User:RobertMfromLI/EditorReviews

Here are the results of my Editor Reviews (well, currently one):

RobertMfromLI
I've been editing Wikipedia for almost a year now. Most of my work has been in Special:RecentChanges, filing CSDs, PRODs, AIVs and block requests (I dont think any have been denied to date, though one CSD probably should have been filed with a different tag). I do occasional copy-editing or minor grammar/punctuation fixes, but have not contributed to article creation (I am pretty good at copy-editing, but am very slow on authoring content from the ground up). R OBERT M FROM LI TALK/CNTRB 06:21, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

 Questions


 * 1) What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
 * My primary contributions are in Special:RecentChanges and mentoring 3 adoptees. I am relatively pleased with my efforts in vandal patrol, "rehabilitating" one of my adoptees, copyediting his first GA article and helping mediate/stop a couple edit wars (one on AN/I (KaySL I believe), one that just hit 3RR but did not reach AN/I (referenced on my talk page here: ).
 * 1) Have you been in any disputes 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?
 * I don't believe I have been in anything that can be considered an editing dispute. I tend to stay very calm during disputes of other nature though I suspect at times my (1) excessive verbosity (and attempt to be thorough) may portray things with an unintended coldness, and (2) that at times (same AN/I) I assume good faith well past the point of reasonableness. I've also learned (same AN/I) not to feed the trolls (though in my defense of this, that they are simply trolling was not fully evident until they had established a clean edit history during the AN/I process).
 * I don't believe I have been in anything that can be considered an editing dispute. I tend to stay very calm during disputes of other nature though I suspect at times my (1) excessive verbosity (and attempt to be thorough) may portray things with an unintended coldness, and (2) that at times (same AN/I) I assume good faith well past the point of reasonableness. I've also learned (same AN/I) not to feed the trolls (though in my defense of this, that they are simply trolling was not fully evident until they had established a clean edit history during the AN/I process).

 Reviews 
 * Review by VictorianMutant:
 * Civility towards the community: Your help mentoring other users is greatly appreciated and takes a lot more patience than most people have. Thanks for being "one of the good guys." I also took a look at your interactions with User:Bad edits r dumb. You definitely showed patience there...
 * Article contributions: A couple of the articles you edit are areas I'm interested in, particularly Iron Maiden and OS/2. I think both articles have potential: Iron Maiden used to be a featured article back when standards weren't as strict and OS/2 is an operating system with an interesting history (I'm asked occasionally what I think was the "best version of Windows" and often answer 'OS/2' which gets puzzled looks). I think you could vastly improve both articles and bring them up to higher level if you worked on them some.
 * Edit count analysis: A quick look at your graph tells me you do a lot of vandal fighting. Looking at your contributions, it seems you use Twinkle a lot (which I also use). Lately, I've been using STiki along with Twinkle. STiki is good at finding persistent vandalism that a lot of the Huggle users leave behind (especially the not-so-blatant vandalism that is buried in two paragraphs of "innocent" text). You might be surprised what lasts two weeks without being touched. I actually use a "holistic" method of patrolling- I don't just look for vandalism... I look for spelling mistakes, formatting errors, etc. It takes longer, but I think it is better than being in the recent patrol "race."
 * RfA-worthiness: I see you might be interested in the mop. I would definitely support you given time and more article edits. I think you should definitely try to get at least 10,000 edits under your belt and increase your % of edits to articles above 50% before actively seeking it out, though.
 * Final thoughts: You are a great editor who definitely helps out where needed and have a strong "net positive." Thanks for all you do, Victorian Mutant  (talk) 03:03, 25 October 2010 (UTC)