Wikipedia:Editor review/Voretus

User:Voretus
I wish to be reviewed because I like editing Wikipedia and want to know if there is any way that I could be a better editor. This includes suggestions on technical/meta stuff, mainspace editing, civility issues, anything! I don't have that many contributions yet, but I hope to continue editing for a long while. Voretus talk  15:46, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

 Reviews 


 * Hi Voretus. I have found some areas that I think you're doing well in and some that I think you can improve on.  I can't tell you what to believe, but I must admit I'm troubled by your use of the word "gay" in a derogatory sense on your talk page .  I guess it's your talk page and you can do what you want on it, but I hope you don't do this when interacting with other editors, whom it might offend.  Similarly, I'd avoid saying things like "what the hell" and other stuff that could be interpreted as offensive or aggressive.  Most of the other edits on your talk page were friendly enough, thought I thought you could have been friendlier in this exchange.  I can understand you were frustrated, but I think it's really important to be as polite as possible, especially since on the internet we don't have the voice and facial cues that let each other know we're not really being mean.  Your talk edits that I looked at were friendly enough.  You have a good number of talk edits and you seem to discuss potentially controversial changes before you make them, which is good.  You don't have many project space edits, and no wiki talk edits, suggesting you don't discuss policy much.  You do participate in XFD, which is good.  You work hard and do a lot of gnoming.  You consistently use edit summaries, which is also good.  I'd suggest using more detailed edit summaries, since I found a bunch of your summaries to be unhelpful.  My strongest piece of advice is just to work on the friendliness thing and be careful to avoid comments that might upset other users.  Otherwise good work on the whole.  delldot | talk 18:33, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for commenting. It's honestly appreciated. I'll try not to do stuff that may be considered offensive like that in the future; I mostly use "gay" as slang, but I suppose people might get upset. I don't tend to use it in conversation. I wouldn't use "what the hell" as in "what the hell are you doing", usually... I used it there because the weenie shake thing was a joke edit and really gross, and it was more of a good-natured thing.
 * I'll try to participate more in policy discussion. Thanks! Voretus/talk 21:09, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

 Comments 


 * View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.
 * Your vote on Articles_for_deletion/MapleStory was (in a way incorrectly) based on the article's current state, not its potential state. The existence of original research and unreliable sources is not a reason to delete the article, unless it is impossible to correct or the article is entirely composed of it. Your claim that it doesn't assert notability is entirely wrong, the "Revenue and game population" clearly states its notability - this shows you should actually read an article instead of skimming it. Additionally, articles should be judged on a case-by-case basis, not assumed useless just because it's freeware. Don't worry if you disagree, it's just a suggestion. --TheEmulatorGuy 08:30, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
 * At the time I commented on that AFD, there was no sourcing on the notability claims in the article, which is what I stated. Voretus/talk 07:12, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

 Questions


 * 1) Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * I mostly find myself editing small things in random articles that I'm interested in; one of the things that irks me the most is bias in niche articles that most people won't get around to editing. I do have some fairly large contributions that I am proud of, however. I created the article Tail Concerto. I am also in the middle of creating a better article on Super Robot Taisen: Original Generation 2 in a user subpage. I am also proud of much of the work I have done in ridding articles of incredibly useless "trivia" sections.
 * 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 can't recall getting into any major editing conflicts. Many users have caused me stress, but whenever there's division, I try to talk it over instead of constantly reverting back and forth in articles. When I feel strongly about a subject, I deal with it by pressing my issue until there is a large consensus, the other party concedes, or I realize that I am wrong, myself.
 * I can't recall getting into any major editing conflicts. Many users have caused me stress, but whenever there's division, I try to talk it over instead of constantly reverting back and forth in articles. When I feel strongly about a subject, I deal with it by pressing my issue until there is a large consensus, the other party concedes, or I realize that I am wrong, myself.