Wikipedia:Editor review/Lds

Lds
I joined Wikipedia in 2005 and only began to contribute on a more regular basis in 2008. I've more than 9000 edits in my edit count and I think it's time to gain some feedback about my editing. I've been longing to promote some articles to FA or GA status, and hope to gain some advice from this review on how to improve the quality of my editing. _LDS (talk) 14:54, 6 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Questions


 * 1) What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
 * I contribute mainly to articles on Chinese history, Chinese literature and some films and TV series. I'm most proud of my contributions to Xiang Yu, Emperor Gaozu of Han and articles on Wuxia works (almost all the articles in the following categories were created/heavily edited by me: Category:Wuxia television series, Category:Wuxia novels, Category:Organisations in Wuxia fiction, Category:Wuxia novel characters). I've also edited some articles on Hong Kong/mainland Chinese TV series and films, especially those on Wuxia and Chinese historical fiction, and some articles on Hong Kong horror films. I've worked on expanding/creating articles of some Hong Kong/mainland Chinese actors/actresses, such as He Zhuoyan, Zhang Tielin, Tang Guoqiang, Zhang Fengyi etc. I'm pleased with them because the quality of these articles have improved after my editing, or because that I'm the one who initiated these articles. Please see here for a summarized description about my contributions.
 * 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 a number of small disputes with other editors which have been resolved, with varying degrees of success. I decided to give in to the other editor in a few disputes because their concerns are reasonable and supported by the views of the majority (see Talk:Hwa Chong Institution and Talk:Koxinga for two of the major disputes I'm involved in). However, there have been cases where the disputes were resolved simply because the editors are no longer active, and have presumably backed out. I've attempted to act as a mediator for this dispute but it wasn't very successful.
 * I've been involved in a number of small disputes with other editors which have been resolved, with varying degrees of success. I decided to give in to the other editor in a few disputes because their concerns are reasonable and supported by the views of the majority (see Talk:Hwa Chong Institution and Talk:Koxinga for two of the major disputes I'm involved in). However, there have been cases where the disputes were resolved simply because the editors are no longer active, and have presumably backed out. I've attempted to act as a mediator for this dispute but it wasn't very successful.


 * Reviews
 * Airplaneman  ✈
 * Helloo Lds, sorry it's taken more than four months for someone to give you some feedback. A quick look through your contributions shows that you are doing lots of article work and goming. Keep it up, but I would strongly recommend using edit summaries all of the time, especially for edits not considered minor. It looks like you've been warned already on your talk page as recent as two weeks ago. There is a preference you can set in your preferences that warns you when you don't use an edit summary. I use it, although I rarely trigger it now because I've gotten into the habit of at least leaving a word/symbol explaining the meaning of my edit. Right now, your usage count is at 13 %. Ideally, it should be in the 90–100% range. This helps avoid misunderstandings and helps people who may be looking through the page history.
 * For some advice on how to bring articles up to GA and FA status, try seeking advice at peer review. The good article criteria and the featured article criteria are good things to know as well. Also, take a look at the current good articles and the current featured articles. The next step would be to nominate articles at WP:GAC and WP:FAC. Don't be discouraged if they don't pass; you'll receive feedback on how to improve them and can always nominate again.
 * For question number two: how will you deal with disputes in the future? I didn't see that part of the question answered. It looks like you kept a fairly level head in the two linked disputes, which I commend you for. Far too often, they become unnecessarily heated and filled with drama. As for the mediation, it won't always work. Just try again, and continue keeping a level head while making rational, well-informed comments.
 * Finally, I would encourage you to diversify your contribution range and participate in areas you might not have much experience in. By doing so, you will gain more experience and maybe find something else you like doing. It can't hurt. Happy editing, Airplaneman   ✈  18:49, 23 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the review. I wasn't quite expecting anyone to give me feedback after such a long time, so this is really a pleasant surprise indeed. Yes, I'll try to use edit summaries in future for non-minor edits. I'll take your advice to contribute in other areas as well, but I've limited experience and may not be of much help. 暗無天日  contact me (聯絡) 04:42, 24 July 2010 (UTC)