Wikipedia:Editor review/Dodger67

Dodger67
Been here a few years, I would just like to know if I'm doing ok. I'm not seeking adminship or any other "hats", I'd like to have weaknesses pointed out to me (I think I might be a little too quick on the "rollback" trigger at times). Roger (talk) 11:59, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

 Questions


 * 1) What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
 * I'm one of the founders of WP:WikiProject Disability and an active member of various other projects, particularly WP:WikiProject South Africa. As indicated on my User page I am also interested in aviation and military technology, but judging from the state of my watchlist I am very much a generalist with a lot of small edits to a very wide variety of articles. I occasionally answer questions at the help and refdesk pages too.
 * 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've had my share of disputes, but nothing to get too excited about. The most significant one was probably in Black mamba where I was one of the main opponents of an editor who eventually turned out to be one of many sockpuppets, so in that case I believe I was "on the side of the angels".
 * I've had my share of disputes, but nothing to get too excited about. The most significant one was probably in Black mamba where I was one of the main opponents of an editor who eventually turned out to be one of many sockpuppets, so in that case I believe I was "on the side of the angels".

 Reviews 
 * It has been a pleasure to work with Dodger67 on various disability-related articles, project and portal. Given that we all learn a bit more each day we work on Wikipedia anyway, I don't see anything in desperate need of correction and improvement. Without at all saying how in detail he should format them, Doger67 should provide more than just the URL when adding a reference to an article. --Mirokado (talk) 16:25, 26 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Roger corrects my (many) mistakes without complaining, bragging, or censure, and jumps on vandals faster that you can say "Mangosuthu Buthelezi". Wikipedia is a better place because he is (constantly) here. pietopper (talk) 17:13, 26 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Roger's greatest attribute in my opinion is the deft, gentle touch he has when dealing with others. As a newish editor, Roger will correct any mistakes I make without making a fuss about it. That bolsters an editors self confidence and is much more pleasant that being told off. He has the potential to be a good mentor
 * Another good trait is his seemingly boundless energy - he is always willing to help on my pet projects. His updates always make the pages I use look and read better.
 * Lastly, his knowledge of Wikipedia's rules and guidelines is impressive. He knows exactlywhich WP:Whatever to reference and WT:Manual of everything to point an editor too. And he does it without sounding like a know it all
 * As he wants a more detailed review, I would add the "criticism" that sometimes he uses words in jest that may get misinterpreted by others - an example is the RHWAG discussion and the way he referred to us, his fans as Talk Page Stalkers :) (And when I didn't know what a TPS was, he pointed me to the right place)
 * Thanks for the help Roger. I owe you a drink when you're in Cape Town again Gbawden (talk) 13:52, 9 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Roger has been the heart and soul of the disability project since it's inception - and in my interactions with him he has stuck up for me, supported my projects (with a great deal of help looking after the Hawking talk page when I was doing other things), and been one of the major forces behind the coverage of disability on wikipedia. He is of course aware I hold him in high regard.  It is, however, worth taking both sides of this seriously, and occasionally there are, for example edit summaries that could be more polite, or diplomatic. The other thing that springs to mind is a tendency towards investment in a thread - some of these things may hurt at RfA if that direction opens up.  But it's absolutely important that we recognise an ability to change ones mind on wikipedia, which is sadly lacking in many editors and may be Roger's greatest strength. Fayedizard (talk) 17:56, 11 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I want to thank Roger (Dodger 67) for the excellent work on a page I created and that was waiting for approval. He really brought the page to a higher standard and I will learn from his improvements. I thought I knew enough about Wiki but I obviously didn't. Thank you so much, dear Roger! Love and chocolate from Switzerland.


 * Although this editor is clearly doing a lot of good on Wikipedia, and we all benefit from his contributions, I felt that this edit summary was perhaps a tad lacking in Wikiquette. Obviously, whoever added Rhodesia to the article should have paid a bit more attention, but we don't need to call them idiots :) don't get me wrong, though; Dodger is a boon to the project and I'm glad he has given so much to Wikipedia. —  Richard  BB  09:02, 26 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much for your help with the AfC backlog. However, you may be a bit too quick to tag articles for speedy deletion as spam. My hackles raise as quickly as anyone's when I smell advertising on WP, but two articles you tagged that I saw (IMO) were just godawful, not spam. Perhaps more-specific guidance on the need for reliable secondary sources would help the contributors. Maybe not :-). Anyway, please keep up the good work and all the best,  Mini  apolis  13:49, 26 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the work on bromofluorocarbons.


 * Hi Roger. I am a newb in providing a review – so please forgive me if I break some rules here, but since you asked for criticism, not just positives I thought I would take shot.


 * I meet a lot of editors at wiki and sometime their name seems familiar with a faint positive or negative taste, but that’s all I can remember. I remembered meeting you before in context of wikiproj disability/accessibility, but not much else. So, after checking your contributions to Assisted living I felt your were a bit harsh on people who tried to contribute to this article which could use all the help it can get. HTH XOttawahitech (talk) 20:56, 26 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Mr Dodger 67,thank you for your edit on the article Engku Isa Al Husam, but please do not delete the word Yang Mulia again as it is the formal name for the styles and titles for the Malay Ruling Monarchy for the title of His Highness. You may ready further for the page of Malay Style and Titles. Nice to know you sir.