Wikipedia:Editor review/A412

A412
Requesting general review.

 Questions


 * 1) What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
 * I do formatting of articles that look like they're in trouble. Especially ones at AFD, those tagged with wikify, etc. I guess you could call it copyediting, I think it's formatting. None in particular stand out, but you can look through my contribs :)
 * 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 don't remember any disputes, but if I was in one I would attempt to explain the relevant policies and guidelines.
 * I don't remember any disputes, but if I was in one I would attempt to explain the relevant policies and guidelines.

 Reviews 


 * Your CSD, PROD tagging looks good but take LadyofShalott's advice on the A1 and A3 tagging. An hour or so wait before a tag isn't going to hurt the encyclopedia.  Your AFD !votes themselves look fine but a few of the rationales you've offered for your !vote were weak.  Try to use more policy based discussion there.  You haven't created many articles.  Not everyone is a content writer, but this is an encyclopedia.  Try to write a few stubs at least.  Maybe even a DYK.  Otherwise, you appear to be a good clueful editor.  Keep it up.--v/r - TP 22:31, 7 June 2012 (UTC)