Wikipedia:Editor review/Vizjim

User:Vizjim
I am in the process of writing a paper on the interaction between Wikipedia and Google. As part of this, I will be looking at the whole question of bias, and the ways in which Wikipedia consensus is formed. Therefore an editor review would be extremely useful to me, as it would give me an idea of my own biases and oddities, and possibly indicate ways in which I diverge from the mainstream of Wikipedia editors. I would like to thank in advance any editor who troubles themselves to do such a review. Cheers! Vizjim 00:24, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

 Reviews 


 * No one reviewed you after almost 2 months? Okay, I'll be nice and do something. You don't seem extremely active, just a "freelance" editor, which isn't a bad thing. Sometimes just editing what you feel like is best. You have a LOT of Wikispace edits, which is definitely great, shows you're a part of the deeper aspects of the community. I don't really know about your subjects for the mainspace edits, but they seem good. Looking at some of your talk edits you seem quite friendly and cooperative, which also helps. I can say that most Wiki editors I come across have far more Wikispace edits (or if they don't, they have a large number of talk edits). You don't have a good number of talk edits overall, which is a shame since you seem friendly. Hopefully this helped, let me know if you need more info. -- Wizardman 16:30, 29 December 2006 (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?
 * The articles on Gerald Vizenor and Devlin Waugh, though on rather different subjects, in both cases are ones that I rewrote virtually from scratch. I am also pleased with the work that I have put in to the List of writers from peoples indigenous to the Americas - not just in creating new articles, though I have done a fair bit of that, but also in adding references to redlinks to give other editors the tools to create the articles themselves
 * 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?
 * I have had edit conflicts with HQCentral over the article House Made of Dawn. This eventually went to mediation, and has now been resolved.  I learnt from that that "less is more" - rather than getting into a big fight with another user it's probably best to take the minimum action necessary, then step back and trust to other editors' good sense.  An example of this attitude in practical effect can be seen in the current debate at Articles for deletion/Nikhil Parekh‎ and Articles for deletion/Only as Life‎, both of which involve an editor who I had previously spent a lot of time arguing with.