • 3 blocks for edit-warring is an indication that you will need to improve on how you work along with other editors - co-operation with other editors is important. The talk page should be the first stop if you get into a dispute, not the revert button. Keep up your good work on the GAs. - Mailer Diablo 22:31, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Freknsay*

Freknsay (talk · contribs · count) STATEMENT Freknsay (talk) 07:44, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    Any thing that I am knowledgable, and any thing that I am able to contribute
  2. Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
    Never involved in dispute. There are several dispute resolution methods including WP:3O. I believe that keeping a cool head and realizing that the virtual world is different from the real world are key points to help in dispute resolutions.


Reviews

[edit] Jonjonjohny*

Jonjonjohny (talk · contribs · count) I've created this nice little review board. I want to see how i'm doing around here. Any type of feedback would be very helpful to me. Jonjonjohny (talk) 18:02, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    My primary contributions focus on editing music-related pages, bands that recieve little attention and develop them to a good level. Articles that I have perticularly built from the ground up are La Dispute and The Eyes of a Traitor. I also restored the article for Bring Me the Horizon after a majority of the text was removed for being original research and poorly written.
  2. Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
    The main issues i've had on wikipedia is genre warriors. I usually deal with it by sourcing the genres in the Infobox or deleting the two genres that keep being disputed (If it's an uneccessary addition). So bottom line, genre warriors, not cool.


Reviews

[edit] Ebe123 (2)

Ebe123 (talk · contribs · count) Hello, I'm Ebe123. It has been around 5 months since my last ER, but I thought that it would be good to re-apply. I have really changed my focus here compared to last time. I'm an bureaucrat and importer on incubator:, and autopatrol on meta:. ~~Ebe123~~ (+) talk
Contribs 22:36, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    I used to do lots of NPP work. Now, I do MfD things, MtC drives, sometimes Vandalism works. I do errors, but I try to revert.
  2. Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
    I do get vandals vandalize my user and talk page, I just ignore it and revert. I do get some uncivil comments, but all is fine. If I were in a content dispute, I would discuss the change on the talk page and possible go on WP:DRN.


Reviews
He is a very good user and trusted Katarighe (talk) 21:46, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

  • I've noticed at least your last over 90 edits are to Wikipedia (prefix) and User namespaces. While this isn't necessarily a bad thing, I've noticed your production drip off to working on vandalism on the pages with a Wikipedia: or User: prefix. Try to spend more time contributing to articles, because what caught my eye was your article editing has dripped off. But other than that, you're a fantastic editor, and well-deserving of any praise you receive. It's just you should try to broaden your scope a little bit. Hope I have not offended you, and warm regards, Belugaboycup of tea? 12:53, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
    Thanks for the review. Honestly, I like more working on the meta side, and rarely going to the surface, but I will broden my scope. I'm currently working on some chemical pages now. ~~Ebe123~~ (+) talk
    Contribs     21:55, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Review by Kudpung

