Wikipedia:Editor review/PeterSymonds

PeterSymonds
I've been editing actively for just over eight months, and I want to see where I stand with the community and see what it expects me to improve upon. Any advice will be considered and appreciated. Thanks in advance! PeterSymonds | talk  18:53, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

 Reviews 


 * I think you are an above avarage editor. I am impressed to see that over 50% of your edits are mainspace edits. I suggest becoming more active at wikipedia and working in more areas. Thanks, and keep it up!-- RyRy5 Got something to say?  07:02, 6 April 2008 (UTC)


 * With four Featured Articles you should be a shoo-in for adminship but I can see how some folks may be spooked after your note below. I myself am mainly an article writer and find my most useful tools are Move and Protect, although with a watchlist of 4000 I pick up a fair few vandals who may have been missed elsewhere. Maybe comment on Moves and a bit of AfD thoughtful input will help.Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:00, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Yeah perhaps, but the image thing was quite a while ago, before I realised that my login could be remembered, and before my contributions really began to take shape in other areas of Wikipedia. My account is only remembered on this computer, and I have quite a thorough understanding of the image policies, so it certainly won't happen again. It's certainly something that I've regretted, especially because it appeared to be a lie, but after some confusion I worked out what had happened and apologised on the IP's talk page. PeterSymonds | talk  10:49, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Heck, it wouldn't worry me but you never know when someone will get spooked and then you watch the RfA crash and burn big-time. The trick is to bolster it enough so it doesn't. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:00, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Indeed. I'll work on more XfDs and maybe run for adminship in the near future (it would certainly help with new page patrol). Thanks for taking the time to review me :) PeterSymonds | talk  11:59, 7 April 2008 (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?
 * My best contributions are my four featured articles (1, 2, 3, 4. The three Princesses have been featured as DYKs, and 1 and 2 were both good articles before becoming featured. As well as this, I respond to requests for peer review, do quite a bit of NewPage, RC patrol, and have recently become more active at WP:AIV.
 * 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?
 * Not really. An incident occured when I split Line of succession to the British Throne into subpages; I acquired permission on the talk page, and it was completed by the time people started opposing it. The end result was that my changes were reverted. It didn't cause stress, and there was no harm done. Also, last year I was accused by an anonymous IP of an image copyright violation, which caused a bit of stress because I didn't personally upload it (my login details were remembered on my neighbour's computer). The result was that my login details were limited to my primary PC, and my password strengthened beyond compromise. Ultimately, there was no harm done.
 * Not really. An incident occured when I split Line of succession to the British Throne into subpages; I acquired permission on the talk page, and it was completed by the time people started opposing it. The end result was that my changes were reverted. It didn't cause stress, and there was no harm done. Also, last year I was accused by an anonymous IP of an image copyright violation, which caused a bit of stress because I didn't personally upload it (my login details were remembered on my neighbour's computer). The result was that my login details were limited to my primary PC, and my password strengthened beyond compromise. Ultimately, there was no harm done.