Wikipedia:Editor review/Veracious Rey
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] User:Veracious Rey
Veracious Rey (talk • contribs) Thanks to all of you for taking time to review my edits. I've been a member of Wikipedia since 2005. Early on I enjoyed uploading original photography when I found articles I thought might benefit from them. I didn't do much serious editing, but lately I've found an interest in current events, especially the Gerald Ford article. I've tried to be a voice of reason on that talk page, and have been one of the main contributors since the former president's death. Many of the article sections have been reworked, and I added a few photographs to compliment the article sections. I've also created other articles, such as Conner High School, and some templates. You can find these and more on my user page. I look forward to learning and expanding as an editor, and with the many contributions I've made this past December, I thought now would be a good time to see how I'm doing. Veracious Rey talk ↔ contribs 21:54, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Reviews
- Continues to remove a tasteful and adequately sized photo of Gerald Fords Tomb without any discussion as to why. I agree you have done a good job with his page, but that does not give you the right to remove pictures without reason or compromise. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Eman1114 (talk • contribs) 02:23, 5 January 2007 (UTC).
- I'm contacting an admin to get this cleared up. And by the way, there has been discussion on adding pics, and cleaning up the death section of this article. I don't remember you contributing to this. So you might want to actually read the talk pages instead of requesting discussion on something that has already been discussed. Veracious Rey talk • contribs • review me 02:26, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
- Everythings fine now, all sides worked it out. I think I got a little too protective of the Ford article. Veracious Rey talk • contribs • review me 08:17, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
- All in all, a very good job. Kudos to you especially for tackling current events, which is a hotbed of vandalism and contention. I often rate users like I would a potential admin; in that spirit, I see that you have plenty of user talk edits, which suggests that you are vocal with others; however, I would encourage you to a) get involved in Wikipedia at large (only 44 WP space edits); look through AfD discussions, RfA nominations, the village pump, etc. Also, b) find an article (or articles) that need improvement and try and get them to GA or FA status; it's always nice to think that you've helped make a piece of Wikipedia that much shinier (ooh, it glitters!) All in all, a good job (i said that already, i need a better phrase... ;) ) and I hope to see you around. Dåvid ƒuchs (talk • contribs) 22:30, 2 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?
- As mentioned above, I'm very pleased with my contributions to the Gerald Ford article. I've requested semi-protection a few times, have reverted numerous vandalism and erroneous edits, and have tried to stay true to Wikipedia guidelines when editing and discussing matters on the talk page. I've recently started a few school articles too. You can locate these on my user page.
- 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?
- No stress as of yet. I've never been involved in a down-and-dirty edit war, and only occasionally have I had some confritations with other users. But I always try to take the high ground. For example, some have taken issue with edits I've done on the Gerald Ford article. But the issue has resovlved itself when I explain my position and/or compromise with theirs. I'm also willing to admit mistakes. I've tried to be a voice of reason over on the Spider-Man 3 talk pages too. If I should run into problems in the future, I have no problem getting a impartial mediator or other means of resolving the issue. I'm fully aware that each editor has a valid point to make, and it's only fair to hear them out.
