Wikipedia:Editor review/Griffinofwales

Griffinofwales change

Griffinofwales (talk · contribs) I have approximately 1100 edits here, but only 40% are in article space, and 40% are in user talk space. I want to know what users think of my past, my present, and what I should be doing in the future. Griffinofwales (talk) 05:06, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

Of your contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
My anti-vandalism work.
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?
There was a recent one (still at WP:AN), where I was told not to welcome users, and I took the advice. There have probably been others but I cannot recall them. If I do face a controversy, I will learn from the comments, and change my editing habits for the future.

Reviews

Review by NonvocalScream (talk) change

You do well. There is no hidden knowing that we all are in need of constant improvement. The only difference is that there are some who seek the light, and some who are well just to stay where they are. I applaud you for submitting yourself for review. I have only three statements to make for you.

I understand nothing.

Continue your work, you are an asset to this project.

Realise that the law (policy and guideline) has both a spirit and a word. Sometimes one should be served over the other. The challenge, is the application.

Best of luck and skill to you. Namaste, NonvocalScream (talk) 02:15, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Review by Shappy change

Shappy's Review Editcount isn't everything. Policy isn't meant to be blindly followed. Shappy ^talk 02:16, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Review by Juliancolton change

With all due respect, you need to lighten up a bit, and have more faith in other users/admins. Every edit and action made doesn't have to be explicitly supported by policy. –Juliancolton | ^Talk

Review by Mentifisto change

I think you're obsessing too much with usernames. It certainly isn't healthy nor beneficial... and everyone isn't out to offend you with theirs, really. -- Menti fisto 01:31, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I checked, it appears all his username reports were ok. NonvocalScream (talk) 19:05, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Review by Gordonrox24 change

I have to agree with Shappy and Julian. Loosen up, relax, and don't be so literal. Policy is to be followed, but not word for word.--Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 23:37, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments change

View this user's edit count using WikiMedia User Edit Counter

@NVS, please clarify point 1, and Shappy, please clarify your review. They sound almost philosophical, and I don't think reviews are meant to be deciphered. Griffinofwales (talk) 02:21, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To truly grok neutrality, one must realise; there is no understanding. That is the anti-bias. NonvocalScream (talk) 05:17, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- NVS, the philosopher. Griffinofwales (talk) 15:24, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - To distill this even further... I do not have to understand the subject to write it. So if I take an attitude of understanding nothing, then I van write neutral articles. I understand nothing. The references to back up the subject is all the understanding, and no undersdtanding at all that is required. Best, NonvocalScream (talk) 17:20, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - Much better. Thanks for the review, Griffinofwales (talk) 17:23, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I honestly don't see what's so complicated about my review. You seem quite obsessed with your editcount, which is not good. Also, policy isn't meant to be blindly followed means that things are not always meant to be taken literally. Shappy ^talk 17:35, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Now I understand. Dr. Shappy says I have a case of editcountitis. Does Dr. Shappy have a cure for it? Griffinofwales (talk) 17:40, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - I'm not the doctor, he is. :P But don't worry about the number of edits you have. It's not worth getting your knickers in a twist about. Good things will come in time. Shappy ^talk 17:57, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - I'm not too worried about my edit count, but I should make sure that I'm not trying to artificially inflate it. Thanks for the review. (Fr33kman is a great doc!) Griffinofwales2 (talk) 19:52, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      - I apologise for the off topic intrusion; What are knickers? NonvocalScream (talk) 21:50, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        British word for a combination of tights and undies, if I am correct. Shappy ^talk 22:06, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        No, they are simply the British word for panties. fr33kman ^talk 22:14, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        o.O...sorry bout that. :P Shappy ^talk 22:58, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Mentifisto: I don't understand your review. Could you give me an example? I don't recall obsessing over usernames, and the second part is really confusing. When have I been offended by a username and an admin has not agreed with me? Griffinofwales (talk) 18:04, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Just generally... I commented that there were way too many "bad username?" on AN started by you... my point is, do you really think usernames are the worst problem this wiki has? Do you really think staring at the new users log all your time here is productive? -- Mentifisto 09:13, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Oh, that's because I stare at RC all the time, not the new users log :) Griffinofwales (talk) 18:33, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]