Wikipedia:Editor review/Hahc21

Hahc21
Saluts. I'm a tireless contributor here on Wikipedia, who lives in Venezuela, loves music and books, enjoys being helpful. Why I want to be reviewed? No, i don't want to become an admin nor seeking adminship soon. I just wanna see where i'm failing and fix it, just for personal interests. Thanks. — Hahc21 [ TALK ] [ CONTRIBS  ] 23:44, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

 Questions


 * 1) What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
 * I primarily contribute on Latin America-related articles, mostly music, and on the Good Articles process. I'm very pleased with the work i've made on Ricardo Arjona's articles, the templates i've created, my work as a reviewer and constant contributor on disputes; and my ability to always make a neutral comment, regardles of the situation.
 * 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 have never been on editing disputes and i always avoid such situations. I prefer to solve the problems talking rather than fighting. I have to agree that some users have caused me stress in the past, but i dealt with those situations kindly, showing them the basis of my claims with facts and proofs instead of personal attacks and word fighting, which i consider to be unefficient and uneffective. As i said, i've never been on an editing dispute, but have seen many, and i have reached a solution to them proposing the users involved a commentary session on talk pages to reach a consensus, which is what i believe.
 * I have never been on editing disputes and i always avoid such situations. I prefer to solve the problems talking rather than fighting. I have to agree that some users have caused me stress in the past, but i dealt with those situations kindly, showing them the basis of my claims with facts and proofs instead of personal attacks and word fighting, which i consider to be unefficient and uneffective. As i said, i've never been on an editing dispute, but have seen many, and i have reached a solution to them proposing the users involved a commentary session on talk pages to reach a consensus, which is what i believe.

 Reviews 


 * User has a good grasp of vandalism and has recently been given rollback rights and has graduated from WP:CVUA. Seems to be friendly, as I kind of know their CVUA instructor. Just one thing, why is your edit count low? From a user who has been here over 4 years, I would expect more. Also, have you only recently been involved with vandal fighting, or has it been long term? Cheers!--Chip123456 (talk) 15:25, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I have been here for 4 years, that's right. I decided not to get involved in editing articles until i fully understood the policies, since i had many troubles on the Spanish Wikipedia for that reason. I have only been involved in vandal fighting (on a priority basis) since some weeks ago; after that, i only reverted vandalism as a good faith work, without being active on that matter. My main interest here has been the development of article content, usually on the GA and (recently) FA status. Thanks. — Hahc21 [ TALK ] [ CONTRIBS  ] 00:35, 12 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Great editor, is involved with article creation, anti-vandalism, AFD's, and good article reviews. Knows what he is doing. Electriccatfish2 (talk) 21:29, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Has been a positive contributor to WP:GAN processes of late. --LauraHale (talk) 11:40, 18 June 2012 (UTC)