Wikipedia:Editor review/GainLine(2)

GainLine
I'm 3300 edits into my career here and just looking for a performance appraisal. I've had a previous review: Editor review/GainLine and now that I'm a little more experienced want to get a handle on how I'm doing  G  ain  Line    ♠  ♥ 12:40, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

 Questions


 * 1) What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
 * I contribute mainly to Ireland and Rugby Union related topics. Late last year I started into new articles and also discovered WP:DYK. To date, I've created 15 new articles and had 14 DYKS. The expansion of Sakae Menda and its subsequent appearance on DYK is one I'm particularly pleased with as it was an interesting article and did well on DYK views (5600).  I occasionaly patrol new pages and recent changes. I try to welcome newcomers and offer assistance where I can, this being a good example of that.
 * 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?
 * Last year I became involved in a fairly major dispute which eventually went to arbitration:- Arbitration/Requests/Case/Lapsed Pacifist 2. This was a fairly stressful situation where some of my prior poor behaviour was dredged up.  It also took me away from editing topics that I enjoyed.  At the end while I was admonished for my early problems, I was commended for moving on and improving. The other user was topic banned and placed on editing restrictions and all editors were reminded to seek intervention with sucj problems.  This taught me a lot about the dispute resolution process and seeking administrator intervention through mechanisms that are available on Wikipedia. In future should I encounter similar such situation, I belive I am a lot better equipped to deal with them. I was also granted rollback rights recently and have become very hesitant to to undo anyone elses edits that aren't vandalism. Instead I believe problematic edits should be addressed through further editing.
 * Last year I became involved in a fairly major dispute which eventually went to arbitration:- Arbitration/Requests/Case/Lapsed Pacifist 2. This was a fairly stressful situation where some of my prior poor behaviour was dredged up.  It also took me away from editing topics that I enjoyed.  At the end while I was admonished for my early problems, I was commended for moving on and improving. The other user was topic banned and placed on editing restrictions and all editors were reminded to seek intervention with sucj problems.  This taught me a lot about the dispute resolution process and seeking administrator intervention through mechanisms that are available on Wikipedia. In future should I encounter similar such situation, I belive I am a lot better equipped to deal with them. I was also granted rollback rights recently and have become very hesitant to to undo anyone elses edits that aren't vandalism. Instead I believe problematic edits should be addressed through further editing.

 Reviews 

Review by PrincessofLlyr

Here are my comments upon reading your talk page and looking over your contributions. Those are all the things on which I have comments. Feel free to leave questions or comments here or on my talk page. PrincessofLlyr royal court 03:01, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Your article work is very good. Keep it up!
 * You seem to have had some trouble with csd before, so making yourself thoroughly familiar with the criteria would probably be good. I have myself has trouble with csd tagging, so I can understand.
 * Your handling of disputes seem fairly good. I think you have moved on past the arbitration case.
 * Congrats on moving past your early vandalism history!