  • Hi. I would have thought that with only 40 of your 549 edits last month being to article space, you might like to consider improving articles, and most importantly cleaning up your own. Try to review and copy edit your own work - I've done a major overhaul of your Les Surveillantes, please see the history and compare the diffs to see exactly the changes I have made. There is absolutely no shame attached to writing an article in English if it is not your first language, so don't hesitate to tag it for clean up by the WP:GOCE. Remember also that all articles, such as this one too must be referenced, and to add the appropriate stub templates to the very short articles.
I echo Belugaboy's comments above. Splitting hairs such as you did with this edit on a project page is so unimportant that it's even disruptive because 1) the edit summary was not sufficiently descriptive, and 2) it makes editors have to look up the page history to find out what you did, and then take time to tell you here why the edit wasn't a good idea and a waste of yours and everyone's time. For example,we already have a lot of people combating vandalism and if you really want to work on the 'meta' side (which does not include correcting messages on project talk pages), perhaps you could do more new page patrolling - it's an area that is seriously under staffed, your assistance would be most welcome, and if you need any help understanding anything, don't hesitate to let me know. If ever you have designs on being an admin, I recommend you read this and this. Fais gaffe à toi!  :)
Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:42, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
  • Funny thing you brought up your criteria, since I do not fit it and never will (check my talk archive 1 and your point 11, 16, and 26). Also, I started a discussion about your criteria on your talk page. ~~Ebe123~~ → report ← Contribs 19:42, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
I don't recall any discussion with you about my criteria on my talk page, but I remember you having one of these badges on your user page: {{User wikipedia/Administrator someday}} which is why I offered the links above. Nevertheless, you are most welcome to discuss my criteria - discussion is an essential process before doing anything big on Wikipedia ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:30, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
I have now had time to review your talk page archive as you suggested - I have also taken the liberty of changing the bg colour so that the page can be read. You obviously didn't make a very good start on Wikipedia due to your impatience at wanting to get involved in meta and maintenance areas and wanting to be an admin. I'm sure that you have learned from these errors, but do understand that adminship is not a trophy (or any other user rights for that matter) and should never be set as a goal to be achieved. You may still need to ask people the right way when you need help and advice - much of the work I do here on Wikipedia is helping younger editors to overcome their difficulties and I'm always available, but admins such as Worm run special programmes for mentoring new or youger editors. My best advice for you is to concentrate on contributing good stuff to articles, do some page patrolling, learn to work as a member of a team, and stay out of important maintenance areas for a while - and that also means not starting central discussions on things that you don't yet fully understand :) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:34, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
I'll add to what I mentioned above nearly 2 months ago. Your recent comments at AfD demonstrate a misunderstanding of the way deletion debates are conducted. Perhaps you should read WP:DELETION, WP:AfD, and WP:AADD bearing in mind that many essays are based on common sense and help to illustrate existing policies and guidelines, and may be cited during deletion discussions and other noticeboards. I suggest again that you continue to add content or improve articles before getting too deeply involved in meta matters that you do not appear to fully understand. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:17, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
I don't know if you continue to follow AfD debates you vote on, but you may be interested to see how this one was closed. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:11, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
I do not care about results, or even AfD. I do not take pride in my article work. Do I get notification when someone else edits an article I create, no. So why get a big notice telling me "The article you have created will get deleted". The notices should be way friendiler and they are for newcomers who don't know the watchlist. The notice also implies ownership of the article to me. ~~Ebe123~~ → report on my contribs. 13:50, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Nolelover

Nolelover (talk · contribs · count) Well, its been a little over a year (and 7k edits) since I became really "active" on the 'pedia, and I'm realizing that I've definitely been slowing down lately - if not in actual contribs, then in the amount of time I put into this site. This isn't a curtain call by any means, but I would like to see what other editors think of my work here in the last few months. I really can't remember how and when exactly I got started on WP, but it was working with User:Vyeh on Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri that first got me hooked, and where I really realized the amount of work that goes into this site. Since then I've started a couple stubs, patrolled many a page and been the butt of many geek jokes from my RL friends, but I've loved (almost) every minute of it. All comments, whether glowing or absolutely damning are appreciated, but please note that I have no interest in RfA so there's no need to frame your reviews that way. This is not a precursor to my attempting to pass that great institution, but simply an honest request for any and all feedback. Nolelover Talk·Contribs 14:30, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Per my request to another user to review me, I am updating this page. It's now past a year and a half, and closer to nine thousand edits... Nolelover Talk·Contribs 16:22, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
I should also note that I have an alt account. --> NLinpublic (talk) 18:00, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    Other then the aforementioned SMAC, which went from this to GA, I've never done any major content work. Obviously I've worked on many articles, but I seriously doubt I've added more then a couple paragraphs of prose to any of them. Like I say on my userpage, I'm better at getting article from really bad to OK, rather then OK to GA/FA. However, I am happy with the work I've done on articles like Ehsan Sehgal, not because of any major content work I've done, but because of the work that goes into teaching a new editor the ropes. I'd also like to think I do a decent job at NPP; my CSD log, which only shows the latest month (where I became more inactive anyway) is here, but that's probably fairly representative of my overall work there. In the Project namespace, I am extremely happy with the work I have done at WP:WWF, where I am assistant coordinator, and currently the day-to-day manager with a couple of other editors inactive for various reasons. Other then that, I tend to gnome around, fixing whatever crops up in my path. I also do a bit of College Football related editing.
    (Added at 16:22, 29 December 2011 (UTC)) Note that since this was written, I have resigned at WWF, although I'm still active there.
  2. Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
    Well, as much as I would like to be like other editors on this page and say that I haven't been in any, but that I would work with the other editor to achieve consensus (linked, ofc) on the talk page, I've been around the block a few too many times for that. I can't say that I've really been a participant in any major editing disputes, but I have seen firsthand how hard it can be too work with someone when you believe their mindset is wrong. However, I looked for something to show how I do operate in those situations, and I found this one in my talk archives (second diff) and this one. There is probably also something in the SMAC archive between me and User:Dream Focus, and there are a few things in my second talk archive that I won't link individually. I have done some minor mediation/resolution/been the bad news bearer, and that landed me in rather hot water here. (Note that I am not the editor Pedro is referring to in his edit summary, and here are more diffs. All this revolved around User:Guoguo12's ill-fated RfA.) I think that's about it on that front.
    (Added at 16:22, 29 December 2011 (UTC)) A much better (and far more recent) example occurred at Ehsan Sehgal, Ehsan Mehmood Khan and Babar Malik. There's more discussion at the article's talk pages, my talk, Ehsan Sehgal's (the user referenced above) talk page, and the talks of a couple Ips. The gist of it was that these and other Ips and a couple registered editors began reverting and removing info on those pages, and started an edit war with Sehgal and I. To be entirely honest, I did not handle that well. I'm pretty sure I broke 3rr and I should have asked for another editor to look in sooner; I'm just a little to personally involved with Sehgal to make entirely unbiased statements.

