Wikipedia:Editor review/Chemicalinterest

Chemicalinterest

Chemicalinterest (talk · contribs) Hello. I have been doing several chemistry edits recently, and I was wondering whether they are appropriate to this encyclopedia. Thanks --Chemicalinterest (talk) 19:31, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reviews

They are appropriate, but I highly doubt that anyone would look up Aluminium oxide over other articles like Bartender that have not yet been created. As for your editing overall, I've noticed that seem to use your talk page as a general forum with User:Nataly8. That is generally looked down upon. Also, with articles you create, try to expand on them a bit, like adding a photo to them or something.

Best, Battleaxe9872 ^文/ _テ 22:53, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Feel free to expand the article Prohibition era. It is not really my area of work. --Chemicalinterest (talk) 23:11, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Shoulder was moved to Wiktionary; see deletion log of shoulder. --Chemicalinterest (talk) 10:51, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I like to create articles on subjects that I know already. The PRC's Army would have a lot of copying from en.wikipedia, and it might not even be simple anyway! I am used to trying to describe things to my family so I know how to simplify chemistry-related topics quite well. I was actually reproved by Nataly8 because I posted a comment that asked whether (s)he started school yet. So I try not to "shoot the breeze" anymore with editors. --Chemicalinterest (talk) 23:25, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You do active and solid article work here, and that's great. :) I'm glad to see how well you're helping out. I agree with Battleaxe that it would be nice if you could try to make your chemistry articles a bit larger, but they're simple and well written, so I can't really find much to snap at. And by the way, you can "shoot the breeze" off wiki on Internet Relay Chat if you want. :P Good job, and keep up the good work! God bless, —Clementina talk 03:58, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is what I do. I create a small article for many chemistry topics. Then I go back and expand them after they are all created (Mercury compounds hasn't been expanded yet), adding a picture and maybe some additional trivia. --Chemicalinterest (talk) 10:47, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How do you like the format of this recent article? --Chemicalinterest (talk) 11:59, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nice. :) It's definitely refreshing to have lots of our red links filled up by such dedicated editors as you. Kindly, —Clementina talk 12:45, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

View this user's edit count using X!'s tool

Questions

Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
My expansion of several element articles by simplification from en.wikipedia, such as phosphorus and chromium. --Chemicalinterest (talk) 19:34, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
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 haven't had any conflicts on this Wikipedia, but on en.wikipedia I have created a disturbance because of my "radical" young earth creationist views. I have not personally attacked anyone during the disputes though. I once did create a test page, boron(II) oxide (chemical formula BO), but I will not create one again. --Chemicalinterest (talk) 19:34, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]