Wikipedia:Editor review/Anypodetos

Anypodetos
I have been editing here for just over two years, and have switched a bit from content additions to more administrative tasks, e. g. cleaning up some subpages of WP:PHARM, over the past few months. I'd like to get some general feedback on what I could improve. Also, I have recently changed my babel box from en-3 (advanced) to en-4 (near-native) and would like to know whether I was being over-confident there. ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 22:14, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

 Questions


 * 1) What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
 * Article creations and expansions, mainly at WP:PHARM and with Proto-Indo-European related topics; copyediting and cleaning up of random articles; creation of chemical drawings. Two GAs (although neither written completely myself) and a few DYKs. And my hobby article, Bogdan Bogdanović.
 * 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?
 * Articles for deletion/-logy, User talk:Davidtfull/Archive 1, Talk:Medroxyprogesterone are my less pleasant contacts with other Wikipedians, the latter bordering on an edit war on my part. I try to learn. In general, I tend to back away and let people do what they like if I don't know how to handle a situation, which is a safe but suboptimal approach.
 * Articles for deletion/-logy, User talk:Davidtfull/Archive 1, Talk:Medroxyprogesterone are my less pleasant contacts with other Wikipedians, the latter bordering on an edit war on my part. I try to learn. In general, I tend to back away and let people do what they like if I don't know how to handle a situation, which is a safe but suboptimal approach.

 Reviews 


 * Review by VictorianMutant:
 * Civility towards the community: I don't see any big problems with civility. You've made 13,000+ edits, you're bound to have some conflict, especially when the edits are in two often contentious subjects like linguistics and pharmacology.
 * Article contributions: Linguistics is actually one of my favorite subjects to browse and so I have seen your work around(although I am sure your knowledge of the subject far surpasses mine). Pharmacology? Too many big words for me! Anyway, a quick glance of some of your most edited articles shows you have been a real asset to Wikipedia. Thank you.
 * Edit count analysis: Almost a perfect graph. If I were being really, really picky- I would say you need more experience with images...
 * RfA-worthiness: Absolutely!
 * Final thoughts: You are an asset to the community. If I could say anything in the way of advice I would say that while you are branching out into administrative tasks, remember to not forget your focus on article building- you edit in two areas in which a lot of people don't have the expertise that you do. As for your English, if you had not mentioned it above, I would have thought you were a native speaker judging from your edits. Sometimes I can tell when someone isn't a native speaker because it doesn't "seem" right, but you definitely contribute at a near-native level. Thank you for your contributions! VictorianMutant (talk) 07:27, 22 September 2010 (UTC)