Wikipedia:Editor review/Ross Hill

Ross Hill
Hey all, I'm Ross Hill, and I've been editing here a little more than a year. I have about 5000 edits, but only about 1000 are in the mainspace. I wanted to go on editor review to know what I have done right, but mostly what I can do better. I would love some suggestions on how I can help out more in the mainspace, because whenever I want to write an article, it turnes out it exists already. I understand there might be a couple editors with an axe to grind, but understand that, while I may have acted immaturely at some times, I only ever have edited in good faith. Thanks for reading, I look forward to hearing your comments! -- Ross Hill  •  Talk  •  Need Help?  • 22:25, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

 Questions


 * 1) What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
 * My primary contribs have been to counter vandalism, and my CVUA course; as well as contributing to community discussions. I have made a few average articles- none featured yet.
 * 1) Have you been in editing disputes 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? If you have never been in an editing dispute, explain how you would respond to one.
 * Of course other editors have caused me some stress at points, but for the most part I have refrained getting involved in heated arguments.
 * 1) What do you want to get out of this editor review? Are you thinking of running for adminship? Would you like feedback on a specific area of your editing? Or would you just like a general review of your edits?
 * Run for adminship in a few years once I have a few featured articles. I want a general review of my edits.

 Reviews 

You may not realize it, but one of your edits at Mary Wright Plummer caused a bit of a kerfluffle, if you check the linked article on the talk page. I think it's a learning experience, that we need to work on that Articles for Submission process so that we have more folks going in and upgrading articles, since most newbies don't know quite what to do yet, rather than simply evaluating them. You might want to review a little more on notability and reliable sources for different types of articles-- we can all use a refresher there.
 * Hello Ross, thanks for your work in counter-vandalism, and for pitching in at Teahouse!

For working on mainspace, if you really want to dig in, you could take a look at this New York Times reference generator, and add some citations to historic articles from NYT coverage.

If you want to write new articles, we have some redlinked articles from the recent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/DC/Statistics_Edit-a-thon that you could write ... we have sources all ready for you.

You could also go to a library and add cites from some of the standard reference books, especially biography and geography.

Keep it up, we always need more help here. Djembayz (talk) 02:08, 11 December 2013 (UTC)