User:Dr vulpes/mistakes/2022
The 11 "Citation needed" maintenance tags you added earlier today seemed in-toto like some kind of WP:DRIVEBY... so there are now 5 left. Shearonink (talk) 16:01, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the feedback Shearonink I'm still pretty new and honestly hearing this helps me grow and mature as an editor. I'll admit this article was kind of tricky for me hence why I added the tag asking for experts to weigh in. I think the mistake I made was viewing each statement as something that needed to have a source instead of taking a more holistic approach, I think I came to conclusion as the article had some problems with citations and flow in earlier drafts. Dr vulpes (talk) 16:29, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Use of AWB to make inconsequential edits
[edit]Hello Dr vulpes, while reviewing your WP:PERM/PCR request, I noticed that over the past few weeks you have made a substantial amount of edits with AWB that have no effect on the rendered page, e.g. removing whitespace ([1][2]) or replacing redirects ([3][4]). I wanted to remind you that one of the rules of AWB states:
Do not make insignificant or inconsequential edits. An edit that has no noticeable effect on the rendered page is generally considered an insignificant edit. If in doubt, or if other editors object to edits on the basis of this rule, seek consensus at an appropriate venue before making further similar edits.
In my view, it seems that many of your recent edits violate this rule. This is a bit disruptive because these edits will often clutter page histories and other editors' watchlists while bringing very little benefit to the encyclopedia. In the future, before submitting an edit with AWB, please ensure that the edit will actually have a substantive impact on the page. Thanks, Mz7 (talk) 01:02, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for reaching out and giving me a heads up about my editing behavior. Yeah I see how this happened and kind of got away from me. I've been using AWB to go though batches of articles to kind of evaluate them to see if there were things I could do to improve them or if they would be articles I felt comfortable making edits to. At some point I figured if I was going to be hunting down parts of articles I was interested in and spending time getting a feel for things instead of making edits I might as well be productive. I see the error in this logic, how this sort of became a slippery slope for me as an editor, and I will correct it going forward. Again thank you for taking the time to point this out to me and nudging me back in the right direction. Dr vulpes (💬 • 📝) 01:17, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
Violated Pending Changes Reviewer Guidelines
[edit]
Hello, I'm NotReallySoroka. I wanted to let you know that your pending changes review to 2015 in the Philippines seems to violate our guidelines. Here is more info on our criteria for reviewing. Please try to follow our guidelines as closely as possible. If you have questions, just ask me on my talk page. Thanks. NotReallySoroka (talk) 05:10, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- I have reverted your review because the IP had use blog or self-published sources to back their claim. Thanks, NotReallySoroka (talk) 05:10, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hey NotReallySoroka thanks for pointing this out. I'm not really sure how I let this slip past me but I'll be more diligent in the future going forward. I reviewed the edit in question and I think I may have gotten the entry above it with the archive.org URL mixxed up. Thanks for taking the time to reach out and pointing out my mistake. Dr vulpes (💬 • 📝) 05:33, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- :) NotReallySoroka (talk) 05:34, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hey NotReallySoroka thanks for pointing this out. I'm not really sure how I let this slip past me but I'll be more diligent in the future going forward. I reviewed the edit in question and I think I may have gotten the entry above it with the archive.org URL mixxed up. Thanks for taking the time to reach out and pointing out my mistake. Dr vulpes (💬 • 📝) 05:33, 18 June 2022 (UTC)