Wikipedia:Editor review/-Midorihana-

-Midorihana-
I want to have an editor review just to see how I'm doing, or what else I could be doing on Wikipedia. I appreciate all of your comments. Thanks! Midorihana(talk)(contribs) 20:38, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

 Reviews 


 * Guess who! Ok, so far you're a very solid contributor; I'm especially impressed by your thoroughness when dealing with rogue editors. I'm very glad to see that you've reported users to AIV and also speedied pages; involvement in these two areas helps a lot with learning process, as you have to apply reasoning when picking a reason to speedy an article or report a user. Involvement in RfA is also a good idea; it gives you an idea about what other users are looking for in an admin if you ever happen to run, and the information is handy just to help you with day-to-day dealings. Good job taking the initiative and involving yourself in the XFD process; try to spend a bit more time in that area, as, again, all of these fields have their own experience to be learned and applied later on. I'm also impressed with your ability to keep your cool during disputes. Remember, if an editor is ever being difficult, just be patient and try to reason it out with them. But overall, excellent work so far, and keep it all up! I'll recommend some vandal-fighting tools on your talk page to help you with vandalism. Master of Puppets Care to share?  21:54, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

 Comments 


 * View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool

 Questions


 * 1) Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * I mostly revert vandalism on Recent changes and tag articles for speedy deletion. I also do some article writing, but very little.
 * 1) Have you been in any conflicts 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?
 * An incident that caused me a bit of stress was talking to editors of the Eagle Club Group article. I gave the editors some hints for the future, and told them to look at Wikipedia's rules about notability.  Other than that, no conflicts.
 * An incident that caused me a bit of stress was talking to editors of the Eagle Club Group article. I gave the editors some hints for the future, and told them to look at Wikipedia's rules about notability.  Other than that, no conflicts.

Additional questions by Master of Puppets
 * 1) An anonymous (IP) editor adds the text "jesus walkd among the lepers nd tehy were happy. this can b a metafor for some1 who makes freinds wit soshal outcasts" to the Leprosy article. What action do you take?
 * If the editor just joined Wikipedia, I would revert and add the welcome vandal template to his/her talk page. If the editor is a repeat vandal, I would add the appropiate level warning.
 * 1) You revert a user's edit to an article; the user is claiming that the moon is actually a holographic projection, set up by communists who have a base on the Eiffel tower. After this, you notice the user showing up a lot on your watchlist; every article that you visit, he or she makes some changes to, often disrupting dates or names. What do you do?
 * I would ask, at first, to not add that information; then, I would warn with the user-warning templates. If he/she made a lot of disruptive edits I would report them to AIV.
 * 1) A user who has added some uncited text to a school page claims to be the school's IT director, and threatens to sue you for slander and libel for reverting his edits. What do you do?
 * I would remind the user about Wikipedia:No legal threats and Wikipedia:Assume good faith. I would then try to talk to the user as calmly as possible and help resolve those issues without any legal action.