Wikipedia:Editor review/Kim dent brown

Kim Dent-Brown
I have been a registered user since August 2006 but only started editing properly in April this year. I have tried my hand at editing articles and contributing to new page patrol and to Afd and RfA discussions. However I am aware that there are probably many more things to know and tasks to perform, but I'm not sure how to prioritise where to go next.I would appreciate some friendly criticism of how I've done so far, with some pointers towards activities/tools/tasks that would be helpful for the future. I should say that I have no 'techie' skills and am looking rather to contribute to the human and scholarly activity of Wikipedia. Kim Dent-Brown  (Talk to me)  15:14, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

 Reviews 

I am really impressed by your new page patrolling and vandal fighting. You have really contributed well to removing pages that have no place in Wikipedia. You also seem to be very nice to the users you warn. Your work on AfD also seems to be very good. You are a great example that one doesn't need to do a lot of big edits to contribute effectively to Wikipedia. Be careful to avoid lenghtening the page history without reason, as you did to Royal Wiltshire Yeomanry on April 11, 2007-It is preferable to avoid making a lot of small edits when they can be done all at once. I have not checked all of your edits but I would say continue this way! Canjth 19:06, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks Canjth, that's very kind. I have now discovered that there is such a thing as the 'Preview' button (!!), so no more tons of micro-edits (eg this diff, which represents a few dozen previews and one main edit.) Kim Dent-Brown   (Talk to me)  22:18, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

 Comments 


 * View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.


 * View this user's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool

 Questions


 * 1) Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * The first article which I started and brought up to a state I was happy with is Royal Wiltshire Yeomanry. This received an A-class rating from the military history WikiProject.
 * I've also done a major edit job at Wicca which was a bloated 66k long before I started exporting material out to subpages . It's now down to a little over half the size it was and I think is the better for it. This is one article I would like to help get to FA status.
 * A contribution with a more chequered history was to Chestnut Ridge Church. I found it looking like this and (in retrospect rather hastily) slapped a speedy deletion tag on it. This led to a sometimes acrimonious exchange with the original editor, some of which is here . However the end result is an article which (while WAY outside my area of knowledge and interest) is much better referenced than the average such article. Maybe my nagging edits were irrelevant and the original editor would have improved it anyway in his/her own time. I choose to hope I helped improve it!
 * Another example of a similar process was in taking the article on Gila Sher from this to its current state.
 * You can see other articles I've started or made a major contribution to here.
 * 1) Have you been in any conflicts 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 cited the articles on Chestnut Ridge Church and Gila Sher because although I think they led to improved articles, they involved a degree of tension between me and their main editors. I tried to deal with the acrimony by remaining cool and responding with constructive suggestions, but I do wonder if the speed of my original tag was inappropriate. I've now taken to adding a fuller and kinder welcome if I make a CSD or PROD, and I'm tending to use more AfD or PRODs than I used to.
 * With some other editors I've been less prone to offer help, because they seem to me to be unwilling to work towards improving an article, such as here. The only time I've been subjected to serious user page vandalism was here - and several subsequent edits which seemed to have been prompted by my swift tagging of an attack page (see User talk:Hungryhorse90. In this case I'm not sure if there's anything I could have done to prevent this other than let the attack page go in the first place.