Wikipedia:Editor review/Freechild
Freechild (talk · contribs) I have been active on WP for over a year, creating a range of articles and editing others related to youth, education and several focused on North Omaha, Nebraska. Recently I've come under what feels like an exceeding amount of scrutiny from other editors regarding my edits and contribs, and I want to make sure that I'm not off-base in what I've been working on, and how I've been doing it. Any feedback is appreciated. Freechild 06:39, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Reviews
- I know it's a relatively trivial thing, but I'm impressed at the job you've done in tidying up Burlington Company - I know I'm the one who AfD'd it, but this sort of cleanup of low-interest but hard to find elsewhere material is what IMO Wikipedia ought to be about, rather than the 'big name' topics where it's easy to find material on Google. - Iridescenti (talk to me!) 16:42, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- I have encountered you in connection with your work on youth and education topics. I am impressed with your knowledge, your commitment, and especially your productivity, but I often perceive a lack of objectivity in your work (you often appear to be advocating for causes, rather than describing topics dispassionately) and a sense that you feel you "own" the articles, categories, and templates you have contributed to. --orlady 20:22, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- You are a very good editor and Omaha, Nebraska and related articles have gained much from your work, as well as youth empowerment articles. However, there are some problems with your non-editing behavior. When accused of WP:OR or WP:COI or things like that, you are a bit aggressive in your own defense. Consider, for instance, this edit. I understand that you were replying to this comment. I hope you've read the articles orlady linked to, there is something to her criticism. Your best response in these cases is to explain why your edits are not POV, that you are writing in good faith, etc. Invite the critic to be particular about individual edits they feel are problematic. Be open about things. Many people make edits that skirt the line of OR, of COI, of WP:AUTO, etc. I tell myself WP:IAR, and try to make sure that what I write is verifiable, etc. Politics on WP can seem hurtful, people can seem aggressive. It doesn't add anything to be tit-for-tat with them. Finally, do what you can not to burn out. Take breaks from WP when things get sticky. Get involved in other aspects of the site that you haven't looked at recently. Et cetera. Best, Smmurphy(Talk) 17:58, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Comments
- View this user's edit count using Interiot's 'Wannabe Kate' Tool.
- View this user's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool
Questions
- Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
- I really like the article I have started for adultcentrism and another I just completed entitled Timeline of Racial Tension in Omaha, Nebraska. For the first I feel that I took a complicated topic and simplified it, making it relatively accessible topic, while keeping it attributable and appropriate for WP overall. For the latter, I gathered a variety of obscure references and gathered them together in a concise, relevant article that really reflects the ability of WP to represent a range of perspectives.
- 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 been cited several times regarding edits I've made on my talk page for making edits others disagreed with. In the last few days another editor and I clashed pretty hard over some nefarious editing, and as my attempts to bring us into mediation have failed, I thought I'd double-back and make sure that editor's concerns about me aren't without merit. I think that's a safe strategy, and have only sought the input of other editors throughout my WP experience... so hopefully this will gather that feedback for me.