Reviews

  • His edits are related to these points,

He is polite

He assumes good faith

He avoids personal attacks

He welcomes new editors

He does not bite

He is helpful and good teacher

He is very fair and neutral

He is the real" Editor"

He is worth and proud of Wikipedia

  • That's why I decide to remain in wikipedia to contribute.

Thanks to Nolelover

Ehsan Sehgal (talk) 20:32, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Ehsan. I really appreciate that. :) Nolelover Talk·Contribs 23:11, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
  • You deserve it.One of my quotes,
  • To display ones talents is not objectionable.How ever denial of other's

talents is tantamount to denying your own." Thanks you too.Ehsan Sehgal (talk) 04:21, 26 September 2011 (UTC)


[edit] Fltyingpig

Fltyingpig (talk · contribs · count) I have been editing for around six months and I would like to know about what other Wikipedians think of me. pluma Ø 04:48, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    My primary contributions have been reverting vandalism, correcting typos, regulating redlinks, and doing other wikignomish activities
  2. Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
    I got a page I written turned into a redirect page without consensus from an other editor with around 80,000 edits when I was still a signator, but I didn't know what to do about it, so I just got into a big edit-war, but since then I haven't got into any edit wars because I have been pretty timid and wikignomish because of that.


Reviews

  • Review by Trevj:
    • Note: Further reviews welcomed. Below is my first ever editor review, so the additional comments of others would be useful, please. Thanks.
    1. Userpage is informative and organised.
    2. Talk shows civility.
    3. Edit summaries are welcomed, but could in some instances be more meaningful, e.g. this could have stated reword: 'to a zoo and some other attractions' -> 'to some atractions like zoos', although this is a matter of personal preference. There's also no need to state "I [...]" because they're your edits we know it's you who's done them!
    4. Your fights against vandalism are noted.
I hope the above is useful. Happy editing! --Trevj (talk) 14:54, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
  • Review by Mirokado:
    • My first review too...
    1. You are clearly enthusiastic and motivated to make high quality contributions
    2. I also noticed the edit summaries but would suggest differently from Trevj: this just illustrates what he said about personal preference. It is excellent that you always provide summaries but they could be a bit less verbose. I don't think there is much point in repeating the content change verbatim, that is what we have diffs for. You could ask yourself "how can I say concisely what I have done and/or why so that a reviewer can decide whether to look at my change in more detail and will know what to expect from a diff?" In the example above, I think "rephrase for neutral POV" would have been fine
    3. In addition to any comments here there are also various sections on your talk page which provide ongoing feedback on your contributions. I hope you are "paying attention" to what has been said there
    4. You mention one early problem with an edit war. Please don't be discouraged by occasional setbacks like that, they help us to learn, so while being careful to avoid edit warring do not be too diffident either when considering a change you think is necessary.
I hope you continue to enjoy editing. --Mirokado (talk) 13:30, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Hallows AG*

