Wikipedia:Editor review/GreyCat
GreyCat (talk · contribs) I've been with Wikipedia for a substantial time (since April, 2005). I'd like to get my work reviewed. I mostly enjoy working in pretty niche things related to guitars, music, sound producing, etc, occasionally some programming. Also, I like to help desiging better categories structure and categorizing articles. GreyCat 23:11, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Reviews
- Review by delldot:
Hi GreyCat, you're doing great. Almost all your edits are in the mainspace, suggesting you work hard to improve the encyclopedia but maybe don't work together with others much. Your talk edits are low and your and user talk edits are quite low -- are you sure you're discussing important changes with other users enough? Perhaps you don't make many controversial edits (I do see your discussions of moves and merges, which is good). Your talk edits that I looked at were friendly and detailed. You sometimes forget to sign your posts on talk pages, though it's hard for me to tell how common that is from a brief look. Another minor thing: I'd suggest responding below someone's comment rather than responding after each argument they make, or it could confuse readers about who said what. You can quote them in your statement if you need to respond to each thing. You're a stickler for sources, which is good, but that's an area where more talk and user talk discussion could be a benefit, rather than reverting first (I might leave a note on the user's talk page asking for a source and then revert later if none is provided). I found no incivility in the talk and user talk edits I looked at, though you are firm in letting people know what you think should be done (e.g. [1]). You have very few project space edits and no wiki talk edits. If you go for an RFA, many there will probably object due to that. (Though it pains me to even hint at editing just to run up your counts). You can find helpful work to do at WP:XFD, WP:HD, here, and other pages. You do participate in WP:CFD, so that's good. Excellent use of edit summaries both in consistency and helpfulness of the summaries themselves. You work hard and do a lot of gnoming as well as contributing with your expertise in the guitar area, so that's awesome. Your contributions have taken a dip in the past few months, are you busy with school or something? Anyway, you're doing great, I hope to see you around! delldot | talk 00:53, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Comments
- View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.
Questions
- Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
- Well, Comparison of SQL syntax was going to be particularly big and helpful contribution, but it turned out to be gigantic. Now I'm proposing to move it to Wikibooks. Other contributions I'm somewhat proud of are Floyd Rose, Superstrat, Pickguard, Fingerboard, Headstock (with a nice collection of headstock outlines I've drawn for that article), may be Bolt-on neck. I guess I've written most of the content of these articles.
- 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?
- Sure, that happens. I try to discuss and find out the truth - in fact, most of the wikipedians are pretty responsive and tact. Random additions that look somewhat good from not-logged-in users - it's a pity to just revert them, and they can't be left alone without proper sourcing and formatting - that's what disturbs me the most. It's a fair amount of work I have to do to maintain a well-done article.