Wikipedia:Editor review/Staffwaterboy-Review2

Staffwaterboy
STATEMENT Staffwaterboy Critique Me  21:13, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

 Questions


 * 1) What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
 * I feel that i have made a tremendous changes while making my contribution to Wikipedia, I often work to revert vandalism while using Igoo and Huggle althought i ran into a few issues with Igoo that required adminstrator attention it was forseen and i have made many chnages on how i use this programs.I feel that i am being more reserved while making reverts to possible vandalsim. TO insure that i can help prevent furth mistakes being made on my part.I also tag pages that meet the requirements of csd or Articles_for_deletion i feel that i have made a tremendous progress in better learning the guidelines for Wikipedia.I have also recently  created to articles which were technicaly the first two offical  articles i made, not to mention the ones that i have re wrote once they were deleted.I  am also active creating accounts throught ACC which i feel is also another major contribute to Wikipedia.
 * 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.
 * Yes i have had a few edit disputes such as before while it seemes that the text while looking at it in plain site didn't seems to fit the article  deleting that and having to go throught a mini editwar where i have removed  information and anthoer person keeps anding it back i tried to talk to users when this happens to see the best possible solution available
 * Yes i have had a few edit disputes such as before while it seemes that the text while looking at it in plain site didn't seems to fit the article  deleting that and having to go throught a mini editwar where i have removed  information and anthoer person keeps anding it back i tried to talk to users when this happens to see the best possible solution available

 Reviews 
 * No offense, but your communication still leaves a little to be desired, as it did when I reviewed you almost two years ago. I'm not just talking about spelling; in your response to question #2 I can't even understand what you're trying to say. I'm not sure what you're goal is currently (RfA, WP:ABUSE, etc.), but if you are looking to run for any of these positions then being able to communicate clearly is a must. r ʨ anaɢ (talk) 05:13, 5 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Your recent vandalism reverts look good for the most part, but I did find one issue. It's clear to me from the diff why the edits were made. It's possible that your grammar difficulties may have made it more difficult for you to see the reason. In this case though, there were several other clues. First, the editor you reverted has over 2000 edits. It's very rare for such an editor to commit vandalism because they normally get blocked long before their edit count gets so high. Second, the editor was himself performing a revert. In such a case, you should always take a look at the original edit history. If you had done so, you would have found that Iaaasi had already left a message on User_talk:24.25.218.135 that explained the situation perfectly. Nevertheless, I've sometimes missed such things myself when in too much of a hurry. In such a case, you should have apologized to Iaaasi instead of chastising him over the edit summary. He used WP:Twinkle to perform the rollback and most Twinkle links don't provide the option for adding anything else to the edit summary. He technically should have done a manual save of the old version instead of a rollback because it wasn't really vandalism, but that's hardly worth mentioning considering that you made a bigger mistake. To improve your grammar, please consider editing by cutting and pasting to/from a word processor that performs automatic grammar checking. Hopefully you can learn from your mistakes this way and eventually not need it anymore. You provided a user some great help in this case. However, your grammar was marginal and you could have easily been misunderstood had the situation been more complex. Good writing skills are essential to success on this project. Perhaps you could start by rewriting your answers to the questions above to help others who may want to provide you a review. —UncleDouggie (talk) 06:49, 15 February 2011 (UTC)


 * In the future, you might want to fill out the part that says "STATEMENT". / ƒETCH COMMS  /  03:58, 28 February 2011 (UTC)