Wikipedia:Editor review/PrincessofLlyr

PrincessofLlyr
I'm asking for a review mostly to find out how I'm doing around here. I've been editing not quite a year and most frequently in the last few months. I have no interest in adminship, just improving the quality of my contributions. PrincessofLlyr (talk) 14:31, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

 Questions


 * 1) What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
 * I work most actively with the Percy Jackson Task Force, improving articles and reverting vandalism. I am also semiactive on Wikiproject Warriors. I use Huggle to patrol recent changes and work on New Page Patrol occasionally. Probably I am most pleased about helping to have The Titan's Curse passed as a Good Article. I've also done one GA review here.
 * 1) Have you been in any disputes 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 have not been in really any major disputes and if Wikipedia (or users thereof) are causing me stress, I log off and go read a book. I strive to always give another editor the benefit of the doubt and never argue with vandals.
 * I have not been in really any major disputes and if Wikipedia (or users thereof) are causing me stress, I log off and go read a book. I strive to always give another editor the benefit of the doubt and never argue with vandals.

 Reviews 


 * Excellent counter-vandalism editor using WP:NPP and WP:RCP very effectively. To be highly commended on her efforts in this field.
 * Thoughtful copy editor.
 * Very knowledgeable on various authors and novels. Edits at Percy Jackson (character) and related articles are especially good.  Important participant at Percy Jackson Task Force and WikiProject Warriors in this respect.
 * Participates in debate in a thoughtful manner and always manages to keep the conversation civil. Known "talk page stalker" but comments are always useful, polite, and welcomed.
 * Overall, a very pleasant and sociable editor with a good track record --Jubilee♫ clipman  16:55, 19 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I have no idea how to do an ER- I think I'm approaching looking through your contribs as if you were standing at RfA... but you asked, so here are some ideas. Write something.  Anything.  You've copyedited a GA, now try starting an article and getting it on DYK.  Pick the right subject and it'll take you around 2 to 3 hours, but since you've never written an article from scratch, I think it'll be a good learning experience for you.  (If you need any ideas, I've got a list of notable subjects the length of my arm I can never seem to get around to.)  2)Participate in more XfD's.  A few of your AfD's I looked at were uninspiring, with  being the best of the bunch.  Get egg on your face.  Say something boneheaded.  Wander over to the dusty caves of WP:CFD or the like.  XfD'ing is, like anything else, an exercise in learning by doing.  3)On the GA review you conducted, you said you had a preference for no red links.  Why?  I could name major subjects where Wikipedia's coverage, even with 3.2 million articles; is downright lacking.  (Royal Navy ships from George I to Victoria; most are red-links.  National Register of Historic Places; mostly redlinks, and so on, just off the top of my head.)  Redlinks save the eventual article writer from having to create links, and show where notable subjects exist that no one has gotten around to writing about yet.   I may have more later. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 02:00, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the good points on improvement. Any more are welcome. In comment as to my preference about red links, that suggestion was made out of ignorance. I was not aware of the policy concerning them and should have researched it before bringing that up. I now understand the necessity for red links, but still prefer not to have an excess of them as I believe it looks messy. I will try to work on your other suggestions. PrincessofLlyr (talk) 03:09, 21 March 2010 (UTC)