Wikipedia:Editor review/Ctjf83

Ctjf83
I want to see what the community thinks of me as an editor. I welcome feedback from any editor, especially if you don't regularly work with me, and any feedback before I even consider WP:RfA C T J F 8 3  chat 19:00, 5 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 to The Simpsons, Family Guy, and Iowa related articles, specificly Davenport, Iowa, I'm also somewhat involved with WP:AFD and New page patrol. I'm particularly pleased with my contributions to Davenport, as it is on the verge (I hope) of FA status, I've spent countless hours working on and improving, and hope my work will pay off when it is on the main page.
 * 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 have dealt with disputes, I think relatively well. Sometimes I may let emotions get the better of me, but I am trying to remain civil during all disputes
 * I have dealt with disputes, I think relatively well. Sometimes I may let emotions get the better of me, but I am trying to remain civil during all disputes

 Reviews 


 * Review by VictorianMutant:
 * Civility towards the community: I didn't feel like looking through all 34,000+ edits, but looks like you had one block for edit warring earlier this year. Other than that, no problems.
 * Article contributions: Look at this article here. Look familiar? Well, it was the last revision to Davenport, Iowa before you started editing it. It was unsourced(1 cite), boring, and basically crap and then you turned it into a great article, on the cusp of FA status. I've actually used your Davenport article as one of the "templates" for my work on city articles. Sure others worked on it, but this is your baby. I didn't need to look further, but I did. Your work to the Quad City article and various Simpsons and Family Guys article shows the same pride.
 * Edit count analysis: The majority of your time in article space, which is great. You have almost 2000 wikipedia edits which shows you're interested in the process, but not overly interested. Much experience with templates and files... overall looks good.
 * RfA-worthiness: Without a doubt, I would support you, but you know there will be opposes because of the block.
 * Final thoughts: You are a great editor who understands how to craft excellent articles and knows you are here to build an encyclopedia. You take your work seriously and are an asset to the community. I look forward to seeing you somewhere out there in wiki-land. VictorianMutant (talk) 07:59, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you so very much for the review! Your positive comments make me feel like I'm appreciated here, thanks again!! C T J F 8 3  chat 15:45, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Ctjf83, I'd much rather say this now than in an RfA - I think you might want to have a careful look at some of your creations. Some wording (eg Kahl Building) is too close to the non-PD sources used. --Mkativerata (talk) 03:48, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Ya, that is the only thing holding me back right now. Any new pages I create, I ask User:Moonriddengirl to look it over, just to make sure it is ok. Thanks for your feedback.  C T J F 8 3  chat 16:26, 22 September 2010 (UTC)