Wikipedia:Editor review/Omarcheeseboro

Omarcheeseboro
I would like feedback on what I can improve on as an editor, and what I'm doing well Omarcheeseboro (talk) 18:22, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

 Reviews  Looking good in all the areas that count. Solid (4300+) edits for 4 serious months, and a large majority of namespace edits. See you around! Resident Mario (talk)

Yo Omar, just stopping in to say keep up the great work at new page patrol. Cheers, Skomorokh  17:23, 15 February 2009 (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?
 * I had an awesome hike on the Art Loeb Trail, and it was nice to come home and significantly expand the page from a stub. There are some very good sources about the trail scattered about, and it was nice to put them all together on one page.  While I enjoy and have learned a lot by doing a lot of WP:NPP, vandalism cleanup, and some participation in wp:afd, I have to say that my article creations are what I'm most pleased with. --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 18:24, 12 January 2009 (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've had some conflicts with editors over the usual: content 1, 2, 3, WP:NPP with an admin, 2, and a probable auto-biographer who couldn't believe his article went to wp:afd 1.  I dealt with them by trying to stay cool (with varying degrees of success), clearly making my point, and then if necessary, bringing in other editors. I've found that Third Opinion works well, and simply just waiting for other editors to comment.  Either they agree with me or end up making me see another side of the argument. I've learned a lot in 4-5 months or so I've been editing seriously --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 18:24, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I've had some conflicts with editors over the usual: content 1, 2, 3, WP:NPP with an admin, 2, and a probable auto-biographer who couldn't believe his article went to wp:afd 1.  I dealt with them by trying to stay cool (with varying degrees of success), clearly making my point, and then if necessary, bringing in other editors. I've found that Third Opinion works well, and simply just waiting for other editors to comment.  Either they agree with me or end up making me see another side of the argument. I've learned a lot in 4-5 months or so I've been editing seriously --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 18:24, 12 January 2009 (UTC)