Wikipedia:Editor review/LAAFan 2

LAAFan (talk · contribs) I would like to be reviewed because I would like to know what I can improve on. LAA Fan 21:50, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reviews

Your contributions seem well-rounded, and probably at a pace that you're finding pretty comfortable with. I noticed that you have attempted to orientate yourself with multiple processes, which is good. Admin coaching is also a great start in understanding the unwritten rules of its processes. Content contribution in areas of your personal interest is a big plus for me personally, and I would not really encourage tagging articles with tags unless necessary, particularly if I could {{sofixit}} on the spot; Wikipedia suffers an awful backlog of cleanup/verify tags that is practically out of control (try working on backlogs if you have plenty of time). Exercise caution when using semi-auto tools, as many unintended misunderstandings are the result of careless errors when utilizing them. If you are running for adminship today, some editors might point out that the pace of editing might be pretty tardy in their standards though. However, I would say that you're making substantial progress in terms of picking up the know-hows, and just continue doing what you always love to do. - Mailer Diablo 15:27, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Questions

Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
I pleased with all of my article contributions, but I am most pleased with Cy Young, as I feel I was doing a service for WP:Baseball.
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?
Yes, I have been in two conflicts. Both of these were when I was new to Wikipedia. One was particularly with User:Lomn. I have patched it up with him, though, and would like to be regarded on my edits.