Hallows AG (talk · contribs · count) Hi, I'm Hallows AG and I want to know how I am doing. Hallows AG (talk) 13:30, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    My primary contributions are mainly copyedits and edits to articles connected to South-East Asia
  • Additional comment I have also done a number of vandalism reversions since I submitted my review request.
  1. Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
    I have not yet been involved in any disputes, if I was in an editing dispute, I would calmly post a message on that user's talk page saying that my edits were constructive and that Wikipedians should work together


Reviews I have put in over 800 edits on Bert Bell. He reverted my edits without even checking anything. I am awaiting his unrevert of my edits. I put a merge request in on the article, which noone contributes content to but me, and then I made the merge. He unmerged it. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 10:54, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

He unreverted my edits. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 11:01, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Tom Morris*

Tom Morris (talk · contribs · count) I've been on Wikipedia for a while and would like to find potential ways to improve my editing, possibly find new strengths or areas to explore editing, and uncover potential weaknesses so I can undo those. (Oh, and maybe I'll run for admin someday.) —Tom Morris (talk) 20:52, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    My main content contributions have been Black Bear Ranch (5x expand DYK on a topic I came across completely by random while reading an unrelated book) and the history section of Dignity in Dying. I've created some images and put them on Commons and added them to the articles (Bournemouth University, Søren Kierkegaard bibliography, Sex shop, Abortion in the United Kingdom, Mayfield and Five Ashes).
    But the vast majority of my edits are gnomish: vandalism reversion (with Huggle and Twinkle), deletion sorting, categorisation, new page patrolling and participation in the deletion process.
  2. Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
    I haven't been in any editing disputes. When an article is going in the wrong direction in my humble opinion, I'll chime in with a comment, but I don't get into revert wars or have massive disputes over things. If I were to somehow find myself in an editing dispute, I'd try and approach things calmly, seek consensus in a civil way. If I'm unable to do that, I'll disengage and have faith in the community to sort things out without me making it worse. I think I'm reasonably able to detect the limits of my patience and disengage before reaching them. Thankfully, I haven't had to deal with those kinds of situations. I have been accused of being an administrator (which I'm not) in a shadowy cabal that involves getting paid off by the CIA and Microsoft, but that was more funny than enraging.


Reviews

[edit] Falcon8765 (2)*

Falcon8765 (talk · contribs · count) I've been a bit introspective regarding my editing habits lately, and as I rarely get feedback I thought this might provide some valuable insight into my contributions. I was just starting out in the previous review of 2+ years ago, and quite a lot has changed since then. If I have made any glaring errors recently, having them pointed out to me so I can work on rectifying them would be helpful. Falcon8765 (TALK) 08:35, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    I largely do anti-vandalism work. When the mood strikes me however, I'll venture over to Special:NewPages and do some patrolling/tagging/categorizing. I try not to spuriously tag articles for deletion, and would like to think that all of the ones thus tagged were tagged correctly. I have created a couple of stub articles (Norman Albert Mott) but they aren't anything to write home about. Article creation isn't particularly stimulating for me unfortunately.
  2. Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
    I was involved in one dispute recently that did annoy me, which is part of the reason I'm seeking this review (Talk:Planned_Parenthood#See_also_section_._Inclution_of_Eugenics_in_the_United_States). After trying to explain my position and relevant policies etc. a dispute broke out and I ended up getting a bit annoyed with another editor. Instead of escalating it though, I took a step back and let more patient editors take over.


Reviews

[edit] Rohith goura

Rohith goura (talk · contribs · count) I would like to know how i progressed throughout my editing wiki. RohG ??· 16:46, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    I have very good CSD work and i have started my contributions to wiki with this edit which are usually done by the beginner and have added to this article with this edit which is constructive and then i have taken a break for long time after my reentry to wiki had quite good edits 1
  2. Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
    Probably not!But i don't know.But i have warned several times by s/he for my misuse of the anti vandal tool because my brother who is blocked for a while in commons and i have over come this issue recently with the help of Quadell of course this is my fault letting him to go through my account.Never loose my cool if i get disputed with another editor if it gets too far then i prefer going to ANI who always have there reviews or else contacting a wiki admin personally to help/intervene to make balance for unnecessary dispute,lighten the mood, defuse conflicts, and make Wikipedia a better place to be.


