Wikipedia:Editor review/Unisouth

Unisouth
Hi, I am Unisouth. I am an established editor having edited articles on Wikipedia for nearly two and a half years. I would like to be reviewed to see if my contributions have been worth the time and effort I have put into them. UNI| SOUTH  07:54, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

 Reviews 

You asked: "I would like to be reviewed to see if my contributions have been worth the time and effort I have put into them." That is a difficult question to answer. How do you evaluate the worth of your time? Depending on your life circumstances, your time may be cheap or expensive. How do you evaluate the value of a Wikipedia article? That is a very difficult question to answer. Some will say the number of page-views an article receives - a variant on impact factor for academic journals - demonstrates how important that article is. Others will say an article should be evaluated for its quality designation, e.g. "Good Article," "A Class," or "Featured Article." I don't know if any one metric can attach value to a project on which we work for free, as a volunteer enterprise.

I did enjoy looking at the pictures on fingerpost, the article you cited in Q1. If your goal is to teach total strangers about interesting topics, you are succeeding. This project is all about sharing our knowledge with total strangers.

I noticed on your userpage that you say you want to be an administrator. If you make a request I'd give it serious consideration, but your answer to Q2 worries me. Did you really get into a fight about who was the "lead editor" for two months? I don't have all the context here, but that sounds kinda stupid. If it's worth discussing, drop me a line. Otherwise, save your energy for more important problems. Yechiel (Shalom) 04:27, 20 June 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 favourite contribution to Wikipedia has to be my Fingerpost article. It was one of my first articles back in 2006. I decided to write it due to its oddity and its place in British transport history. It started off small and quite undignified but grew with help from other editors to a major part in the British Road Signs group of articles. It is also one of the biggest articles in the genre showing how much interest there is in its history. It probably has even raised its appeal.
 * 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?
 * Being a serious editor I have come accross many conflicts in the past. A fairly recent one being with the article Eastern Gray Squirrel. I reverted an edit as it was causing an image code to be damaged thus the image will not show. This is because the image name itself has 'grey' in it. The other editor thus changed it to 'gray' causing it to break. However after talking about it we got the image name changed on the commons and therefore the image code was fixed. An ongoing dispute which has caused some stress is with my WikiProject London Transports newsletter - The Metropolitan. Conflicts over the design and layout and who was the lead editor. Again after talking for over two months we come to the conclusion that we should both become the joint Lead Editors. We are now currently working on a new desing for Issue 6.
 * Being a serious editor I have come accross many conflicts in the past. A fairly recent one being with the article Eastern Gray Squirrel. I reverted an edit as it was causing an image code to be damaged thus the image will not show. This is because the image name itself has 'grey' in it. The other editor thus changed it to 'gray' causing it to break. However after talking about it we got the image name changed on the commons and therefore the image code was fixed. An ongoing dispute which has caused some stress is with my WikiProject London Transports newsletter - The Metropolitan. Conflicts over the design and layout and who was the lead editor. Again after talking for over two months we come to the conclusion that we should both become the joint Lead Editors. We are now currently working on a new desing for Issue 6.