Wikipedia:Editor review/KrytenKoro

KrytenKoro
Hello. I've been here since last October, but I feel I might still not be doing things exactly right, so I would like to hear feedback on what others think I am doing right or wrong. Also, I know I can be argumentative, so I would like any pointers as to how I can be less abrasive.KrytenKoro 06:40, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

 Reviews 

I'm not too concerned about your past conflicts. Articles for deletion/List of Mega Man Zero characters, which you nominated and which was deleted, showed your maturity and familiarity with the deletion process. The correspondence on your talk page is amicable and well-reasoned, not too stressed. The only way to avoid conflicts on Wikipedia is to edit articles that nobody else cares about. (That's mostly what I do.)

I would advise you to branch out and take an interest in editing articles outside your immediate fictional universe. The Community Portal (link on the left sidebar) has some good ideas for you. Even reading the Main Page frequently can give you ideas about what you might like to learn more about.

I wish you good luck. Shalom Hello 04:45, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I feel from past experience that you may need to modify your approach on talk pages. It's my opinion, but you sometimes convey that you are aggressive and disagreeable. I have no problem with your actual edits, but remember that good communication with other users is vital. Thank you. Ashnard Talk  Contribs  17:25, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I personally think your editing out my pics for that Akatsuki (Naruto) page was a wrong judgement. i spent time puting those on there. it is helping people understand the topic but you just crushed that. just because you have been on wikipedia longer than me doesn't mean that you can edit the important stuff out. I even discussed adding yet they still got removed after others said it would be a good idea. Also i asked some of my fellow Naruto fans and they also agreed with me.Nichomas (talk) 00:31, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * ...I didn't remove them, and I've explained that to you before. All I did was explain to you why those pics were copyright infringements. And I never "pulled seniority" on you. Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 05:26, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Personally, I've appreciated having someone else who clearly has the Seven Deadly Sins on his watch page, however I find it really quite difficult to have a discussion with you. Your standard approach to discussion appears to be to say that the other person is wrong. This is not really discussion, and makes it quite hard to move things on. In particular, you never really even acknowledged that what I was trying to do (limit cultural references to notable entries with verified links to the SDS) made sense. In the end I had to go and find policies to back me up, at which point you said "We should limit the list to entries that are notable or uniquely interesting, and back these up with sources - I in fact have agreed with this from the start." Well, firstly, you never actually said that from the start, you instead chose to "discuss" the things you disagreed with me on; and secondly, to say that you said this from the start is disingenuous. In your immediately preceding post, you said "WP:Notability does not apply to the CONTENT of an article - only the topic itself". I could only interpret this as disagreeing with me that entries in the cultural references list, i.e. the CONTENT of the SDS article, should be notable. In fact that whole post is a perfect example of how, rather than attempt to understand what I'm trying to do, you listed the ways in which you disagreed with me.

I think generally on talk pages people would appreciate it if you remembered that Wikipedia is supposed to be a collaborative exercise; we're supposed to be working together to make the encyclopedia better. I would certainly appreciate it if you made more positive suggestions about how we are going to reach a sensible set of guidelines, rather than focusing on how and why you think I'm wrong. --Merlinme (talk) 16:44, 9 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, your editing seems fine for the most part, but you recent edit here was really unecessary. Thanks,  Meldshal42 Hit me What I've Done  19:47, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I would like to advise you not to use capital letters to stress your intentions, as you did in the aformentioned edit to Seven deadly sins, and I also saw it here, where you sound pretty irritated. Consider using italics to emphasize parts and remember: stay cool, and if you feel you can't, take a small break. Cheers, Face 23:17, 18 May 2008 (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 Lists of Digimon (for example, List of Fresh Digimon)- I have done a lot of work in cleaning those up and adding what sources I can (a lot of the stuff seems real but is from japanese sources, so I can't really check on it, though I do check and source the stuff from english sources). Also, some of the other list articles like List of characters in Digimon Tamers, which I created and am trying to fill in.
 * Also, List of characters in The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, List of characters in The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess, Races in The Legend of Zelda series, Bosses in The Legend of Zelda series, and Enemies in The Legend of Zelda series - I try to do cleanup and info work on these, but because I am mostly focusing on Digimon right now, it mostly ends up being vandalism-reversion. I did do a lot of work setting up the redoing of the Bosses page, though some of my changes were later un-consensus-ed when new editors came around.KrytenKoro 06:50, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 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 been in a few arguments with vandals and those who I strongly disagreed with. The vandals, I kept asking them to stop, and those I strongly disagreed with, I debated with. I tried to stay civil during the debates, but I'm an impatient person, and quickly fall into uncivil behavior (I hope not too uncivil, though). One in particular, 156.something - he kept on changing around a lot of the prose on the Royal Knights page, under the pretense of improving the grammar and spelling, and except for a few cases, it seemed obvious to me that it was in fact detrimental to those. I reverted his edits, explaining for each error why I saw it as such, but he kept on doing fullpage reverts that took back even the obvious spelling fixes I had done, and claimed oppression when I asked him not to do so. I eventually took this to a request for mediation, but that never really got off the ground - he did seem to have stopped editing the page, though.KrytenKoro 06:50, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) You seem to add things to the talk page that have no relevance to discussing the article. Like that mud-job someone did on your page. Or the Vexen vandalism. Admittedly, that last one does have to do with the article, but it was reverted and I haven't seen such a thing since, so I don't see why you felt the need to comment on it. Mind telling me why you did so?
 * The mudjob on my page had actually been because I gave a vandalism warning to that guy who had been vandalizing the XIII page, and I thought it was funny how he had taken it, so I thought you guys would get a laugh out of it, too. I'll remove it from the talk page, since it was just supposed to be a bit of humor.KrytenKoro 01:32, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
 * The mudjob on my page had actually been because I gave a vandalism warning to that guy who had been vandalizing the XIII page, and I thought it was funny how he had taken it, so I thought you guys would get a laugh out of it, too. I'll remove it from the talk page, since it was just supposed to be a bit of humor.KrytenKoro 01:32, 4 August 2007 (UTC)