Wikipedia:Editor review/MC10

MC10
Hello there, I am MC10. After a few more months of editing after my most recently failed RfA, I'd like to see how I am doing with my editing. — MC10 ( T • C • GB •L)  22:31, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

 Questions


 * 1) What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
 * As I am not a content-writer, my primary contributions have not been to primarily towards article-building. Instead, my primary contributions are mainly towards vandalism-reversion, as I focus to that area a lot, especially with the use of Huggle. I also frequently comment on ANI. I am pleased with some of the comments that I had made to ANI, as I had taken significant thought about what I should comment about. However, other comments were sometimes a bit hurried, and not as well thought out. Taking all of my edits in comparison, however, I am pleased with my overall work on Wikipedia.
 * 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?
 * Of course, when interaction with other users happen, conflicts will naturally result. About a month ago, I was involved in this incident about me "breaking" quite a few anti-vandalism templates. (The ANI discussion can be found here .) It turned out that I had only broken one template – welcome-anon – with a code change; however, a few editors had thought I had broken the whole lot of anti-vandalism templates, and reverted almost all of my changes. Since the change was discussed, I informed the other editors at ANI about the discussion, and stated that only one of the templates was broken. As a result, the whole mess, which was actually not really a mess, was sorted out. In a future situation like this, I would discuss my changes before making them, to avoid another ANI incident, and I would try to discuss with the editor I had a conflict with how to sort out the conflict, instead of making the conflict worse by sticking to my side of the conflict without evidence to back it up. More discussion, and linking to discussion within my edit summaries, would probably avoid another one of these incidents/disputes from happening again in the future.
 * Of course, when interaction with other users happen, conflicts will naturally result. About a month ago, I was involved in this incident about me "breaking" quite a few anti-vandalism templates. (The ANI discussion can be found here .) It turned out that I had only broken one template – welcome-anon – with a code change; however, a few editors had thought I had broken the whole lot of anti-vandalism templates, and reverted almost all of my changes. Since the change was discussed, I informed the other editors at ANI about the discussion, and stated that only one of the templates was broken. As a result, the whole mess, which was actually not really a mess, was sorted out. In a future situation like this, I would discuss my changes before making them, to avoid another ANI incident, and I would try to discuss with the editor I had a conflict with how to sort out the conflict, instead of making the conflict worse by sticking to my side of the conflict without evidence to back it up. More discussion, and linking to discussion within my edit summaries, would probably avoid another one of these incidents/disputes from happening again in the future.

 Reviews 
 * Hi, your use of edit summaries seem nice, keep that up. It's good to see you active in fighting vandalism, but it would be better to also have content contributions. After all we're here to write an encyclopedia right? I've read over that template problem, but it seems to be a misunderstanding. So overall, great job on vandalism, but try to get in some content contributions. Derild  49  21  ☼  13:22, 23 June 2010 (UTC)