Wikipedia:Editor review/Hammersoft

Hammersoft
I'd like to request input on my editing from third parties who have not previously had significant contact with me. Not looking for yes/no people, just want an unbiased outside opinion. While I am quite happy to work with others on the project, I at the same time place little weight in the negative opinions of other editors with respect to me. I do not modify my behavior to make them happy; nobody can make everyone happy all the time. Rather, I work to uphold Wikipedia policy and guideline. I recognize that this attitude causes severe agitation among some editors, as I don't play a game of social betterment here. I have no goal of becoming anything other than an editor, and so do not take stock in the worries that other people find fault with me until such time as it should rise to the level of admin intervention. Nevertheless, I'm curious at this juncture in my editing here as to whether unbiased 3rd parties feel I'm a net negative here. Thank you for your time and attention. Hammersoft (talk) 13:36, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

 Questions


 * 1) What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
 * My primary contributions to Wikipedia are in the area of WP:NFCC compliance and related issues regarding policy and guideline discussions. I routinely monitor non-main article namespace pages for WP:NFCC #9 violations, monitor living people articles for replaceable fair use images being used to depict them, monitor images and tag as appropriate for missing rationale/orphaned/no source/etc. I also work to reduce fair use overuse issues in "list of" type articles and other articles where fair use rises to a significant number.
 * 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've been involved in multiple discussions that at times have become heated. One of the ways in which I responded to this; I have a personal policy of exiting a conversation when someone is personally insulting me. In more extreme cases, I take a policy of avoidance attempting to prevent further interaction between myself and the other editor. I'm well aware that the nature of the arena in which I choose to work, that of NFCC compliance, frequently leads to people being angry at what I do. My userpage has a long list of what I call 'awards' in this regard. I don't actively seek people to insult me, but rather use the page as a means to help keep a lid on further insults. When editors thinking it a good idea to insult me see my userpage, it has a deterrent effect.
 * I've been involved in multiple discussions that at times have become heated. One of the ways in which I responded to this; I have a personal policy of exiting a conversation when someone is personally insulting me. In more extreme cases, I take a policy of avoidance attempting to prevent further interaction between myself and the other editor. I'm well aware that the nature of the arena in which I choose to work, that of NFCC compliance, frequently leads to people being angry at what I do. My userpage has a long list of what I call 'awards' in this regard. I don't actively seek people to insult me, but rather use the page as a means to help keep a lid on further insults. When editors thinking it a good idea to insult me see my userpage, it has a deterrent effect.

 Reviews 

Your contributions look fairly good and rooted in the policy. Your specialty work in the WP:NFCC is useful and helpful. I've also noted in your disputes that you mostly keep a level-head, but you need to be aware of what you're saying and you need to take a little more care not to lash out. I've seen one or two releases of anger (which is understandable, of course.) Also, when people attack you over things like removing non-free images in their userspace, try to stay 100% calm. Many people don't know that we restrict images that aren't free. I haven't seen a great deal of biting, but there was a lack of explanation on several. Just be a little clearer. Other than that, I'd say you're doing a great job helping out. (Also, I've never reviewed anyone before, so if you don't like what I said, you can justify it with that :P) Keep doing what you do, good sir!Neo(T) 18:53, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

You're a bit too focussed on NFCC, to the exclusion of everything else. You're doing some good work, and I don't want to stop that, but your ideas on NFCC are a bit extreme in comparison with the rest of the community. My advice: keep calm, and apply to help with permissions on WP:OTRS! Chase me ladies, I&#39;m the Cavalry (talk) 21:44, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

I think your focus on NFCC is critical to the project, and I think your efforts in the area are admirable. It takes an editor of strong constitution to hew to the policy and stand up to others that are not as familiar with the details. I would certainly echo most of what the other reviewers have said, and I think you certainly do an excellent job keeping a level head in the face of unwarranted attacks. But of course, deleting images, even when clearly warranted, is a touchy subject. Just be sure to explain yourself and stay calm. And keep up the good work, you a valuable member of the community! Verkhovensky (talk) 03:21, 5 April 2010 (UTC)