Wikipedia:Editor review/Onceonthisisland
Onceonthisisland (talk · contribs · count) I joined Wikpedia in 2007 to create the article Harappan Architecture. After that I began to edit more frequently, doing mostly anti-vandalism work, with the occasional grammatical correction. I also did some work with WP: AFC. During my first few months, most of my edits were in the User namespace, as I don't quite think I really realized what Wikipedia was all about. I don't really edit my userpage anymore, though I recently took down lots of distracting bits I had added over 2 years. I took a year or two long break, and now am getting back into editing. I am requesting this editor review so as to learn from a different perspective about the work I have done in the past, and how I will be able to apply my editing skills in the future.-- Once On This Island Speak! 19:15, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Questions
- What are your primary contributions to Wikipedia? Are there any about which you are particularly pleased? Why?
- My primary contribution to Wikipedia at this point is the Harappan Architecture article. I was doing a school project on it at the time I wrote it, and was annoyed to find very little information on the subject. Obviously it needs quite a bit of work, both stylistically and in the citation department.
- Have you been in any disputes 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 haven't really been in a serious editing dispute, mainly because I have a rather timid personality. The closest I have come would probably have been fairly recently, on the article Pamela Wynne, when the creator of the article kept adding what seemed to be a personal page as a reference. I tried to talk to the creator about it, but they have not as of yet responded.
Reviews
- R1 Glad to have you back on Wikipedia! The following are a few suggestions for improvement:
- OptIn for the edit counter[clarification needed] so that others may properly review your history. (I was unable to do so and have only been able to evaluate you according to random searches in your contributions.)
- I reviewed the Pamela Wynne source you questioned and don't see a problem. It was not claimed to be a source but an external link (review WP:EL), and while the site is not maintained by a popular publisher, it seems to be very authoritative and comprehensive. Moreover, if you had issue with it, it is best to first present a comment on the article's talk page rather than immediately confronting any single editor, so that all who view the article can comment if desired.
- Most of the articles you have contributed to lack proper inline citations. Take a look at some FAs to see how WP:CITE is used, and then give it a shot!
- Hope this helps, and keep up the good work! —Eustress talk 14:31, 18 April 2010 (UTC)