Wikipedia:Editor review/Paul Pigman

User:Paul Pigman
I'm interested in improving my effectiveness as an editor. Pigman (talk &bull; contribs) 21:30, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

 Reviews 


 * Comments from AdelaMa e (talk - contribs)
 * Comments about Articles for deletion
 * Have you run across the speedy deletion policy and the proposed deletion ("prod") policy? Speedy deletion lets you tag articles to be deleted on sight if they meet certain criteria (total nonsense, obvious vandalism, no content, etc).  Articles that don't meet those criteria, but are uncontroversial deletion candidates, can be tagged with  and will be deleted in 5 days if there is no objection.
 * When you nominate an article for deletion, your nomination is your argument/vote to delete (unless you are nominating it for purely technical reasons and say so).
 * Be careful about using non-notability as your sole argument for deletion, since it tends to be pretty subjective and WP:NOTE is a guideline, not a policy. Most truly non-notable articles will also be unverifiable or violate some other policy.
 * I sent the AfD debate for Don paterson bedfellows to Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense. Too funny.
 * Comments about mainspace editing
 * I have nothing to complain about here. The edits you've made are good.  You're not writing huge chunks of text, but not everybody does that.  I tend to do things bit-by-bit myself.
 * General comments
 * Wow, you've done a lot of editing this month.
 * Your talk page archive is kind of hard to get at. I usually leave some of the most recent comments on the page each time I archive, so that there's some continuity and people don't just see a (mostly) blank page.
 * I noticed that there were occasions where you changed your mind based on input from other editors. Good for you.  I admire that.

 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?
 * Answer Nothing in particular. I'm embarrassed to have done a flurry of spelling edits recently in order to qualify to use VandalProof but they were still real edits, if minor. I tend to the conservative side on entry creation and contents, mostly by applying notability policy/standards/guidelines.
 * 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?
 * Answer No really big conflicts. I'm generally a polite person so keeping to the civility standards isn't a hardship or difficult. I think I've been participating in online fora for long enough (20 years) to also distinguish between truly trollish behaviour and confusion or inexperience. (Questions 1 and 2 answered by me and signed here because I think this is a confusing layout once people have begun inserting reviews at the top. So there. --Pigman (talk &bull; contribs) 07:40, 2 December 2006 (UTC))
 * Answer No really big conflicts. I'm generally a polite person so keeping to the civility standards isn't a hardship or difficult. I think I've been participating in online fora for long enough (20 years) to also distinguish between truly trollish behaviour and confusion or inexperience. (Questions 1 and 2 answered by me and signed here because I think this is a confusing layout once people have begun inserting reviews at the top. So there. --Pigman (talk &bull; contribs) 07:40, 2 December 2006 (UTC))