Reviews

  • Roh G is an enthusiastic Wikipedian who wants to work well with others to improve Wikipedia. As a beginner, he still has much to learn about the way Wikipedia works, but he seems willing to do so. He had problems with someone else using his account, but he asked for help and the problem seems to have gone away. He did a few GA nomination reviews, which helps with the backlog -- he wasn't terribly good at it, since he's just starting out, but he seems to take suggestions very well. When he found himself over his head in a review, he asked for help appropriately. When I asked him to wait before doing more reviews, he was happy to hear the advice. When I brought the Manual of Style to his attention, he linked it from his userpage and used it in a review. He seems to have the right attitude, and is learning quickly. – Quadell (talk) 12:58, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
Quadell! thanks for your review.Positive review really makes me happy and to work out more on those which I haven't work on the other part of wiki.This brings me more energy to me.regardsRohG ??· 13:45, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Mike28968*

Mike28968 (talk · contribs · count) Hi! my name is Mike and the reason I want to be reveiwed is to see how I'm doing Mike28968 (talk) 15:41, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    My main contributions are to the tech field. I am particualy pleased in my contributions in MyTouch 4G Slide because, it is now (in my opinion) a more reliable article.
  2. Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
    I have never been in an editing dispute but, I will respond to one peacefully and without verbul abuse.


Reviews

[edit] Lukep913

Lukep913 (talk · contribs · count) I want to be reviewed because I want fellow editors to comment on my contributions. I also want constructive criticism on what I should do better. -- Luke (Talk) 21:38, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    Most of my contributions to Wikipedia is reverting vandalism and warning/reporting vandals. My other contributions consist of adding/removing citations and fixing grammatical mistakes where I see fit to do so. 1
  2. Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
    Fortunately, I have not been in any editing disputes or edit wars. If I was in one, I would calmly explain my stance on my edits and collaborate with other editors on what everyone thinks is right for the article.


Reviews

  • You caught a vandalism to my user page before I even had a chance to see it and you very politely handled yourself when it came to the vandal complaining on your talk page, so I think you're doing a great job!Tokyogirl79 (talk) 16:11, 24 December 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79

[edit] Surajt88

Surajt88 (talk · contribs · count) I have been in Wikipedia for more than a year. I would like to know how I have progressed and I would very much appreciate any feedback. Thanks in advance. Suraj T 06:01, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    My primary contributions to wikipedia include creating articles related to photovoltaics and sometimes related to tourist spots in and around Ooty. I also do a bit of vandalism fighting occasionally by patrolling recent changes. I am particularly pleased with my contributions to and organizing them into Template:Photovoltaics, because of the effort I put in. I'm also proud of the work I put in Pale Blue Dot to have it listed as a good article and my DYKs and ITNs listed here
  2. Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
    All I can remember is here, which reflected here and here, but I'd rather call it misunderstanding than a dispute. And I believe I was pretty cool throughout. I wouldn't be unnecessarily losing my cool if I get into a dispute with another editor provided it doesn't get personal. I understand that both sides of most disputes which are approached civilly support improving wikipedia content but with different views and it would be unnecessary to heat up.


Reviews

  • You are doing quite fine so far, which may explain the lack of feedback. If you intend to run for RfA, the community might expect more activity from you. - Mailer Diablo 22:19, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the review. I'm not interested in adminship as I dont need the tools. I'm currently enjoying editing as I am doing now. Suraj T 16:57, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Bulldog73*

Bulldog73 (talk · contribs · count) I am a good-natured editor and have changed Wikipedia's content for four months. Bulldog edit my talk page da contribs 00:34, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Questions

  1. What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
    Primarily, I fix references and adding information to stubs. I am particularly pleased of my work on Pillow Pets. Because of my edits, no one has considered nominating it for speedy deletion. I even had it peer reviewed.
  2. Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
    Not too long ago, I made the mistake of nominating USS Chesapeake (1799) for FAC when it still needed to be copyedited. Fifelfoo, however, attacked my nomination, calling it a "procedurally malformed request." I made a comment about this situation on its talk page before it was moved to my talk page. I will now be careful by waiting for an article to meet the FA criteria before nominating it for FAC.


Reviews

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Editor_review&oldid=471996358"
Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
Navigation
Interaction
Toolbox
Print/export
Languages