Wikipedia:Editor review/Beeblebrox

Beeblebrox
Well, I'm pushing 9,000 edits 11,000 edits, and I'm curious what other users might find to like and dislike about my contributions.I think I'm decently civil in my interactions with others, but some have recently suggested this is not the case, so I'd like some feedback on that as well. Beeblebrox (talk) 16:53, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

 Reviews 

I am a new Wikipedia user grateful to Beeblebrox. I created an article that within two minutes (literally) was trashed by a hit and run editor who tagged it with all kinds of issues and left it for dead. I had no idea how to fix all of the problems that were identified. Then Beeblebrox came along, mildly chastised the hit and run editor, and proceeded to patch up the article, showing me by example how to make the needed changes. Were it not for this kind act by Beeblebrox, I probably would have been discouraged from further contributing to Wikipedia. Thanks Beeblebrox! He helped me with editing this wiki. Even though I am inactive, he has helped me a lot. FastReverter (talk) 15:24, 20 December 2008 (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?
 * One of my favorite things is when I come across a newly created article made by a new user or someone for whom English is obviously their second language. Often, such articles are difficult to comprehend, but do contain relevant information on notable topics. I enjoy improving these articles till they can be understood by your average English speaker, then sending them on their way. Tackie Tawiah III is an example of this. It is by no means ready to be an FA or anything, but when I first came across it I couldn't comprehend it at all. Now you can identify who it about, where he is from, etc. Lately I've also been improving Alaska related articles such as 2007 Caribou Hills fire, which again, is not ready for the front page but is at least a start class article now. Mostly I make little improvements to new or neglected articles and spruce up their talk pages, but I also nominate a lot of speedy deletions and I report promotional usernames to WP:UAA.
 * 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?
 * I have been in my fair share of conflicts, but I don't usually get too stressed out by them. One thing I do more and more when trouble is brewing is to try and find a way to involve more editors, by commenting on a talk page or initiating an RFC so that a consensus can be found. I hate it when I see two or three editors going around and around about something but not trying to get any outside input even well after they are at an impasse. Sometimes I also just decide it's not worth it and take the page off my watchlist and get on with my life. 
 * I have been in my fair share of conflicts, but I don't usually get too stressed out by them. One thing I do more and more when trouble is brewing is to try and find a way to involve more editors, by commenting on a talk page or initiating an RFC so that a consensus can be found. I hate it when I see two or three editors going around and around about something but not trying to get any outside input even well after they are at an impasse. Sometimes I also just decide it's not worth it and take the page off my watchlist and get on with my life. 

A couple of questions - is this editor review a prelude to requesting adminship, and can you point to the specific areas where you have experienced conflict before? (Including the link to the page, please). If you are intending to transition to RfA if the editor review is positive, you might consider getting some more experience in discussions - both in article space, and in the Wikipedia talk space. Inexperience with article discussion and policy discussion is often a basis for opposition in an RfA. Avruch  T 17:53, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 * One of the more recent conflicts I've been involved in was at Sentient beings (Buddhism). The discussion is somewhat spread out, on the articles talk page, my talk page, and AfD, but there are links to everything on the article talk page. There is a conversation on my talk page where another user suggested I should be nicer, I don't really think I was "mean". I've been involved in some contentious AfD regarding small air carriers in Alaska and opened this discussion to try and get some additional input, but it hasn't gone very far as yet, and anyone seeing this is welcome to comment there as well. I don't know if this will really be a prelude to RFA or not, but I have participated in lots of AfD discussions, a few CfDs and RfDs, and a couple of policy discussions, such as this one. My answers to the recent RFA survey are here. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:40, 13 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Update: I'm not going to pursue an RFA at this time, but I would still very much like to be reviewed. Beeblebrox (talk) 02:08, 30 November 2008 (UTC)