Wikipedia:Editor review/OrangeDog

OrangeDog
I've been editing Wikipedia for about 4 years, being more active in the last year. I generally potter along minding my own business but have become increasingly involved in the community so I thought I'd do one of these. OrangeDog (talk • edits) 04:25, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

 Reviews 


 * Hi OrangeDog - sorry for the delay in getting a review done for you, but we're slowly catching up with the backlog (we're into September now...) OK, on with the review:


 * User conduct
 * Edit summaries: 94% of all your major edits have summaries, which is very good, even allowing for the AWB edits!
 * Talk pages: Your contributions appear to be relevant to the point at hand, and focussed in improving articles.
 * Attitude towards others: Similarly, these are to the point, and focussed on improving the encyclopedia. Some of your comments may be seen by others as a bit terse, but they are focussed correctly.
 * Edits
 * 60% of your edits are to articles, which is good (even allowing for the use of AWB, which accounts for perhaps half of these). Your work on Cambridge University Catholic Chaplaincy is good - I can see no problems with your editing.
 * I also see that you have been contributing to the Village Pump - again, a very important part of the project, as this is where new ideas originate!
 * WT:Notability (populated places) (failed): this is an area that is very contentious, as you have found! There were some very good contributions in the responses - and as you said, you got a bit exasperated! However, as you recognise there are "more important things in life", you seem to have the right approach here! Incidently, I found DGG's arguments very informative - they appear to reflect the general consensus on this subject on Wikipedia.


 * Summary


 * What can I say? What I see is good, so keep up the good work! --  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me, My Contribs ) 14:01, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

 Questions


 * 1) What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
 * Listed on my user page, plus lots of typo and grammar fixes and some vandal-fighting. I hang out around the pumps a lot as well. I think I'm most pleased with Cambridge University Catholic Chaplaincy.
 * 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 got rather exasperated during WT:Notability (populated places) (failed) as people didn't seem to get what I was saying and were arguing against straw men. In the end I just accepted that I wasn't getting anywhere and there were more important things in life. Generally I try not to get to worked up about things and keep a sense of perspective.
 * I got rather exasperated during WT:Notability (populated places) (failed) as people didn't seem to get what I was saying and were arguing against straw men. In the end I just accepted that I wasn't getting anywhere and there were more important things in life. Generally I try not to get to worked up about things and keep a sense of perspective.