Wikipedia:Editor review/JohnChrysostom

JohnChrysostom
General review of my editing practices to know of any glaring weaknesses, as I am about to undertake substantial revisions of a few pages, and would like to know what to watch out for, to know what suboptimal behaviors I am prone to, so I don't waste more time than I have to, make more mistakes than are avoidable, and have as little talk-pages wheeling and dealing as necessary!. St John Chrysostom view / my bias 13:26, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

 Questions


 * 1) What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
 * Anything dealing with religion (lots on the Bible specifically), some philosophy, some random edits to pages that I come across and need it. Lots of copyediting. Few substantial content-adding rewrites. I've been here for years as various IPs, but I believe my current (edit: and only named) account gives a reasonable cross-section of my editing. My best series of edits? Probably on Books of the Bible before I was aware of all of the intricacies of using the talk page. (Edit: I'd have to add my major cleanup of English Standard Version in there too, as well as the arguments and conciliation at Genesis creation narrative, as well as my ongoing on-wiki rewrite of Second Council of Ephesus)
 * 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 been in few disputes, which are generally resolved by my resolution to follow Plato's advice, "to follow the argument wherever it leads". I don't believe any have progressed (at least in my interaction with other editors, but some of the conversations in the same tree have become heated) to an unreasonable point, and none have required any form of arbitration, RFC, etc.: consensus is always gained on Talk itself. Edit: I was involved in one ANI case which was promptly resolved over the presence of polemic on my userpage; at the time I was unaware that there were any guidelines for userspace writing beyond "no copyright infringement"; the case-admin made me aware of the guidelines and policies. Edit: at Talk:Genesis creation narrative, things got really ugly and heated (users were banned for socking while trying to shift debates - very heated, several cases were elevated to AN, including the close of one debate), but consensus was, at length, reached with no sanctions imposed on me - I even got the "Teamwork Barnstar"! ;-)
 * I have been in few disputes, which are generally resolved by my resolution to follow Plato's advice, "to follow the argument wherever it leads". I don't believe any have progressed (at least in my interaction with other editors, but some of the conversations in the same tree have become heated) to an unreasonable point, and none have required any form of arbitration, RFC, etc.: consensus is always gained on Talk itself. Edit: I was involved in one ANI case which was promptly resolved over the presence of polemic on my userpage; at the time I was unaware that there were any guidelines for userspace writing beyond "no copyright infringement"; the case-admin made me aware of the guidelines and policies. Edit: at Talk:Genesis creation narrative, things got really ugly and heated (users were banned for socking while trying to shift debates - very heated, several cases were elevated to AN, including the close of one debate), but consensus was, at length, reached with no sanctions imposed on me - I even got the "Teamwork Barnstar"! ;-)

 Reviews 


 * It is very difficult to review you when you do not make frequent use of edit summaries. Check the box next to "Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" here and come back for an editor review after making approx 100-200 edits. Morgan Kevin J (talk) 21:34, 8 July 2012 (UTC)