Wikipedia:Editor review/Trust Is All You Need

Trust Is All You Need
I've been editing actively for some time now. I'd like a review regarding my edits, behaviour and my contributions. --TIAYN (talk) 16:03, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

 Questions


 * 1) What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
 * I've nominated 25 successful GAs, one failed FL and three DYKs mainly in the field of socialist and communist politics and television, primarily The X-Files.
 * 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?
 * Numerous, and yes I do believe other users have caused me stress. But to be honest, I've probably have been as enoying to them as they have been to me. I try to stay out of edit-wars, but sometimes irritatio takes the best of me.
 * Numerous, and yes I do believe other users have caused me stress. But to be honest, I've probably have been as enoying to them as they have been to me. I try to stay out of edit-wars, but sometimes irritatio takes the best of me.

 Reviews 
 * Wow, 25 GAs is amazing and it seems that you are very involved in your topic. All I would say is to use edit summaries more. Also, what is with this edit, especially the edit summary? Derild 49  2  1  00:44, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thought he removed information, but i was wrong, he added information. It was, I must admit, close to idiotism on my part. --TIAYN (talk) 07:30, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I hate to be a stickler for such things, but you should really use more edit summaries. Having blank edit summaries makes it tough to know what you are up to, and makes it harder for editors in the future who look through page histories searching for a specific addition or removal of information. Also watch out for edit warring, such as some recent edits over the infobox at Leadership of East Germany. With this article you should have engaged the other editor in a dialogue on the article's talk page instead of edit warring. Other than these issues it looks like you do excellent work with articles and WikiProjects related to leftist politics. Keep up the good work, and don't be afraid to branch out from this topic if you ever get the urge.  Them  From  Space  14:25, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Overall, I am very impressed with your produce here on Wikipedia, and bring articles which is normally "reserved" for English-speaking countries to GAN. Both the project and your many thousand of readers most enjoy your work, and it is as far as I can see, neutral, even though you have flagged some ideological preferences. Two things come to mind: First, there is the flow of prose. It is "obvious" that you are Norwegian and are strongly influenced by that language, and things don't quite flow as they should. My only suggestion is: write more. I don't mind fixing up stuff (being a native speaker of English myself), but the better you write, the less there is for other people to fix and the more they are willing to help out a little. The other is that sometimes your comments on talk pages can be a bit rough, for instance the recent one in reply to an IP on the talk of a certain party was certainly above the limit. Please treaty everyone, even people you disagree with, withe respect, and don't call them names, even if they are wrong. I was impressed with the recent FLC nomination of yours, and hope to see you back there, perhaps with an "easier" article to defend. My experience with FLC is that the first one was really tough (pages of comments), the second still had a lot of feedback, which at my now seventh things are passing by themselves (bank i bordet). Hope to see you with a new FLC nomination soon, and keep those GAs coming. Arsenikk  (talk)  22:48, 17 June 2010 (UTC)