Wikipedia:Editor review/ONUnicorn

User:ONUnicorn
I haven't been editing Wikipedia all that long (just since April), but lately I feel like my editing has changed somehow. I've tried to help out on a few third opinion requests, and recently discovered the villiage pump pages. I'm not thinking of requesting admin powers or anything, just want to know what other people think; especially as regards my 3rd opinion work. ~ ONUnicorn (Talk / Contribs) 18:33, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

 Reviews 


 * A cursory glance at your editing statistics raises no concerns, and your edits to Wyandotte Caves are very good indeed. I'm not particularly experienced with WP:3O, but I will say that from the examples of your activity there, you seem to be doing pretty well: edits like this tell me that your involvement there is running just fine. If you like, you might also want to try the Mediation Cabal or Esperanza as other ways to help in building the community and resolving disputes. As for your article edits, they also look just fine: good work, and keep it up. :) Daveydw ee b ( chat/patch ) 06:20, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the feedback. ~ ONUnicorn (Talk / Contribs) 14:01, 3 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Hello there, sorry for the delay, but I tried to finish as many of the new reviews as possible. Since you asked for opinion about your mediation process, here is what I see:
 * Your edits are pretty even, which bodes well. The fact that you are interested in mediating shows in them, as nearly 25% of them are in article or user talk pages.
 * It is always hard to mediate in conflicts. Pocket PC is a good example of them. While you feel you did not help there, you must understand that sometimes it is not necessary to give an opinion. Just listen to the sides, get the facts, and sometimes a third would appear understanding both sides and correcting the facts in the article to keep both sides "happy". Bring the facts in front of everyone, and sometimes they will understand that extreme positions are usually wrong.
 * In Charun, you stated that the requesting party and the other party both agree to abide by the decision reached (which you, the requesting party, apparently have decided not to do). If you weren't ready to accept a reasonable compromise, you shouldn't have asked for a third opinion. The Third Opinion page state that the mediation is informal, not an RFC where the decisions are final. I think a Third Opinion should review the conflict and give just that, an opinion, which can be accepted or not. If rejected, a new third opinion could be requested, until both parties agree on one. As I saied, mediating is always difficult, and one must always understand that, no matter how hard you work, it is virtually impossible to be always successful.
 * While reviewing your different comments in those conflicts, I noticed the way you format the talk page . That is not the correct formatting for a talk page, makes the talk page much harder to read, and encourages new users to follow that format. I would suggest to stick with the common method of talk pages, using colons to reply.
 * I believe you are being too harsh with you. Mediating is not an easy task, and only mediating in several conflicts will give you experience to handle new ones in a better way. The important thing is making everyone understand that you are someone with a neutral opinion, that it is optional, and that you are doing this because you don't like conflicts when they don't help the article. As Daveydweeb stated, the Mediation Cabal and Esperanza are two groups that will increase your participation with third users, giving you experience about handling stressful situations and, ultimately, improving the way you mediate. You are a good user with good intention, now you just need experience. And remember, the only way you can mediate is if you have trust in yourself. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 22:46, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you. A comment about the talk pages; I don't normally format them that way, but I'd seen others doing it and briefly thought it was a good idea.  Thank you for your comments. ~ ONUnicorn (Talk / Contribs) 15:38, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

 Comments 


 * View this user's edit count using a PHP version of Interiot's tool.

 Questions


 * 1) Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * I'm really pleased with Wyandotte Caves, it was on the main page as a DYK!!! There are some areas of it that still need work, and I hope to be able to upload some more pictures for it soon, but it's the most substantial thing I've done on Wikipedia and I'm really really proud of it.
 * Another contribution I'm particularly pleased with is the image I added to Fork in the road. Maybe that's an odd thing to be pleased with, but I like it anyway.


 * 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 don't think I've really been in any major conflicts; but I have been trying to help out with other people's conflicts like the one at Charun and the one at Pocket PC. This is really why I'm requesting this editor review, to try to get some feedback about the way I handled those, especially since I don't feel like I was really able to help in those situations.
 * I don't think anything on Wikipedia could really cause me stress. I have a new opinion of stress after having to move house 3 times in 2 weeks and wrecking 2 cars in the same 2 weeks last year.  Compared to those 2 weeks, there is nothing on the internet that could really cause me stress.  However, there have been things on Wikipedia that have annoyed me or gotten on my nerves.  I deal with minor things like that by doing something else for a while.  I go for a walk if it's nice out, or I read my book, play a video game, work on a puzzle, take a bubble bath... basically get off the computer and do something else.  Then I come back later when I'm calmer and better able to think clearly.  I imagine that's how I'll continue to handle situations like that in the future.