Wikipedia:Editor review/MItchazenia 2

Mitchazenia
Its been a few months since my last Editor Review, so I think I need a Wiki-physical. Mit ch 32contribs 19:39, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

 Reviews 

Review by Moonriddengirl
Well, I've enjoyed looking through your contribution history. You do good work. :) You seem to have very focused interests, but your article contributions there are clearly valuable and demonstrate familiarity with policies. You also seem to be very structured & organized, which I personally admire. I reviewed AfD participation. Like your article building, it seems very focused, but your contributions there are succinct and generally knowledgeable.

With regards to addressing the behavior of other editors, I note you made a good 3RR report (even if it was your first) and see that you've done a very little bit of good cleaning up on vandalism here and here. With the vandalism, I notice that you did not leave a warning in either case. In the first insistence, I probably wouldn't have either, given the lag between your discovery and the actual vandalism. In the second case, however, you reverted immediately after the act. I'd encourage you to get into the habit of issuing warnings to users when you encounter improper editing, as recommended at the vandalism policy. This can be beneficial in several ways. Some vandals are discouraged from further vandalism by evidence that others are aware of their behavior. Those that aren't are more easily addressed when other editors see that they have received prior warnings. There is a whole list of templates to be used in userspace, including warnings for vandalism or other types of unproductive edits, here. (You may know this already, but it's built into my "cut and paste" comment on vandalism addressing, and I figured I might as well leave it. :))

As further concerns communicating with other editors, I see you opened a new subject at User_talk:Juliancolton without creating a separate header, which might be a bit confusing. Also, there doesn't seem to be a lot of context to your comment there, which (judging by his note on your talk page) threw the user you were addressing as well. I am also a bit puzzled with your suggestion to him not to ask questions on article talk pages. Granted that talk pages are not for extensive discussion fo the subject, but this is precisely what users are recommended to do by Template:RD3. There may be some history between you and that user that I don't know, since evidently you communicate extensively through IRC. From an outsider perspective, the whole exchange is a bit of a head-scratcher. :) (Adding: Today's addition sounds a little alarming. I really can't fathom what's disturbing to you about this.)

It doesn't look like you did lose your temper with User:NE2. I did not fully investigate that incident (because it grew long and complex), so I'll simply note that changes are generally not quite as urgent as they feel at the moment. It's natural to want to FIX IT RIGHT NOW (I sure do) when you run into something you feel is wrong and done against policy. Sometimes it might be better to talk first, revert later. Maybe you did that on IRC, but I can't see any evidence that you attempted to address the editor directly on Wikipedia.

I note that in your previous editor review, it was recommended that you tag minor edits appropriately. You did this for a while but seem to have given it up. Marking these is a courtesy to recent changes patrollers, so it would be nice if you could try to remember to do this. (Spirit of full disclosure: I often forget to do this myself.)

I have only checked your contributions for the months of November and October—you seem pretty consistent. On the whole, you seem to be very much on top of your game, quite a good contributor to Wikipedia. Keep it up. :) I will be watching this editor review until I feel reasonably sure that you've had an opportunity to read over it and address it if you want to. You're always welcome to let me know if you have questions or comments at my talk page. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 20:53, 16 November 2007 (UTC)


 * About the soul food revert, I watched one of my classmates do that, and quickly reverted it.Mitch32contribs 13:52, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

 Comments 


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

 Questions


 * 1) Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * Lately my works have been on NY road articles for WP:USRD and a few hurricane seasons in WP:WPTC. I've got 4 GANs/GAs to my name from: New Jersey Route 33, 1983 Atlantic hurricane season (with help by User:Coredesat), Tropical Storm Jose (2005) (No work done, just nominated it), Tropical Storm Gert (2005) (same as Jose). My latest work on WPTC include Tropical Storm Gamma (2005), the 1987 Atlantic hurricane season (with another user) and Hurricane Georges's new sub-articles. I also did work on the 1986 Pacific hurricane season recently. My latest work at WP:USRD (more specifically WP:NYSR include New York State Route 380, converting articles to Template:Reflist, and expanding New York State Route 427. My future is to help out with the rotting The Price Is Right articles. Mit ch 32contribs 19:53, 19 October 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 covered most of old issues in my last editor review. The only new issue I've had is that I delisted Hurricane Georges to B-class from A-class, and it started the issue. The decision ended 6-0 relist. I took it well, and went back to focusing on other things. I also got into a dispute with User:Airtuna08, trying to teach him all the rules, especially that I don't know them all myself. We started to bond, trying out ideas, and that's how that ended. I haven't spoken to Airtuna08 in a while, probably cause I haven't seen him around. UPDATE: I recently got myself involved in User:NE2's Non-consentual edit spree. I went and reverted many article and am now ready to lose my temper at him. In the future, I guess I have to listen to myself more, and make sure I don't do anything stupid. Mit ch 32contribs 19:53, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I covered most of old issues in my last editor review. The only new issue I've had is that I delisted Hurricane Georges to B-class from A-class, and it started the issue. The decision ended 6-0 relist. I took it well, and went back to focusing on other things. I also got into a dispute with User:Airtuna08, trying to teach him all the rules, especially that I don't know them all myself. We started to bond, trying out ideas, and that's how that ended. I haven't spoken to Airtuna08 in a while, probably cause I haven't seen him around. UPDATE: I recently got myself involved in User:NE2's Non-consentual edit spree. I went and reverted many article and am now ready to lose my temper at him. In the future, I guess I have to listen to myself more, and make sure I don't do anything stupid. Mit ch 32contribs 19:53, 19 October 2007 (UTC)