Wikipedia:Editor review/La Pianista (2)

La Pianista
I have just come back from a short retirement. I may not have many edits to review from, but I would like to know what to do to help me start afresh. After all, un-retiring implies a certain change of idea, am I right? :) &mdash; La Pianista  ♫ ♪ 06:16, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

 Questions


 * 1) What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
 * ''I don't really have any "primary contributions" at the moment. Right now, juggling between real life and Wikipedia work leaves me with little choice than the random glossing over some, copyediting the occasional random article, patrolling recent changes, etc. I am currently working on P:CLM and am trying to become active again in my previous WikiProjects (most notably, WP:CM)
 * 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?''
 * There will always be editors that have caused me stress, but I hope I've been able to hide my anger (or vent it elsewhere!). Just for the fun of it, I sometimes type up everything I wish to say to an editor, walk away for a few minutes, and then re-read my statement to see if it seems cool-headed or not. Naturally, upon a first reading, it doesn't. :) So I try to be understanding and always modify any comments that could be misconstrued. People have been stressed at me before (long before), so I remind myself of what it feels to be misunderstood and consequently attacked.

Please note that this editor has had a previous editor review (see Editor review/La Pianista)

Hello, Pianista, I have got some more questions for you, which may also serve as suggestions:
 * Additional questions from  Anna Lincoln 
 * Are you regularly doing content building, FA/GA/DYK?
 * Nope. I probably should. But I feel my niche belongs in making minor edits; it's just more comfortable for me, both mentally and in relation to the amount of free time I have (which isn't much - you see, I am responding to you at midnight my time :D ). I have written one article in the past, but that's about it. I have also copy-edited a few others, which have made it to FA (one to TFA), but all were done a while before I retired.


 * Do you take part at noticeboards, help desk, village pump?
 * Rarely - whenever I feel like it. It's something to keep in mind, though, and I will certainly check out those places more often.


 * Have you ever !voted at an RfA, RfB, Checkuser, Oversight, ArbCom election?
 * Long ago. And oh so far away. I'm just not administrative material. It's unlikely that I'll ever return to my former activity, but if I do, I might take up interest in what's actually important around here. ;)


 * Have you ever discussed policy pages or at centralized discussions?
 * Yes, and recently, too (if you can call a month ago "recently").


 * Have you ever looked up in a paper source when adding a reference to an article?
 * Yes - books are my #1 source (if I can't hold it in my hand, I'll at least try Google books). In fact, just last week I borrowed a book that I intended to use on several articles, but I could never find the time to log on.


 * Do you visit WP:CORD regularly?
 * No.


 * Do you read The Signpost?
 * No. I would like to subscribe, but as I don't check my talk page very often, the sight of all those clogged up newsletters would be unsettling.


 * Have you got some gadget enabled such as Popups or Twinkle?
 * Yep. I don't see how enabling Popups makes me a better user, but I have both of them (and others) enabled. :) &mdash; La Pianista  ♫ ♪ How's my driving? 06:18, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

 Reviews 


 * Hi La Pianista, sorry for the delay in getting a review for you - we're slowly catching up with the backlog! On to my review...


 * User conduct
 * Edit summaries: Summaries are always used, and generally explain what you have done in your edit. This helps people watching the page to see what's happening!
 * Constructive comments on talk pages: Comments on article talk pages are clearly with the intention of improving the encyclopedia
 * Attitude towards others: Your attitude towards other editors is good, as is evidenced by the warm welcome you got from several editors when you returned from your time away!


 *  Edits
 * Automated Edits: About half of all your edits are automated (mainly using Huggle). This is not a bad thing, and the reverts are valid from what I can see - the only thing I would say is that I'd expect there to be more vandalism warnings - especially for the clear cases of vandalism - and yet since February 2009, I could only see about 20 warnings (and most of those were in a very short period of time). Remember that the level 1 warning (which is what most of the vandals would get) basically says "Welcome to Wikipedia. Your changes have been reverted, please try using the sandbox for experiments"!
 * Article vs non-article: About a third of your edits are to articles, and about 45% to user talk pages. This is not a particular problem, as your edits to articles appear to be good. Your work on music articles is good, as are your edits elsewhere.


 * Summary
 * You are doing a good job, from what I can see! The only thing I would suggest would be to maybe do more warnings when using Huggle to revert obvious vandalism.


 * Hope this helps. Regards, --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 16:48, 12 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I'm glad to hear it. But I thought Huggle sent warnings automatically...hm. Thanks for telling me. :) &mdash; La Pianista  ♫ ♪ How's my driving? 05:05, 13 January 2010 (UTC)